Results 21 - 40 of 6029
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: DocTrinsograce Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Could you please give some scriptural re | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 241782 | ||
Hi, Jer... There is grammatical, historical, and traditional consensus in the interpretation of this idiom. Furthermore, Isaiah 1:18 has nothing whatever to do with Paul's statement in 2 Corinthians 12:2; even less so the thrust of his explanation to the Corinthians of Paul's apostleship. Consequently, in the absence of logic (for our God reveals Himself in the Word) and in the absence of consensus past and present (for our God reveals Himself in community), why don't we set this little bit of silliness aside? It diverts us from the point that Paul was making, just as it has done with the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses. There is an old aphorism that might be helpful here: When the plain sense makes perfect sense seek no other sense. In Him, Doc |
||||||
22 | Is It You, Doc? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 241794 | ||
Hi, Jer... Rather than presume upon the other forum participants, if you want to talk about yourself, feel free to send me an email. My address is at the bottom of my profile -- which is visible by clicking on DocTrinsograce beside any of my postings. In this way, we can let the Study Bible Forum continue to server its intended purpose. Thank you... In Him, Doc |
||||||
23 | When study what to read first | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242103 | ||
Dear Ed, I am not familiar with any arguments over John 1; nonetheless, I like your advice. I was thinking how Mark's audience were Roman gentiles. Luke's audience were Greek gentiles. Those two groups would tend to be more representative of the modern American reader. Therefore they would be good starting points. Perhaps for the less well educated Mark would be better; while Luke might be a good place to start for those with superior educations. Thank you for the suggestion. I think I'll adjust how I have directed new believers accordingly. In Him, Doc |
||||||
24 | Why Jesus came | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242318 | ||
Hi, Wash... I think the first reference to the necessity and the promise of His coming was Genesis 3:15. In fact, there is a fancy theology term for that verse: the protoevangelium; which literally means the first formed message of the gospel. Wouldn't it have been wonderful to be on the road to Emmaus to have heard our Lord discuss all the references to His advent (Luke 24:27)? I wonder how many we Christians have missed over these two millennia? Thank you for drawing our attention to this food for thought. In Him, Doc |
||||||
25 | Why Jesus came | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242322 | ||
Hi, Wash... Fortunately, God has gifted us His Word (Deuteronomy 29:29; Hebrews 1:1-2). It is the "only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience." What a blessing! It is all right there! In Him, Doc |
||||||
26 | is eating on graves a sin ? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242642 | ||
Dear Ed, When I was a young lad, we would occasionally visit the graves of some of the family who had passed. I remember quite clearly getting my ears boxed for walking on a grave. It was quite confusing for a little guy, because the demarcation around graves is often not so obvious. Years later I asked my mother why we avoided walking on graves. She told me that she didn't know; but that every time she did as a little girl her mother would hit her. :-) Years later I found out that it was something to be avoided for very practical reasons. Apparently it was not uncommon for the grave to collapse. I have to admit, though, that your reasons make a lot more sense. After all, we know that the bodies of the dead will one day be resurrected. Thus, the body, a gift from God, is to be cared for in a proper and dignified manner. Thank you for your comments. In Him, Doc |
||||||
27 | is the book of enoch part of the gospel | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242737 | ||
Hi, Frankie... Welcome to the forum! It is often very helpful for us to have comments from different sources. Indeed, it can be very helpful! However, if we quote someone, without a citation, then we leave people to assume that it was we ourselves who wrote the words. This is considered to be in very bad form in the secular world. For believers we know that it is even more serious, because it is a direct violation of the 8th commandment. If you think about it, it is also something of a violation of the 9th commandment. We want your participation in the forum, but we want to hear what you have to say, something of your own, not something plagiarized from someone else. We would very much appreciate it if you would participate with us in a way that honors our Lord and reflects His character. In Him, Doc |
||||||
28 | is the book of enoch part of the gospel | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242739 | ||
Dear Frankie, Actually, what you wrote is almost word-for-word from the Watchtower Online Library. If you are a Russellite, I am amazed, because in signing up and posting, is affirmation of your agreement with the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Chalcedonian Creed, etc. All of which are anathema to Jehovah Witnesses. So by signing up, you not only witnessed to the world your embracing of these creeds, and you also witnessed this to your fellow Russellites. I will never understand how you cults think that lying and cheating will persuade anyone to follow your lead. In Him, Doc |
||||||
29 | DO YOU EVER ANSWER ANY BIBLE QUESTIONS? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242774 | ||
If you did, it might be like Habakkuk 2:2, so take off for the hills! |
||||||
30 | is Gen 2.1 a parabolic image | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242806 | ||
Hi, Polycarp... The "gap theory" is what you are referring to in your post to awesome73 -- a post, by the way, that is some 18 months old. This creation theory is not held by orthodox Biblical Christians. Indeed, I can only think of one theologian who was a proponent of it who was relatively conservative: Donald Grey Barnhouse, if memory serves. This is also commonly taught by Russellites (Jehovah Witnesses). It is also called by various other names: the ruin theory or reconstruction theory. Are you a Jehovah Witness? In Him -- Jesus our Lord -- Doc |
||||||
31 | PLZ ANSWER IM YOUNG AND HAVE TO KNOW!!!! | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242807 | ||
This also strikes me as Russellite teaching. You have read the Terms of Use? Every post you make you are affirming those Terms of Use, including Christian doctrines that are very non-Russellite indeed! | ||||||
32 | The WORD for today | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242833 | ||
And what a pasted year it was indeed! | ||||||
33 | The WORD for today | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242835 | ||
Have a blessed and happy New Year, Ed! | ||||||
34 | Thanks EdB | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242847 | ||
Hi, Ed... Which Apocryphal book contains the good information about worship? I rather enjoy the ones that tell tales of Daniel as though he were an ancient Sherlock Holmes. Bel and the Dragon is particularly a good story. In Him, Doc |
||||||
35 | Has Dan 12:11 been revealed in 1967? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242953 | ||
Hi, Bill... Welcome to the forum! My comment -- made two years ago -- was not regarding you, Bill. It was regarding some fellow named Ellis Skolfield. It takes a bit of time to figure out how to navigate the forum. In Him, Doc |
||||||
36 | Biblically waht is the difference? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242980 | ||
Hi, Justme... Yes the Eastern Orthodox vary somewhat as to which confessions are those with which they would agree. I don't think there is any problem with their agreement with Christendom as a whole in the ecumenical councils. They tend to put a lot of stock in the words of those they call the Apostolic Fathers. In that sense, they are a lot like the Roman Catholics and the Pentecostals. Where they would all differ is on WHO are the Apostolic Fathers after the death of John. They have a term Patriarch that is not easily achieved, but is right up there in authority. In the US the American Orthodox Church they have a pretty comprehensive compilation of their faith and practice. In Russian they have something called the Orthodox Confession of Moglias in 1643). There was some disagreement so there was a council in Jerusalem which produced the The Confession of Dositheus for Eastern Orthodoxy (1672). They are pretty strict in following the various Archdiocese to which they submit. I have had the opportunity to hear various Eastern Orthodox fathers give instruction. However, I am certainly no expert. In Him, Doc |
||||||
37 | Earth's fate | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242981 | ||
Nonetheless, there are some who have taken on the task of producing a translation of the Bible in Klingon. (http://klv.mrklingon.org/) :-) I'm just poking fun... But I have often wondered if the people involved in this effort did not benefit from the exercise. I quite doubtful that any Klingons have. |
||||||
38 | Biblically waht is the difference? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242985 | ||
Dear Ed, Sorry... I should have been more clear... By "Apostolic Fathers" the RCC and EO mean a succession of men of equal authority with the Apostles of the New Testament (see the Roman Catholic Catechism part 1 section 2 paragraph 815 and elsewhere; cf Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by Father Michael Pomazansky). They differ, though, as to who those fellows were, are, and ought to be etc. Although they do agree that this succession must be maintained in a hierarchical manner by their individual lines of authority. This doctrine is called Apostolic Succession (AS). Yes, any Historically Reformed believers do not agree with AS. However, this is not a doctrine simply shared by Protestants as a whole. Others who DO believe in AS include the Anglican Communion, the Porvoo Communion, the Church of Finland, the Church of Sweden, the Independent Catholic Churches, High Church Lutherans of Germany, Polish National Catholic Church, Ecumenical Catholic Communion, Palmarian Catholic Church, etc. Each of these hold with Apostolic Succession, but deny the authority of the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church or the Bishopric of the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Indeed, a document of particular authority in your own denomination is the position paper on Apostles and Prophets. It was published in August of 2001 by the General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God. You can read it here (it is a PDF document): http://ag.org/top/beliefs/Position_Papers/pp_downloads/pp_4195_apostles_prophets.pdf They also seem discourage a what they deem as a non-Biblical doctrine of AS. By the way, I highly recommend reading this document by anyone. It gives a very cogent Biblical discussion concerning apostleship; particularly in the first eight pages. Very well done! Thank you for helping me clarify. In Him, Doc |
||||||
39 | Biblically waht is the difference? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242988 | ||
Dear Ed, I still look forward, one day, to read the twelve names on the foundations of the New Jerusalem. Our Lord was so gracious to use these men upon which He built His church. I used to think that Jesus was the foundation of the church. Rather, He is the "Chief Cornerstone" (Ephesians 2:20). I hope that you are doing well, friend. In Him, Doc |
||||||
40 | WAR ROOM (prayer room)? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 243069 | ||
Dear Justme, That is a very great blessing for our Lord to use such things. If He can use the donkey of Balaam, He can make use of other things of the same sort, we do not doubt. I particularly am uncomfortable with images made of Christ, which we deem is a violation of the second commandment. If you want to read an excellent book on prayer, one of the best is by Martin Luther. A very simple and very devotional book entitled, "A Simple Way to Pray." It can be found free online. It will be utterly different than the method advocated in the movie War Room. However, at the same time, it will be perfectly in line with how we are commanded to pray in the Word. That is crucial, lest we approach Him in the unsanctified fashion of Nadab and Abihu. I am happy to hear that some have been saved from seeing some of the prophecy mongering films and books. The SDA often use this kind of eschatology as a hook to draw new members into their organization. The soteriology from that hermeneutic principle is worse than Pelagian, but the eschatology tends to turn peoples' tantalize the itching ears of the lost. By the way, there is one other book that you might find both doctrinally sound and very pragmatic. It is the book by Bishop J. C. Ryle, "A Call to Prayer." It is even available by audio on YouTube in its entirety. Sometime when you feel like just listening, I can highly recommend that book. It addresses the subject of prayer in very similar ways that you have mentioned. God bless you, Justme. I am praying that God will continue to create a deep craving for Him in your heart, and that you will be satisfied in Him far more than you can imagine. In Him, Doc |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [302] >> |