Results 281 - 300 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
281 | based on Mt. 5:32 may I marry a divorced | Matt 5:32 | Radioman2 | 103528 | ||
Divorce: Legal Separation or Dissolution? There are Scriptural grounds for divorce: adultery or desertion. The key to answering the question lies in the proper understanding of the word divorce and what it means, including what it meant to the average Greek, Roman or Jew of the first century when he heard the word. A tradition dating back centuries and beginning with the Roman Catholic Church views divorce as "legal separation from bed and board." And that's all divorce is in this tradition. However, The people of the time of Jesus' earthly ministry, both Jews and Greeks, properly understood that divorce was the "dissolution of the marriage bond just as though it had never existed." If one accepts the second definition (the definition that is true both Biblically and historically), then he can only come to one conclusion: The RIGHT TO DIVORCE carries with it THE RIGHT TO REMARRY. If it doesn't, then divorce is not dissolution of the marriage bond just as though it had never existed. Instead divorce becomes legal separation from bed and board, nothing else. Which definition to follow: the popular one (legal separation) or the historically and Biblically sound one (dissolution of the marital bond, which carries with it the right to remarry)? ____________________ See the book "The Right to Remarry" by Dwight Hervey, Hardcover (September 1975), Fleming H Revell Co; ISBN: 0800707583. This book is now out of print, but has a limited availability at amazon.com Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
282 | based on Mt. 5:32 may I marry a divorced | Matt 5:32 | Radioman2 | 103537 | ||
Matt. 19:9 KJV And I say unto you, Whosoever shall PUT AWAY his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. NKJV And I say to you, whoever DIVORCES his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." NASB "And I say to you, whoever DIVORCES his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." AMPLIFIED I say to you: whoever dismisses (repudiates, DIVORCES) his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. ESV And I say to you: whoever DIVORCES his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery." NIV "I tell you that anyone who DIVORCES his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (Emphasis added.) --Radioman2 |
||||||
283 | based on Mt. 5:32 may I marry a divorced | Matt 5:32 | Radioman2 | 103623 | ||
justme: It's easy for me to answer you respectfully. That's because I respect and admire you. You've been a good friend since you first joined the forum. :-) Grace and peace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
284 | Ps109:1 | Matt 6:1 | Radioman2 | 80888 | ||
fast (Greek: nesteuo, Strong's# 3522) Definition: to abstain as a religious exercise from FOOD AND DRINK: either entirely, if the fast lasted but a single day, or from customary and choice nourishment, if it continued several days (Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Nesteuo". "The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon". Emphasis added.) (www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/) - - - - - - - - - - fast 1 : to abstain from FOOD 2 : to eat sparingly or abstain from some FOODS (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) (Emphasis added.) |
||||||
285 | No limit on what faith can do? | Matt 6:10 | Radioman2 | 83337 | ||
mommapbs: You are correct in saying it is "the OBJECT of our faith that is without limit." If one were using a wooden plank to cross a raging river, one would find that: It is better to have weak faith in a strong plank than strong faith in a weak plank. And, of course, the object of our faith is the Lord Jesus Christ, whose power is without limit. He is the One in Whom we have faith. Sorry for the confusion. When I asked, "Don’t several New Testament passages declare that there is no limitation on what genuine faith can do?", I didn't really mean I believed this to be so. Rather, I posted a question so that I could then provide an answer to it. It's like when a preacher asks: "Isn't there more than one way to heaven?" Then in his sermon he goes on to explain, "No, there is only one way." My sincere thanks to you for pointing out that my question was a bit confusing. In my writing I always strive to make my meaning as clear as possible. When I do not achieve the desired clarity, other people are sometimes very helpful to point out that I missed the mark. That gives me the opportunity to try harder and do better. Thank you for your reply and for the many fine submissions you have posted. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
286 | Faith plus Baptism or Faith alone? | Matt 7:13 | Radioman2 | 77974 | ||
Tim: You write: "Are you going to respond to every single post on baptism, no matter how old? :-)" Fact: As of 03-11-2003, at 6:30 p.m., this forum has received more than 1,000 Questions, Answers and Notes whose contents include the word "baptism." I offer this information without comment. Keep up the good work, Tim. Radioman2 |
||||||
287 | Faith plus Baptism or Faith alone? | Matt 7:13 | Radioman2 | 77992 | ||
The unfortunate Radioman of long ago forgot his password, so he had to re-register and append a "2" to his original user name. :-) Thanks for the welcome. And thank you for hanging in there with consistently reasonable, scriptural and accurate postings. Radioman2 |
||||||
288 | Do the will of the Father to enter heave | Matt 7:21 | Radioman2 | 87284 | ||
Ecargneb: You are correct. "Faith in Jesus is displayed by obedience to God's commands." The emphasis is on "displayed by." Obedience is the result, not the cause, of saving faith. Radioman2 |
||||||
289 | Do the will of the Father to enter heave | Matt 7:21 | Radioman2 | 87334 | ||
AMPLIFIED 1 John 3:6 No one who abides in Him [who lives and remains in communion with and in obedience to Him--deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] commits (practices) sin. No one who [habitually] sins has either seen or known Him [recognized, perceived, or understood Him, or has had an experiential acquaintance with Him]. AMPLIFIED 1 John 3:9 No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, for God's nature abides in him [His principle of life, the divine sperm, remains permanently within him]; and he cannot practice sinning because he is born (begotten) of God. Using the Search function to check my postings, you will see that I have never said we can deliberately, knowingly and habitually practice disobedience and still claim to be born of God. No one who [habitually] sins has either seen or known Him. (See 1 John 3:6-10, especially in the Amplified Bible.) |
||||||
290 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 93731 | ||
1. Summary: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland Figgy: Welcome aboard! I will be posting several Notes to you re the shamans of the Word of Faith Movement and their dubious doctrines. Grace to you, Radioman2 ____________________ [Note: Numbers within or at the end of sentences are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'Summary 'Kenneth Copeland stands today as one of the Faith movement's leading spokesmen. His voluminous material (in print and broadcast media), combined with his crusades and international outreach centers, attest to his vast influence. 'Copeland is responsible for spreading many of the Faith movement's unbiblical teachings. He distorts the biblical concepts of faith and covenant. He reduces God to the image of man while elevating man to the status of God. He lowers Jesus to being a product of positive confession who took on a satanic nature at the cross. And he promotes the occult practice of creative visualization. 'Copeland's errors are largely due to his negative stance on reasoning, his poor handling of the Bible, his aversion toward theology, and his bias against tradition. 'On the night of November 2, 1962, a young man twenty-five years of age, struggling against "sin, sickness, and strife," asked Jesus to "come into [his] heart."1 His decision came two weeks after his wife had done likewise.2 Today, these two individuals head a ministry that literally stretches around the globe, while remaining in the forefront of what has come to be known as the "Faith" movement. They are Kenneth and Gloria Copeland. 'Part One of this series explored the roots of the Faith movement and surveyed some of its leading proponents today. In this installment, our primary attention will be devoted to cataloging and critiquing the core theology of one of the most widely recognized and respected Faith teachers to date - Kenneth Copeland.3' ____________________ The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland by Hank Hanegraaff and Erwin M. de Castro. To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) matt2411 |
||||||
291 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 93732 | ||
2. FROM OBSCURITY TO CENTER STAGE: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland ____________________ "Strange how first-class, super-Christians, who would have us believe they are tapping into divine revelation, can do all things in Christ, except successfully defend their damnable doctrines of demons." (--Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher (www.pfo.org/preacher.htm)) ____________________ [Note: Numbers within or at the end of sentences are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'FROM OBSCURITY TO CENTER STAGE 'Though best known for his "prosperity" message, Copeland began his ascent to Faith stardom from a state of financial disarray. Beset by monetary problems, in 1967 he decided to resume his education at Oral Roberts University (ORU), where he subsequently "landed a job as copilot on Oral Robert's [sic] cross-country crusade flights."4 'It was not until August of 1967, however, that Copeland experienced a revolution in his outlook through the preaching of yet another evangelist - Kenneth E. Hagin, regarded by many to be the "father of the Faith movement." With reference to his "distant mentor," Copeland has been quoted "as saying that he 'learned nothing' during six months at Oral Roberts University but was so excited by Hagin's teachings that...[he] spent the next month in his garage listening to them."5 'The Copelands returned to Fort Worth, Texas in 1968 where they established an evangelistic association. Within a few short years their home-based Bible studies reportedly grew into large revivals, sometimes with crowds large enough to fill entire "civic centers and international arenas."6 'In 1973 the ministry began publishing its own newsletter, Believer's Voice of Victory. Two years later, Copeland claimed the Lord "commanded him to 'preach the uncompromised Word on every available voice.'"7 This prompted him to launch the Believer's Voice of Victory radio broadcast in 1976. By 1979 Copeland's ministry was established firmly enough to enter the arena of television, paving the way for its 1981 venture into satellite communications. And in August of the following year "the ministry made history by initiating the first global religious broadcast" (emphasis in original).8 'Copeland continues to experience popular acceptance within various charismatic and Pentecostal circles. His books, booklets, and taped messages can be found in a number of Christian bookstores, and his crusades and revivals consistently produce large turnouts. Furthermore, the ministry's international scope and influence is well attested by its offices in England, the Philippines, South Africa, Australia, Canada, and Hong Kong. 'While not every Faith teacher holds to all of Copeland's doctrines, they, along with his followers, consider him a leading - if not the leading - authority on Faith theology. "Many have already coronated Copeland as the new king of the Faith movement," writes one observer. "In a recent article, even Time magazine refers to Copeland as the 'chief exponent' of the Faith movement."9 ____________________ The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland. To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) matt2411 |
||||||
292 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 93733 | ||
3. THE FORCE OF FAITH: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland [Note: Numbers within or at the end of sentences are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'Of the multiple views of faith held by Faith teachers,10 Copeland focuses primarily on an understanding of faith as a force. "Faith is a power force," he claims. "It is a tangible force. It is a conductive force."11 Moreover, "faith is a spiritual force....It is substance. Faith has the ability to effect natural substance."12 As "the force of gravity...makes the law of gravity work...this force of faith...makes the laws of the spirit world function."13 'Copeland affirms that "God cannot do anything for you apart or separate from faith,"14 for "faith is God's source of power" (emphasis in original).15 Moreover, "everything that you're able to see or touch, anything that you can feel, anything that's perceptive to the five physical senses, was originally the faith of God, and was born in the substance of God's faith."16 In other words, "faith was the raw material substance that the Spirit of God used to form the universe."17 'Copeland adds that "God used words when He created the heaven and the earth....Each time God spoke, He released His faith - the creative power to bring His words to pass."18 For "words are spiritual containers,"19 and the "force of faith is released by words."20 'Copeland derives his definition of faith from Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (KJV). He interprets the word "substance" as some transcendent, primary element that makes up the universe; it was and is activated by spoken words at the onset of creation (both God's original creation of the world and all subsequent creations, whether by God or man). 'Contrary to Copeland's view, the word translated "substance" in the King James Version is the Greek word hypostasis which, in the context of Hebrews 11:1, means "an assured impression, a mental realizing."21 Far from being some tangible material or energetic force, faith is a channel of living trust stretching from man to God. It is an assurance that God's promises never fail, even if sometimes we do not experience their fulfillment during our mortal existence. Other translations render hypostasis more precisely as "being sure" (NIV), "to be sure" (TEV), and "assurance" (NASB). 'Neither the original Greek text nor any of the modern translations support Copeland's understanding of faith. The same holds true for his understanding of spoken words. Besides, the idea of words functioning as faith-filled containers makes no sense if there is no such thing as a "force of faith" (requiring packaging and transportation) in the first place. ____________________ The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland. To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) matt2411 |
||||||
293 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94087 | ||
4. A GOD OF HUMAN PROPORTIONS: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland ____________________ 'Copeland's deflation of God is best exemplified by his comment that "the biggest failure in the Bible...is God."* (*Kenneth Copeland, Praise-a-Thon, TBN, 1988. Copeland has, in another instance, stated that God "is not a failure" (Kenneth Copeland, The Troublemaker [Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Publications, n.d.], 23).) ____________________ [Note: Numbers within or at the end of sentences are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'Copeland's view of God fares no better biblically than his understanding of faith. He describes God as someone "very much like you and me....A being that stands somewhere around 6'2," 6'3," that weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred pounds, little better, [and] has a [hand]span nine inches across."22 'Copeland's statement is based on his hyperliteral reading of Isaiah 40:12 ("Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, marked off the heavens with a [nine inch] span,..." [AV]). Yet following the same line of interpretation, one would also have to conclude that God literally held a basket full of dust and weighed mountains on a gigantic set of scales (v. 12b) - an absurd proposition ruled out by the context of the passage. The fact is that Isaiah 40 makes extensive use of figurative language to underscore the vast difference between the Creator and His creation. 'Giving a literal spin on verses that figuratively describe God in humanlike (anthropomorphic) terms, Copeland makes God out to be a "spirit-being with a body, complete with eyes, and eyelids, ears, nostrils, a mouth, hands and fingers, and feet."23 However, the Bible never intended to convey the notion that God has physical features like His human creation. Anthropomorphic descriptions were simply meant to help us understand and relate to our Maker. Jesus declared, "God is spirit" (John 4:24), not a spirit-being with a body (cf. Deut. 4:12). The Creator is, after all, "God, and not man" (Hos. 11:9). 'The idea of God possessing a body (physical or spirit) implies the unbiblical view that the Trinity is actually composed of three separate beings. Moreover, a God who has a body with definite, measurable dimensions cannot truly be omnipresent, unlike the God of Scripture who is present everywhere in all His fullness (Jer. 23:23-24). (It is true that in His human nature Christ has a body and is localized in space and time. But in His divine nature He remains nonphysical and omnipresent, sharing this immutable nature with the Father and Holy Spirit.) Copeland's deflation of God is best exemplified by his comment that "the biggest failure in the Bible...is God."24 In stark contrast, the biblical God is an all-powerful being (Dan. 4:35) whose plans cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2) and who considers nothing too difficult (Jer. 32:17; Luke 1:37). 'Copeland's diminished view of God is further amplified by a correspondingly inflated view of the universe in general and man in particular. He claims that the earth is "a copy of the mother planet [i.e., heaven] where God lives."25 Exactly how Copeland could "squeeze" God on any planet is difficult to fathom, especially since Solomon pointed out that heaven itself cannot contain God (1 Kings 8:27).' ____________________ The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland. To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) |
||||||
294 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94159 | ||
5. MEMBERS OF GOD'S CLASS: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'Copeland also claims that Adam's transgression empowered Satan to evict God from the earth. "God's on the outside looking in," says Copeland. "He doesn't have any legal entree into the earth. The thing don't belong to Him."37 (Psalm 24:1 says otherwise.)' (Footnote 37. Kenneth Copeland, The Image of God in You III (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1989, audiotape #01-1403), side 1.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Note: Numbers in the text are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'Copeland overemphasizes similarities between God and man to the point where any distinction becomes virtually nil: "God's reason for creating Adam was His desire to reproduce Himself....Adam is as much like God as you could get, just the same as Jesus....Adam, in the Garden of Eden, was God manifested in the flesh" (emphasis added).26 'Referring to his so-called law of genesis, Copeland asserts, "Adam was created in God's own image and likeness, a spirit-being...[and] takes on the nature of his spiritual father or lord."27 In explaining the terms "image" and "likeness" in Genesis 1:26, he adds: "If you stood Adam upside God, they look just exactly alike....If you stood Jesus and Adam side-by-side, they would look and act and sound exactly alike....The image is that they look just alike, but the likeness is that they act alike and they are alike....All of God's attributes, all of God's authority, all of God's faith, all of God's ability was invested in that man."28 'Actually, the terms "image" and "likeness" refute Copeland's point. The Hebrew word for "likeness" (demuth) simply means similarity or resemblance, not identity.29 Furthermore, the term itself actually "defines and limits" the word "image" (Hebrew: tselem) in order "to avoid the implication that man is a precise copy of God, albeit miniature" (emphasis added).30 'Humans are created in God's image in the sense that they share, in a finite and imperfect way, God's communicable attributes (e.g, rationality and morality). These attributes, in turn, give individuals the capacity to enjoy fellowship with God, develop personal relationships with one another, and take care of God's creation as He has commanded.31 God's incommunicable attributes (e.g., omnipotence, omniscience, self-sufficiency), however, remain solely His. 'Along with the "image of God," Copeland also refers to "the life of God," which he interchanges with the terms "the absolute life of God," "absolute life," "life force," "life in the absolute sense," "eternal life," and "everlasting life."32 He applies these terms to a quality of life, the source of which is God.33 But he also speaks of it as "the substance - the source, the power - the unseen force that makes God, God...[and] places Him above everything else that exists."34 'Copeland states that "man was created to know that great life force and he longs for it in his dreams. Adam had that life force in him before he committed high treason" (emphases added).35 This is yet another sense in which Copeland believes Adam to be created in God's class. He was made to partake of "the unseen force that makes God, God" - once again diminishing severely if not altogether destroying any final distinction between creator and creature. 'Furthermore, this "force" is at times spoken of as a reality more ultimate than God Himself, conferring deity not only on the Creator but on His creation, man. This again puts God and redeemed man in the same class. 'In Copeland's theology, Adam (and, consequently, the rest of humanity) does not appear to have a uniquely human nature. Initially possessing the nature of God, "when Adam committed high treason [sinned] against God and bowed his knee to Satan, spiritual death - the nature of Satan - was lodged in his heart."36 Adam had, in effect, allegedly traded in his divine nature for a satanic nature, otherwise called "spiritual death." However, Scripture reveals that mankind is wholly distinct from both God (2 Sam. 7:22; cf. Mark 12:32) and angelic/demonic beings (Ps. 8:5; cf. Heb. 2:7). And even after the Fall, man is still said to bear the image of God (1 Cor. 11:7). 'Copeland also claims that Adam's transgression empowered Satan to evict God from the earth. "God's on the outside looking in," says Copeland. "He doesn't have any legal entree into the earth. The thing don't belong to Him."37 (Psalm 24:1 says otherwise.) And supposedly, since "the sin of Adam went all the way up to, but not including, the throne of God...[even] the Heavenly Holy of Holies had to be purified."38 ____________________ To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) |
||||||
295 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94209 | ||
Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute. Question: Where did she hear that one must believe the 'hell doctrine to be saved'? Answer: 'Moreover, in her 1991 booklet, [Joyce] Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute. Meyer writes, “There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth I am presenting. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place in hell.”(10)' (To read the entire, uncut article quoted above, go to: http://www.equip.org/search/ and in the search field enter the words Joyce Meyer.) ____________________ '6 Meyer, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make: A Complete And Thorough Understanding Of What It Means To Be Born Again (Tulsa: Harrison House, 1991), 35-36 (emphasis in original). The 1996 version of this booklet contains slightly different wording, but essentially the same message: '“Jesus paid on the cross and went to hell in my place….God rose up from His throne and said to the demon powers tormenting the sinless Son of God, ‘Let Him go.’ Then the resurrection power of Almighty God went through hell and filled Jesus….His spirit went to hell because that is where we deserved to go.” See Meyer, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make: A Complete and Thorough Understanding of What it Means to be Born Again (Tulsa: Harrison House, 1996, 5th printing), 41-43.' '10 Meyer, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make (1991), 37 (emphasis added). The words “in hell” are deleted from this sentence in the 1996 version of The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make. However, substantial references to the general idea remain in this later version (see the example given in endnote six above).' --Radioman2 For further information/explanation, see the references cited in this posting. |
||||||
296 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94218 | ||
Gracefull: In this thread my posts are filled with references to the actual publications in which Copeland himself said the things that are quoted. Perhaps you missed these sentences, so I quote from my posts: "(Footnote 37. Kenneth Copeland, The Image of God in You III (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1989, audiotape #01-1403), side 1.)" - - - - - - - - - - - - - "[Note: Numbers in the text are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)]" "To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)" (The footnotes to which I refer are those giving the original publications in which Copeland said these things.] Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
297 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94221 | ||
Jesus' "little, wormy spirit" -- Kenneth Copeland 'The situation seemed hopeless, as Jesus' "emaciated, poured out, little, wormy spirit is down in the bottom of that thing; and the devil thinks he's got Him destroyed."73 'However, Copeland explains that "Satan fell into the trap. He took Him [Jesus] into hell illegally. He carried Him in there [when] He did not sin."74 'God found the opening He needed: "That Word of the living God went down into that pit of destruction and charged the spirit of Jesus with resurrection power! Suddenly His twisted, death-wracked spirit began to fill out and come back to life....Jesus was born again - the firstborn from the dead the Word calls Him - and He whipped the devil in his own backyard."75' ____________________ 73 Kenneth Copeland, Believer's Voice of Victory (television program), TBN, 21 April 1991. 74 Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, side 2. 75 Copeland, "The Price of It All," 4-6. --Radioman2 |
||||||
298 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94241 | ||
Repost of ID# 89213 by Hank "We need to be careful of what we say about our brothers and sisters, we will be judged for it." --from your post No. 89181. Tim, where does Scripture say that Christians will be judged for reproving and rebuking false teaching and false teachers? Just how "careful" were Paul and other apostles about soft-peddling error and corruption in the church? For that matter, how compromising was Jesus in dealing with false teachers? Have you read anything about the vigor and forcefulness with which Charles H. Spurgeon opposed modernism and the apostasy that it brought to the Baptist Union of England in his day? No, Tim, Christians who love the faith once and for all delivered to the saints are not to be careful lest they offend. They are not to be spineless, namby-pamby, weak, apathetic, and ineffectual, craven and ignorant little wimps hiding in the shadows, ashamed of the gospel of Christ, bent on condoning error and deception. They try to rationalize their hypocrisy by calling it Christian charity and tolerance. The seminal cause of many church groups floundering today in man-centered theology can be traced to the failure of professing Christians to stand up for orthodox teaching and practice. The corrupting interlopers had free play simply because there was no one who had the guts to oppose them and put an end to their ungodly secularism and socinianism. When man began to introduce theological concepts that robbed God of his sovereignty and placed man in control of his own destiny, much of biblical Christianity began a slow, steady disintegration into a devilish mixture of cults, false teaching and heresy. Much has been said on this forum about the so-called Word of Faith movement, one characteristic of which that is widely advertised by its practitioners is expressed in the silly slogan, "Name it and claim it." Name the blessing or whatever that God "owes" us and claim it. Since when has God ever empowered man to put Him in the dock and force Him to do anything? This is Heresy with a capital H. What is sad is that disciples of the false teachers are not bashful to come forth to condemn orthodox evangelicals, frequently tagging them as practicing legalism because they adhere to sola scriptura and thus don't look for any special favors from God such as a private and extra-biblical sign or special revelation . . . --Hank |
||||||
299 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94271 | ||
6. COVENANT OF CONVENIENCE: The Teachings of Kenneth Copeland - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Copeland's view deflates the biblical concept of God in numerous other ways. He parallels God's actions with those of Satan. In effect he makes man to be the dominant party over God..." - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Note: Numbers in the text are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes providing reference sources for this article, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm)] 'According to Copeland, "God had no avenue of lasting faith or moving in the earth. He had to have covenant with somebody....He had to be invited in, in other words, or He couldn't come."39 In fact, "the reason that He's making covenant is to get into the earth."40 "God is on the outside looking in," says Copeland. "In order to have any say-so in the earth, He's gonna have to be in agreement with a man here."41 '"Since man was the key figure in the Fall," Copeland argues, "man had to be the key figure in the redemption, so God approached a man named Abram."42 An agreement was struck between God and Abram that "gave God access to the earth."43 God, in turn, "promised to care for Abraham and his descendants in every way - spiritually, physically, financially, socially."44 Commenting on the deal, Copeland writes that God "re-enacted with Abram what Satan had done with Adam, except that God did not sneak in and use deception...and Abram bought it."45 'As his comments indicate, Copeland views divine covenants no differently from business contracts.46 They are benefit-oriented, not relationship-oriented. They are formed by mutual agreement (for mutual benefit) through negotiation, as opposed to being initiated by the stronger party offering non-negotiable help (not of necessity but of grace) - which is the traditional Christian understanding of God's covenants. They focus on the fulfillment of certain terms (performance) rather than personal loyalty. Copeland himself states that "the Word of the living God is a contract."47 'Copeland's view deflates the biblical concept of God in numerous other ways. He parallels God's actions with those of Satan. In effect he makes man to be the dominant party over God - even claiming that Abraham could have told God to "bug off" when God offered him a "proposition."48 And he seemingly attributes the ultimate sacredness of divine covenants not to the figure who stands behind them (viz. God), but to the fact that they are composed of words: "Words are the most sacred things....This is a word planet...governed by words...created by words....Words cause it to function...cause life...cause death....Words go on forever....Words are holy."49 'Copeland maintains that God "used His right that Abraham had given Him"50 to provide a way for Jesus to enter the earth. Abraham gave God what He needed: "the chance to use his [Abraham's] mouth, because what God was after was a vehicle in the earth that was a man to get His Word in there."51 ____________________ To read more, including extensive footnotes, go to: (www.equip.org/free/DC755-2.htm) |
||||||
300 | A FALSE TEACHING? Yes / No | Matt 8:5 | Radioman2 | 94323 | ||
EdB: "Why look for truth in a false doctrine? I'm sure it may contain some but why look?" EdB: I agree with you -- why even look for truth in a false doctrine? Why bother? "Meyer apparently prefers to hold onto teachings scraped from the garbage cans of the Word-Faith movement." (THE PREACHER WHO DOESN’T TELL IT LIKE IT IS: THE TRUTH TWISTING AND TALL TALES OF JOYCE MEYER by Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher. (http://www.pfo.org/preacher.htm)) Perhaps at times one will find a little edible food in a garbage can. But we don't go scavenging among garbage cans looking for a mere scrap of truth when God has prepared for us a feast in His Word. Every cult mixes a little truth in with their heretical teachings. It's like the old "bait and switch" advertising scam. Or it is like what Eve said in Genesis 3. When tempted, Eve said, "But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die" (Ge 3:3). God did not say anything about not "touching" the fruit of the tree. He did NOT say "neither shall ye touch it." What God said was, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Ge 2:17). There was some truth in what Eve said -- "Ye shall not eat of it." But then in an attempt to sneak it in under the radar, she said, "Neither shall ye touch it." EdB, you've been doing a commendable job of defending the truth. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ] Next > Last [40] >> |