Question:

I have a question about Psalm 51:5.  In this passage David says “Surely I was sinful at birth, from the time my mother conceived me.” This scripture was used by a friend as an argument for infant baptism.  He claimed that babies do have sin because David said so in this passage. God says that he was sinful from birth. How should I respond to this? Is this just a smoke screen to defend the idea that faith is the only factor in salvation?   My friend does not see baptism as essential for salvation but believes that faith is the only essential factor.  Other things are just good that Christians should do.

Question:

Hello, can you respond to R.G. Price's articles about the origin of Christianity?

Question:

The idea has been brought to my attention in a Bible study that sin does not only inflict spiritual death but physical death as well.  Possible biblical support for this is that when God curses Adam and Eve for disobeying, He mentions that "from dust we came and to dust we will return."  However the person leading the Bible study said that before Adam and Eve sinned, they were going to live forever, what are your thoughts?

Question:

In your post from April 5th, you state "Biblically, the only way we receive the indwelling Holy Spirit is at baptism (Acts 2:38). "  From Acts 10 it appears that salvation (receiving the Holy Spirit) comes before baptism (Acts 10:47), What is you response to this event?  In full disclosure, I hold to the latter view but I wanted to hear the response from your viewpoint.

Question:

I have a question regarding the disputed texts in the Bible i.e. the Adultery Pericope, the extended ending of Mark 16 and the Comma Johanneum. I've encountered some Muslims who try using these disputed texts in the Bible to prove that the Bible has been corrupted. While I'm aware that there is overwhelming consensus that supports the fact that the Comma Johanneum is probably a later addition to the Bible (and as such many modern Bible versions have removed it), the same can't be said for the Adultery Pericope and Mark 16, where there are still strong arguments both for and against retaining them in the Bible.

Regardless of whether these two parts of the Bible are original or not, what I'd like to know is how should I respond (and how you would) if Bible critics and especially Muslims use the Adultery Pericope and Mark 16 controversies as ammunition to prove that the Bible has been corrupted, unlike the Quran. According to them, since even Christians cannot agree if these two parts of the Bible are original, what is there to say that the Bible, even if just in parts, hasn't undergone corruption that has gone undetected over the centuries? And sometimes they may even cite the Comma Johanneum as evidence that corruption has crept its way into the Bible in the past.

Question:

I stumbled upon a website known as "RationalWiki" which lists supposed unfulfilled prophecies of the Bible which deeply trouble me in my understanding of the Bible. The most difficult of these prophecies are those listed below. Thank you for your time concerning these issues.   "Ezekiel 29:8-12 This passage is one of the most erroneous in the Bible. Since Ezekiel was penned, Egypt has never been a desolate waste, there has never been a time when people have not walked through it, there has never been a period of forty years when Egypt was uninhabited after the civilization started there, and it has never been surrounded by other desolate countries."

Questions:

I hope you don’t mind but I have a couple questions that have served as mental stumbling blocks for me.

1. Are all Persons of the Triune God eternal? For instance, while Christ is the Alpha and the Omega and the Firstborn of all creation, does Scripture indicate what Christ’s existence (as the Second Person of the Triune God, and equally God and humanity in nature) was before the creation of time and space? Is there an existence in which the Second Person of the Trinity does not exist? Is there only One Person of God in His eternal Being?

2. I’ve read your previous answers to the problem of free will, but all that I have read misread the problem and therefore answer the wrong question. Is human will free in terms of salvation choices before the enabling and empowerment of the Holy Spirit? For instance, Scripture indicates that it is only through the Holy Spirit that faith is possible, that an individual can profess Christ as Lord, please God, and live a sanctified life, and that all of humanity is a slave to sin and entirely corrupted by this sin as to not be able to arrive at its own salvation or find God on its own. If humanity can only choose its actions according to its everyday life, but not its salvation and corresponding actions, does it have free will and consequently, is it morally responsible for its state before God has enabled and empowered it to saving faith?

Questions:

I have a couple questions that are generally vague concerning God.

1.  Why is it that when I pray it seems as if I am talking to no one? Usually during prayer in a private space there is just silence and no indication of any connection with some sort of immaterial creator being of the universe present.
2. Is it wrong for a Theistic Christian to be an Agnostic Theist who is open to the possibility of there being no god?
3. Doesn't it seem that Heaven and Hell are just concepts which humans have designated as mandatory since there must be some sort of justice system in the after life? I feel as if Heaven and Hell are fabrications of the human mind that demand justice no matter what realm we may exist in, physical or spiritual.

So that sums up all three questions I have. Thanks for any insight.

Question:

The Bible says that God is a jealous God; the Bible also says that God is love. Despite all this 1 Corinthians 13:4 says "love does not envy" (NKJV). So my question is: how can God be a jealous God and a God of love when the Bible says that love is not jealous?

Question:

Do critics have a case for the allegation that since Jesus' life and events were recorded way after his actual death that they cannot truly reflect his image and deeds during his life? Are there any other examples of historical texts that were recorded 20 to 40 years after the fact? Is the reason behind why the gospels were written in the 50's, 60's and 70's because of persecution and state of poverty, thus taking it longer to obtain materials to record such things, when other wealthy nations had these materials readily available?  I often see this complaint against the New Testament as a reason to dismiss it along with Tacitus, Josephus, Seutonius and other historians that refer to Jesus. Thanks.