Results 601 - 620 of 1935
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: BradK Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
601 | Why we don't have Ps 151 in our Bible? | Ps 150:1 | BradK | 123167 | ||
kalos, Thanks for the info. I had a suspicion, but don't have my normal Software with the Apocrypha at my office:-) It does look like it is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls? BradK |
||||||
602 | when you speak and it happens what is it | Proverbs | BradK | 99299 | ||
queta, I would first consider what 1 Thessalonians 5:21 says, that we "Prove all things..." Speaking positive is vastly different from speaking the future! Let's look at a couple of scriptural examples that may pertain: "“Listen, for I will speak noble things; And the opening of my lips will reveal right things." (Prov. 8:6) "And my inmost being will rejoice When your lips speak what is right." (Prov.23:16) We need to be careful that we are following Biblical practices. I'm familiar that WOF teaching proclaims that we can have what we speak, but this is foreign to scripture. God is not subject to our manipulation, nor is He a "spiritual" vending machine. I don't know enough of the specifics to advise you. From my perspective it would be "questionable" that this is God in action. Remember, the test of a Biblical Prophet is 100 percent acuracy, 100 percent of the time. (Deut. 18:21-22) Speaking The Truth In Love, BradK |
||||||
603 | acts of loving kindness | Proverbs | BradK | 224940 | ||
Hello Inquisitor, Your response doesn't answer the question because it fails to address the text of Prov. 31:26! The ESV reads, "She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue". The Bible Knowledge Commentary notes, "In keeping with the theme of Proverbs, this woman is praised for her wisdom and faithful instruction. The instruction probably refers to her teaching her children and her servant girls." What does your response have to do with Prov. 31:26? If I may, as far as I think, it is better to provide and well-thought answer that exegetes the text, thereby serving to instruct and clarify! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
604 | Bad things, Good People. Prov 4:10 | Prov 4:10 | BradK | 191024 | ||
Hello Val, Allow me to make an observation: I've been around this Forum for some 5 years. I've seen much good and more than enough bad. Many come but few stay to make a difference. Most, because they cannot seem to get over themselves and set aside their pride. That takes some work and humility. Please realize that you're on a public Forum and all of your (and my) statements are open to challenge! You're rather new to the SBF and I'll frankly add that you have not developed any repoire- yet. A handful of posts do not establish that. It comes with time, my friend:-) Should you take the time to not only get a feel for this Forum, but also what your contributions are to be, I think you'll find the SBF to be a blessing. Don't take a challenge as being witout love! The Calvanist/Arminianist debate has raged hot and heavy in times past here. It has also been a heated discussion within the Church for several centuries and I'm very doubtful it will be solved on the SBF. [Rom. 12:9-18] Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
605 | Why the spotlight on gays? | Prov 6:16 | BradK | 142254 | ||
Hi Doc, Thanks for the link to a thought provoking article on this emotionally charged topic! Possibly because I don't adhere to Covenant Theology, I didn't buy their argument in its' entirety. They make some valid observations and raise some good questions for thought, however I have a hard time with homosexuality being "our fault" and it being a "curse" from God, etc. I would call it sin. This is not to say that there isn't merit to this view, but I think the scriptural basis for their major contentions is weak! I've never understood Paul to be proclaiming a curse upon mankind in Romans 1:24ff- other than our sinfulness in general! Those are my thoughts with an attempt at being open-minded:-) Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
606 | Spare the rod, spoil the child | Prov 13:24 | BradK | 178371 | ||
Hello look..., I believe you're referring to Prov. 13:24, "He who withholds his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently." I think the better question to ask is: Where does scripture prohibit corporal punishment? The responsibility of discipline is clearly given to parents (Prov. 22:6). As a parent, I have used spanking as a final measure of discipline to get my children's attention, to let them know I mean business, and to order their behavior. My children were not abused or mistreated. There is a big distinction between discipline and abuse. Speaking the Truth in Love, Bradk |
||||||
607 | Theological Term: Arian Epistemology | Prov 15:10 | BradK | 153182 | ||
Doc, Your post hit the nail on the head for me as we just dealt with this in our Adult Sunday School class yesterday. We're studying Sound Doctrine: The Doctrines of the Nicene Creed. I'm developing an appreciation for what those in the Council went through:-) In covering the "Son: Creator, Redeemer, Light of Life, we looked at the prologue in John 1:1-18. One of our class members (who)is always a little questioning about things "orthodox", could not beleieve that the "Word" referred to in Johns' Gospel is referring to Christ. (He also has a problem with verse 18) In seeking clarification, he admitted to being non-Trinitarian and also doubts that Jesus was God! When asked what scholar he could point to support his view, he was curiosly silent. Another one went so far as to say that we need to "think outside the box on these matters"! (There's always a couple to keep you on your toes) So, Orthodoxy is a bit tough to teach, yet, to some, harder to comprehend. It thinks the point that If I can't understand it, it cannot be true, is indeed where some folks are. At some point we must accept by faith what scripture teaches. Our reasoning may leave us hanging. Speaking the truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
608 | Man's understanding is not always God's | Prov 21:2 | BradK | 233612 | ||
Hello Ed, I agree with Tim. Ingersoll's motives are suspect and he's much to broad in attempting to castigate theology. His statement reminds me of the often repeated, "don't give me theology, just give me Jesus" First, defining Theology itself is relatively simple. It can basically be termed as, “The study or science of God.” Augustine said it is, “Rational discussion respecting the diety”. Theopedia.com provides this more formal definition: “Theology (from the Greek theos - God - and logos - word or reason) is reasoned discourse concerning God. More specifically, Christian theology is the rational study and understanding of the nature of God and doctrines of the Christian faith based on the God's revelation of Himself, chiefly found in the Bible.” This is an easy, straight-forward answer to the question. In fairness, we should also address the negative- why doesn’t theology matter. Or, at least, not so much anymore. Perhaps I could term it why theology appears irrelevant in our churches. It’s important to consider and thereby understand some of the causes behind this apathy toward theology. Based on my experience, I can see at least two contributing causes for this declining interest: One, The problem of Biblical Illiteracy and two; the declining ability to think critically. William Evans noted this in his 1922 book, “What Every Christian Should Believe”, by saying “The ignorance among Christians regarding the fundamental doctrines of their faith is surprisingly great, widespread, and alarming. Definite knowledge and instruction in others and far less important spheres of life are being insisted upon; why not, then, in the highest realm- that of a man’s religion." A pastor who downplays theology is either ignorant of what theology is, or he is deceived in thinking that the wisdom of our world (e.g., pragmatism of some sort or other, in all probability) is the key to our people’s betterment. But A. W. Tozer is right: What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us!” Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
609 | Man's understanding is not always God's | Prov 21:2 | BradK | 233617 | ||
Hello DP Martin, Perhaps you'd desire to clarify and expand upon a couple points you've made in this discussion? You said, "theology is for the theist or deist that believes there is a God but doesn’t know the Lord God, or believes God can not be known." I'm simply curious as to what leads you to say this? Go back to my prior definition, "defining Theology itself is relatively simple. It can basically be termed as, “The study or science of God.” Augustine said it is, “Rational discussion respecting the diety”. Theopedia.com provides this more formal definition: “Theology (from the Greek theos - God - and logos - word or reason) is reasoned discourse concerning God. More specifically, Christian theology is the rational study and understanding of the nature of God and doctrines of the Christian faith based on the God's revelation of Himself, chiefly found in the Bible." Is there anything lacking in this basic definition- as far as you understand it? I define theology as the study of God rooted in biblical theology You also said, "Christianity has become like a grocery store, where there is a selection of theologies to chose from on the shelf, hence a God of their approval as they see God ought to be." Would you care to expand upon this? What do you mean by "a selection of theologies"? Could you be more specific? I think we need to make a disctinction between theology and doctrine. Again, theology being simply the study of God. Doctrine being composed of the topics within scripture that make up it's teachings. I pose the question: Is theology important? I would propose that we examine three points in an attempt to provide an answer and a basis to explore further. First, how do we define Theology? Second, why(or) does it matter? Third what are the essentials and how do we define them? (Is there a core element within Christianity (Orthodoxy) that we can all agree on? Lastly, If we ask the question of “who is a theologian” there is an immediate broader application. Most of us would agree that, a person who pursues the study of theology would properly be called a ”theologian”. The strict sense of the word has obvious meaning. Many of us would leave it at that. I think much of the prevailing attitude by laity in the church says, “Don’t give me theology, just give me Jesus.” But, is this really an answer? Is it even biblical? James White says it like this: “If you are a Christian, you are a theologian. You have no choice. Theology is simply knowing about God. In fact, since Christians are called to grow in their knowledge of God, part of the very goal of the Christian life is theology. Theology is a normal part of the Christian life- a part that gives rise to everything else.” Some talking points to consider for furher discussion if you desire. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
610 | Man's understanding is not always God's | Prov 21:2 | BradK | 233618 | ||
Hi Ed, Thanks for your response and comment. A couple questions for further clarification: 1. You said your "focus was more on the aspect of theology that divides Christianity." Don't you perhaps mean, "doctrines"? I don't see theology- strictly speaking- as dividing Christianity. However, theology improperly understood, abused or heretically communicated would be divisive. 2. I agree with you that "nothing as stated in scripture divides Christianity." However, errent doctrine and the fallen state of man (our sinful nature) can account for further divisions. As Christ scolded the Pharisees for being hypocrites, saying: Matt 15:8- 'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. Matt 15:9- 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'" Saying that, I firmly believe we have much more within Orthodoxy that we can and should agree upon than "divides" us! The core doctrines should unite us in our common faith (Jude 3). It seems that when we major on minors (the non-essentials) is when we get into pride hence causing divisions. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
611 | Man's understanding is not always God's | Prov 21:2 | BradK | 233626 | ||
Hello Ed, Forgive me, but I'm hearing a lot of generalities in rgards to divisions. How do you see that we propose to bridge this gap of division? What are the solutions? With regard to someone who supports abortion, I'd have to say that this persons(s) does not fully understand what scripture teaches. They've failed to adapt a biblical theology. By that, I mean that popular culture has played a significant role in shaping our theology, rather than the reverse. The Church has tended to adopt what "Culture" says is right instead of what Scripture teaches. Ultimately, they (we) don't have a high view of the Bible and view it as authoritative! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
612 | Money - the answer for everything? | Ecclesiastes | BradK | 193757 | ||
Dear yonder..., FYI- As the question is well over 3 years old and the original poster only submitted that one post, I doubt you'll get a reply:-) In Him, BradK |
||||||
613 | alloted days to live | Eccl 3:2 | BradK | 168757 | ||
Hi maearl, The body, as I understand it through science, claims that it can sustain 120 years or so. And, certainly, modern medicine has allowed man to live longer, but I don't know that scripture is so specific? I've always taken (maybe incorrectly) the passage in Gen. 6:3 as specifying the number of years that Noah preached- without sucess- until the flood. Here are a couple of observations from the commentators: 1. Commentary Critical says: "And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive—Christ, as God, had by His Spirit inspiring Enoch, Noah, and perhaps other prophets (1 Pet. 3:20; 2 Pet. 2:5; Jude 1:14), preached repentance to the antediluvians; but they were incorrigible. yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years—It is probable that the corruption of the world, which had now reached its height, had been long and gradually increasing, and this idea receives support from the long respite granted." 2. The Bible Knowledge Commentary says: "Genesis 6:1-4, then, describes how corrupt the world got when this violation was rampant. It is also a polemic against the pagan belief that giants (Nephilim; cf. Num. 13:32-33) and men of renown (Gen. 6:4) were of divine origin, and that immortality was achieved by immorality. The Canaanite cult (and most cults in the ancient Near East) included fertility rites involving sympathetic magic, based on the assumption that people are supernaturally affected through an object which represents them. Israel was warned to resist this because it was completely corrupt and erroneous. The passage, then, refutes pagan beliefs by declaring the truth. The sons of God were not divine; they were demon-controlled. Their marrying as many women as they wished (possibly this is the origin of harems) was to satisfy their baser instincts. They were just another low order of creatures, though powerful and demon-influenced. Children of these marriages, despite pagan ideas, were not god-kings. Though heroes and “men of renown,” they were flesh; and they died, in due course, like all members of the human race. When God judges the world—as He was about to—no giant, no deity, no human has any power against Him. God simply allots one’s days and brings his end." May this add to our discussion and understanding of this matter:-) BradK |
||||||
614 | Animals in heaven? | Eccl 3:20 | BradK | 214508 | ||
Hello diesel, How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you have any scriptural basis upon which to support your speculation? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
615 | Predestination | Eccl 6:10 | BradK | 197548 | ||
Hello dragonfly..., Welcome to the Forum! Hebrews 11 is dealing with faith of course - Faith's Hall of Fame! It is not speaking to predestination, so I would not enter it into the discussion:-) It might better serve a discussion on this topic to focus on the passages and verses in scripture that specifically deal with it. Much has been said on the SBF over the years in regards to this emotionally charged topic. It's been my observation over the years that it's best to proceed with a bit of restraint and caution so as not to fuel incessant debate:-) Speaking the Truth in Love, Bradk |
||||||
616 | Predestination | Eccl 6:10 | BradK | 198163 | ||
Hi Tim, A big Amen to that! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
617 | Predestination | Eccl 6:10 | BradK | 198169 | ||
Hello Michael, If I might say, I've followed both the dialogs on this topic. I would suspect that we're at what's know as a standoff? My own position is being sympathetic to the Calvinist view. However, I truly do not see Tim of being anywhere near as guilty of "misconceptions", "inconsistencies", "being mistaken", "guilty of eisegesis" etc. as you state. The 500-plus year debate on Calvinisim vs. Arminiansim will not be solved this side of heaven:-) Personally, I don't see much further merit in continuing this point. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
618 | Predestination | Eccl 6:10 | BradK | 198180 | ||
... | ||||||
619 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | BradK | 158759 | ||
Hi sid, Welcome to the Forum! How did you come to your conclusion? In general, it's not incumbant upon the Forum to disprove what you assert. However, I think it fair for you to demonstrate why any of us should take your claims seriously. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
620 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | BradK | 158784 | ||
Hi sid, Ok, so you follow Majority Rule and that is what you believe in. Have you considered who else, i.e. scholars would back your position? In other words, what other scholars are you aware of that support a Majority Rule in textual criticism? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ] Next > Last [97] >> |