Results 1 - 20 of 74
|
||||||
Results from: Notes On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Theo-Minor Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is my assessment of them wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126591 | ||
I never said, "If it feels good, do it." I said, "They did it, so they are married and are bound by the parameters of marriage, not free to be promiscuous." Theo-Minor |
||||||
2 | God the Son as a confession of faith | John 17:22 | Theo-Minor | 126589 | ||
I reread my concluding paragraphs in the previous post. I think I was a little confusing. Let me reword that so it makes better sense. No man needs to teach another. All Christians get their learning from the same source. The scriptures are to the profit of all Christians for learning, and are understood by the Holy Spirit and through a spirit of love. While the interpretations are come to individually as the Holy Spirit guides, they are not of private (or various) interpretations. If guided by the Holy Spirit and viewing the scriptures through the inspiration of love, all Christians will come to the same general conclusions. In the few instances that the scriptures are not clear, the Holy Spirit and the inspiration of love are the guidelines for interpretation, not some authority's opinion, unless the opinion is credible and within the bounds of the doctrine of Christ. Theo-Minor |
||||||
3 | God the Son as a confession of faith | John 17:22 | Theo-Minor | 126588 | ||
[1st John 2:27 But the anointing which you have received of Him abides in you, and you need not that any man teach you, but as the same anointing teaches you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it has taught you, you shall abide in him.] [Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts, and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:] [Romans 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.] [Romans 13:9 For this, You shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not vocet; and if there be any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."] [2nd Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished to all good works.] [Matthew 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall you scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:] [2nd Peter 1:19-21 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto you do well that you take heed, as to a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns, and the morning star rises in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.] [1st Timothy 1:5 The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heat, a clear conscience, and sincere faith.] The scriptures are to be interpreted by the individual, through the Holy Spirit, by the understanding and inspiration of love. They are not open to private interpretation, because the New Testament writings are those of prophets, and no scripture of prophecy is open to private interpretation. Love is the goal of their instruction, as well as the commandment of Christ, so when in doubt, look to love. When lacking direct statements, your heart will bear witnesses to your deeds by your conscience, and you will show the works of the law written on your heart. By this will you be judged when lacking direct command. Let the Spirit be your guide. You do not need any man to teach you. All you need will be found either in the scriptures, which are profitable for doctrine, correction, etc., or in your heart by a spirit of love through the Holy Spirit. If anyone disagrees with this post, I expect the disagreement to be a polite exchange, founded in solid, contextual scripture. Don't call me anymore names. Theo-Minor |
||||||
4 | Country Girl: Scripture...or Opinion? | Gen 2:9 | Theo-Minor | 126586 | ||
I don't think he's ashamed of us all. You're a better person than I am, and you haven't done anything wrong. Nor do I think I've done anything wrong. These topics have all been bible-based, and as such, opinion CAN sometimes play into it. Remember that his laws are written on our hearts and minds. The Spirit teaches us the things we need to know. The problem isn't the behavior so much as it is the source of the behavior. Pride, arrogance, vanity ... these are things that are not of God. When our discussions begin with a genuine question, get answered with a sound answer, then the answers are disputed with doctrine and opinion instead of sound, contextual scripture, there is no way we can ever accomplish anything. And to add insult to injury, people that are backing up what they say have to tolerate insults from the people in control who contradict with opinion. If you prove them wrong, they restrict the topic. Hence, the reason I posted a statement that this is not a bible forum. It's an opinion forum. For all that they say it's for bible based questions to be answered with bible based answers, it's more an exchange of opinions than anything else ... ranging in topics from premillenium/preterist discussions in favor of their opinion, to discussions of sin and law, in favor of their opinion. Anything that comes too close to home gets restricted, lest they be forced to concede a point they don't want to concede. May I have your email Country Girl? I'd love to talk with you, and just you. Is that something you'd be okay with? Theo-Minor |
||||||
5 | Country Girl: Scripture...or Opinion? | Gen 2:9 | Theo-Minor | 126553 | ||
With all due respect, there were 29 posts to a topic last night. Not one of them solidly refuted me with scripture. A great number of people on here are guilty of opinionated answers, and the "men of reputation" are amongst them. Don't be a hypocrite 'Torah believing, anti-antinomian, anti-idiocy believer' And by the by: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgent: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Any possibility this has application, Mr. anti-idiocy believer? No one likes a hypocrite. I'm out. |
||||||
6 | Is my assessment of them wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126548 | ||
As I've had to point out to everyone so far, you are proving your case based on opinion. What you said, while credible in a worldly circumstance, is not scriptural. The sixties example is not something that pertains to two Christian individuals. I didn't say, at any time, that promiscuous behavior was appropriate. I said that those that were already doing the act were married. That means, don't leave, don't cheat, don't break up, live together, share the hardships, raise the children together, etc. What I suggested in no way relieves them of the responsibility of their actions. I said they are married, not living together and having sex and just saying they are married until the convenient time comes to break up because they aren't getting along. You, and everyone else, are grossly underestimating what I said. You think I'm trying to advocate sex outside of marriage, but that's simply not the case. I'm advocating that what God has ALREADY joined together, let no man put it asunder. Further, you should reread the post now that your Sunday fury fire has worn down a bit. You'll see that I also told them to "go get married in the eyes of men" so they would not be a stumbling block. Hence, I told them: 1. Their action was not right, but irrevocable. 2. The act made them married by the union. 3. They need to get married by ceremony for the sake of other people, and to witness it before men. 4. That they shouldn't let anyone condemn them for what they've already done. 5. That they can be baptized, because, according to the people on this forum, we all have sin anyway. Since all sin is the same, they are just as qualified as anyone else for baptism. To this list of sound, reasonable responses, I was called names, slandered, ridiculed, and completely discredited on all accounts. And not one person did it with scripture. I got beat ugly with opinion-sticks. Stultis was the only person on the forum that considered the matter objectively for even a second. HE saw what I was saying, and why. No one else, including you, saw it, because their opinions were shining too bright. This my closing post to you. Try scripture in the future. It works better sometimes than opinions. Theo-Minor |
||||||
7 | Country Girl: Scripture...or Opinion? | Gen 2:9 | Theo-Minor | 126545 | ||
I appreciate that Country Girl. I'm tying up loose ends right now. I intend to leave. The mob beat me mercilessly last night with their opinion sticks over another controversial topic, so I'm going to tend to my stripes and move on. It was good to know you. Theo-Minor |
||||||
8 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126542 | ||
I made a sound argument. You did not refute it. You called me names, insulted my credibility, slandered me, and treated me like dirt. I meant what I said in my parting question-post. I have sincere doubts as to your Christianity. You have been a loveless person to me. You undoubtedly saw my post, made an instant decision of fault, screamed out your opinions and insults ... but I am positive you did not objectively weigh what I said for credibility. Had you do done so, perhaps you would have been a little less ugly. And I am leaving, since knowing you, you are likely wondering why I'm posting if I was "leaving" last night. It would be the sort of loveless, critical behavior I've come to expect from you. I'm tying up loose ends now that I'm calmed down from the scourging of the mob. Theo-Minor |
||||||
9 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126539 | ||
Dear justme, 1. "Oh my! My wife and I read your response and we were stunned!" [ ... the anticipated opinions I shortly expect ... Case in point. ] 2. "What you have stated is rediculous if not HERESY!" [ Opinion, unsubstantiated by scripture. This is just name calling. ] 3. "Sex outside of marriage with a boyfriend/girlfriend is not a sin, because there is no such thing as sex outside of marriage." And yet you also wrote "Their real marriage in truth occurs when the man "goes unto her", the act of conjugal joining IS the marriage, because the two have become one flesh." Your statements are outrageously flawed!!!" [ Jesus defined the binding attribute of marriage. "Have you never read that the two are become one flesh? What God has joined together, let no man put asunder." The two 'becoming one flesh' is a joining by God, and this occurs between two people that have sex. The Corinthian example sets precedent to show that such is the case, even if the woman is a prostitute. Hence, the reason prostitution is bad; it is adultery. My statements do not contradict, nor are they 'outrageously flawed.' If a couple are having sex, they are not dating, they are married according to scriptural precedent. Such is the case even in rape. Deut 22:28-29 "If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife ..." ] 4. "Fornication, PRENEIA is illicit sexual intercourse. ... This would include sex between any boy and girl who are not married to each other." [ There is nothing perverted or unlawful about one man and one woman coming together, staying together, and honoring God together. This is only your opinion. "porneia (por-ni-ah); from porneuo (porn-yoo-o): harlotry (including adultery and incest)." This is the literal definition. As Vine's says, it is "illicit" sex. That means "unlawful, or unsactioned by custom or law." See Leviticus chapter 18 for a detailed list of said unlawful/perverted sexual acts according to biblical custom. ] 5. "To suggest that sex between boyfriend and girlfriend is not a sin is not Biblical in any way shape or form." [ To state plainly that it is sin without any scriptural substantiation is presumptuous and opinionated. ] 6. "Read 1 Corinthians 6:12-20 and this states beyond any doubt and very specfically as to what is immoral. Am I to believe this Scripture doesn't apply to today?" [ It does specifically state what is immoral. Verse 13 says that the body is not for fornication, and verses 15 and 16 define said fornication in direct context as lying with a harlot. This proves nothing, does not refute what I've said, and does not, at any time, say anything about two consenting adults in a monogamous relationship. As for today ... it still applies. We still shouldn't lay with prostitutes. ] 7. "If marriage only IS a marriage when intercourse is possible then please tell me what do you tell some young married man who has lost his legs and manhood in a war, like the war we are in now?" [ I didn't say that sex was the only way to be married, only that two people that have engaged in such are married. Marriage is a promise between a man, a woman, and God. You can promise to be together, but not have sex, but if you have sex, you are one flesh, and the promise is made in the act. ] 8. "The answer to the couples question as to should they be baptised is most certainly and positively NO!! How can their hearts be right when they are living together?" [ Whether their hearts are right is not for you to determine. Only God knows their hearts, and their conscience should not be judged by you. You're wrong in saying they shouldn't be baptized. "they are saying I have repented, and turned away from sin ... This is not saying perfection ..." If you're not perfect, then you are as guilty as they. Pull the beam from your eye, hypocrite. Sin is sin. If sin bars them, sin bars you. ] 9. "Marriage is not mans standard of tradition, but is the standard the Lord has made, it is not only sin in mans eyes, but is by Gods standard, Hebrews 13:4." [ This Hebrews passage does not say what marriage is, how it comes to be, that it is sin if you are not married, or that the act of sex does not make you married. You have proved nothing. Further, marriage is God's standard. The ceremony is man's standard. Again, you prove nothing. ] 10. Your final insults, based upon nothing but opinion, presumption, and idealistic teaching, are not worthy of a Christian. You should have refuted me with sound doctrine, or stated your opinion in a polite manner if you couldn't refute. This could have been discussed politely. Now it will not be discussed at all beyond this post. Go back to your mob. Theo-Minor |
||||||
10 | Am I wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126491 | ||
That is just not the case. There are plenty of examples of a man going in to a woman, and taking her, and she being his wife. Your comment is motivated by opinion. It is not factual. Further, it doesn't address things like concubines. Theo-Minor |
||||||
11 | Theo-Minor, Can you show me one case ? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126490 | ||
You wrote: [How about the example of David, with his wives AND his concubines? I guess this wasn't okay, seeing that David was a man after God's own heart. ... God didn't say it so okay. God did send Nathan to rebuke him for having sex with Bathsheba (2 Sam 11-12). ... I think God announced Adam and Eve as husband and wife. We will rebuke you, as long as you pronounce error. Admit you are wrong.] You are right on one score, and have not refuted me. "God did not say it, so okay," in regard to concubines. In fact, he gave them to David. Many of them were the wives of Saul. Bath-Sheba he rebuked David for because she was another man's wife. This is adultery, not sex outside of marriage, and this does not address the issue of whether or not sex makes two people one flesh in covenant. "I think God announced" is an opinion (I think being the key words here), not a scriptural fact. So again, you've proven nothing. I will admit I'm wrong, and gladly, when you prove it. Theo-Minor |
||||||
12 | Sex only after called husband and wife. | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126480 | ||
I concur with this. He goes in unto her, and knows her, and she is his wife. Theo-Minor |
||||||
13 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126479 | ||
"The Greek word for 'fornication' (porneia) could include any sexual sin committed after the betrothal contract. ...In Biblical usage, 'fornication' can mean any sexual congress outside monogamous marriage. It thus includes not only premarital sex, but also adultery, homosexual acts, incest, remarriage after un-Biblical divorce, and sexual acts with animals, all of which are explicitly forbidden in the law as given through Moses (Leviticus 20:10-21). Christ expanded the prohibition against adultery to include even sexual lusting (Matthew 5:28)." (Dr. Henry M. Morris) An elaborate opinion, but still an opinion. |
||||||
14 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126478 | ||
That's what I SAID! Fornication is prostitution, not sex between an unmarried couple. You haven't proved a thing. You talk marriage, marriage, marriage, but you fail to demonstrate how the joining is considered as such a joining when Paul clearly tells us that such is the case. Even when it's a PROSTITUTE! Hence the reason it is bad to lay with a prostitute, because they are adulterers. Refute with sound doctrine and scripture that proves your case. What you've quoted doesn't refute what I've said. It only declares that a thing called "marriage" exists. You have not adequately demonstrated what marriage is, or where it comes from, or how such a covenant is made. I HAVE. I am not wrong until you prove it with sound scripture. Your opinion doesn't count. Theo-Minor |
||||||
15 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Theo-Minor | 126464 | ||
I gave good examples. I backed it up with examples. I expected opinions. No one has refuted anything. A man and a woman come together and they are one flesh. This is a covenant. No one has demonstrated that such a union does NOT constitute a marriage. No one has demonstrated that I am wrong. This has been even more nasty than I ever expected from Christians. I have been ridiculed, insulted, called names, rebuked, and otherwise ostracized ... and without a shred of substantiation to support any of this behavior. Ban the topic. That's what you do with all the others. I expect it of you. We wouldn't want to discuss the credibility of an alternate point of view. This is more like an opinion forum. Well heap another slab of pride on my plate, thank you very much. I've never been treated so poorly, and every one of you that insulted me the way you did, I have grave doubts of your true Christianity. Try reading the scriptures. And while you're at it, explain why David had both wives AND concubines, and why God would have given him many more things "like these" to have prevented the one act of adultery. You people are a disgrace to treat another the way you have. And I forgive you. Theo-Minor |
||||||
16 | Do Ghost's exist? | Luke 24:39 | Theo-Minor | 126435 | ||
Hey Emmaus, I sort of agree with you, and I sort of don't. Forgive me for not making the references right now, but there are in fact references to support this ... There are accounts of people "sleeping" in death, sleeping [because] they're dead. If that made any sense at all. The best story I can bring to mind is the story of the witch of Endor calling up the spirit of Sammuel, who was quite irritated that she had disturbed his sleep. Take a look at that story and see what you think. I don't remember the exact wording. Perhaps that isn't the case at all. Elijah would not have been sleeping in death. He didn't die. He was taken up in a whirlwind. The same is [believed] of Moses by the Jews of the day. It is believed, despite the Deuteronomy account of his death, that Moses was also taken up in the same way. Josephus recounts the events in that fashion, according to the Pharisaic historical traditions, and Jude talks about the body of Moses being fought over by Michael and Satan. In addition, the Revelation, whether speaking futuristically, historically, symbolically, etc., plainly mentions "two witnesses" that each do certain types of miracles. They are able to turn waters to blood, call down fire from heaven, dry up the sky so it doesn't rain during the time of their prophesying, or to bring plagues upon men as often as they desire. This, to me, is a clear depiction of Moses and Elijah; Moses who brought the plagues and turned the Nile to blood, and Elijah who called down fire from heaven and pronounced a drought. Both of these witnesses in the Revelation are "taken up" in a cloud. Then this in addition to the appearance of both Moses and Elijah on the mountain with Jesus. If Moses had died in the body, his spirit would have been "sleeping" in Abraham's bosom. Instead, he had a glorified body, much like the ones we expect to receive ourselves eventually, and was present with Elijah on the mountain. This is not saying that the Bible is incorrect. Josephus claims that Moses concluded Deuteronomy that way because he didn't want the Israelites to worship him. Josephus understood his time and religion far better than I do, so I won't say he's wrong. I simply don't know. It makes logical sense to me that Moses also was taken up, though the scripture in Deuteronomy plainly disagrees. *Shrug* It's food for thought. Theo-Minor |
||||||
17 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126432 | ||
Doc ... Doc ... Doc ... My dearest brother ... I agree with you. Your Grandfather's quote is genius. If someone has agreed within themselves to disagree with you no matter what, there will be no convincing them. We have a friend that comes to Bible study on Thursdays. He is a great guy, but loaded with strange doctrines. The first several conversations, he went home, saying, "I just disagree." Such a statement is, in my opinion, just a cop out. We are to be of one mind and one accord. If you both disagree with each other because neither person has solidly presented his case, then so be it. You have no right to expect someone to bend unless you prove what you are saying irrefutably. But if you have presented the truth, shown credible examples, shown credible plain statements in scripture, and made a solid case for its continuity with the teachings of Christ, they need to concede if they are functioning according to the wisdom of God. Over time, he has changed some of his perceptions, but this only came about (through God) because of time, consideration, patience, and repetition. Barring that, the only way to finally bend him on some of the issues was to pin him down with some yes or no questions and put him on the spot. *laugh* We won those, of course. The words may be thick with pride on their tongues when you do that, but you still cut through the pride. In any case, I just wanted to make sure I hadn't caused you offense, and to make sure it wasn't me that had you wary of speaking freely. I state my points as soundly as I can, but love does not seek its own and is not puffed up. The last thing I would want is to deliberately or knowingly offend someone that has been polite to me without just cause. Theo-Minor |
||||||
18 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126430 | ||
[In what position would you place regeneration on the list? : New Creature] You have to die, and be brought up in the image of the resurrection in the newness of life. The regeneration would be, in my estimation, at the time of your salvation. You can't be saved while you're dead. It is the new life that is the salvation so to speak. So I would say that regeneration happens simultaneously with grace/salvation/sanctification/purification, etc. Theo-Minor |
||||||
19 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126414 | ||
Hey Doc ... I know I'm sometimes controversial in what I say. I believe in a great number of doctrines that defy the standard beliefs, and though many often can't see what I'm saying for one reason or another, I have sound reasons for believing them and love to express challenging points of view to others. If [I] am the one that is causing you distress, I sincerely apologize. Please don't restrain yourself on my account. All opinions are worthwhile, even if they are disputed. How can we ever discover truth if we don't consider possibilities? Again, I'm sorry if I'm the one causing you to be reticent because I'm controversial. Sound doctrine should be able to stand up to scrutiny and stand unshaken when challenged. If a doctrine begins developing enough holes as to appear to be a wheel of swiss cheese, such should be discarded in favor of the more sound position. All my love to you, Theo-Minor |
||||||
20 | 1st John 3:4-9 Discussion on sin. | 1 John 3:9 | Theo-Minor | 126341 | ||
Perhaps this is the reason for some of the discrepencies. I'll get a copy of the other. I look forward to seeing some new info. :o) Theo-Minor |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |