Results 501 - 520 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
501 | Churches | Phil 3:3 | Reformer Joe | 69209 | ||
John is a member of the PCA like me, not the PCUSA. Pro-covenant baptism arguments: http://public.csusm.edu/public/guests/rsclark/Covenant_Baptism.htm Pro-believer's baptism arguments http://www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/99/082999.html http://www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/97/052597.html --Joe! |
||||||
502 | Churches | Phil 3:3 | Reformer Joe | 69173 | ||
In the Presbyterian Church in America, we only have three levels of church government: the session (the elders of the local congregation); the presbytery (comprised of all of the teaching elders within certain geographical bounds, along with ruling elders based on the number of communing members at the congregational level); and the general assembly (made up of the members of each presbytery in the denomination). While each congregation is not ultimately autonomous, its governing bodies are representative in nature. --Joe! |
||||||
503 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69164 | ||
"If you can show me where Christ declared that we are to obey any of our man-made institutions that are defined by buildings, parking lots, plush offices, chandeliers, staffing organization, pews and a pulpit, then I am all ears." Romans 13 1 Peter 2 Titus 3 --Joe! |
||||||
504 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69163 | ||
I'd like to point you do guideline number 1 of the Lockman foundation with regard to the nature of your posts. When you reply to this, please make a note of it right before you hit the "submit" button. | ||||||
505 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69162 | ||
Well, then, Jesus and I apologize to you and Thayer. I can't wait to tell my wife that it isn't adultery if the other woman is single! :) Your emotional response and "playing the victim" does not make me any less correct about your dishonesty. That is not a typo, but a deliberately false presentation of the meaning of the commentators in support of your false view. --Joe! |
||||||
506 | word for wine in the original text? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 69011 | ||
I wish I could say that the "Recovery Study Bible" was something I made up, but it really exists out there. --Joe! |
||||||
507 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69009 | ||
"Jesus had EVERY opportunity to address the issue of plural wives in the lives of many around him, and yet He was completely silent on the issue." Oh, I forgot to mention that this argument is frequently used by those promoting the so-called "Christian homosexual" agenda as well. Jesus didn't say anything about it, and he had every opportunity to do so. Therefore, Jesus thinks that Gay is O.K. Right? --Joe! |
||||||
508 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69006 | ||
You wrote: "I made no alterations to the text of the commentary except to leave out portions that were not relevant to the issue at hand." Again with the dishonesty! You left out a SINGLE clause which emphatically stated that polygamy was NOT condoned among laymen or overseers. How in the world can you try and make that out to be irrelevant to the issue at hand? You quoted everything around it, and did not even use ellipses to indicate that you had left anything out. The argument of the commentators rests squarely on the clause you left out, because what they were saying is that any anti-polygamy requirements for overseers would be superfluous. Again, where is the honesty here? You wrote: "The Biblical definition of adultery strictly defines it as a man desiring and/or having sexual relations with another man's wife." Is that so? "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." --Matthew 5:27-28 "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." --Matthew 19:9 No mention of another man's wife here. In fact, the last verse would seem to indicate most marriage after divorce (presumably to someone who was NOT already another man's wife) is adultery. --Joe! |
||||||
509 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69004 | ||
"Jesus had EVERY opportunity to address the issue of plural wives in the lives of many around him, and yet He was completely silent on the issue." That is because polygamy was not practiced in 1st-century Judea. --Joe! |
||||||
510 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 69002 | ||
You wrote: 'Although the churches in this country do not today find this to be acceptable..." Nor does the state, to whom we are to submit as well... '...I openly challenge the idea that man-made institutions we call "churches" have a God-given authority to add to God's definition of marriage by saying that a "license" is now a part of how we define marriage.' It isn't the "licenses" that define a marriage. I haven't seen anyone else but you even bring up the license. However, multiple marriages are against the law in the United States, and unless that is a commandment which would cause you to disobey God (and you yourself have acknowledged that polygamy is not a COMMAND), we are to glorify God by submission to the authority He has established. And speaking of established authority, the Church was established by Jesus Christ and is not a "man-made institution." We are also called to submit to the church's authority in the Lord. You added: "Organized religion (churches) in this country tend to "tow the party line" (democratically defined system of morality and theology)." Please point out ANY concrete examples of a tradition of polygamous churches since Pentecost. The United States has not exerted any influence over the monogamous marriage structure of the church. It has been that way for 2000 years. "This comes as no surprise to those of us who have taken several steps back from the mind control religion tends to exert upon its followers, and have instead allow scripture to speak for itself." That's funny; the Jehovah's Witnesses have told me the same thing. Ever think that you acting as an individual may have gotten Scripture wrong here? That is why Christianity is a corporate entity, not a democratic free-for-all where your "interpretation" of Scripture is correct because you say it is. The Lord established the CHURCH for a reason, and you are doing nothing but pointing out how you despise its authority and its historical position regarding what Scripture teaches. --Joe! |
||||||
511 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 68994 | ||
"If you want to drink fine that is between you and God. Why does anyone feel it is necessary to justify their private actions on this forum?" I don't know. Why do you? :) For everyone saying that they want to terminate this already humongous thread, people on all sides certainly want THEIR word to be the last one. I think we understand the positions of our respective opponents, and how wrong they are. Time to put this aside. --Joe! |
||||||
512 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68963 | ||
"...and I have also dealt with the elusive, and outright non-existent command of only one wife for each man sinply based upon what Adam was given." No, you haven't. --Joe! |
||||||
513 | word for wine in the original text? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 68873 | ||
"No, actually it has the opposite meaning in scripture, more positive meaning..." Oh, sorry. I didn't know. I haven't purchased "The Recovery Study Bible" yet, so I can't glean from its intertextual wisdom! :) --Joe! |
||||||
514 | word for wine in the original text? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 68850 | ||
'"But" this view does not take into account the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer." (this is what you stated). That first word (But), in the recovery world is always viewed as a denial word, for me this is a red flag.' Does this "red flag" go up every time you see one of the apostles using the word "but" in Scripture, too? Please be sensible! " I have spent time talking with alcoholics who want to stop, but they have difficulty because it is a drug that is chemically addictive. Almost all of them say it's like a demon that has control of their lives. And because it is addictive, it becomes a self-inflicted disease. They simply cannot stop drinking, they say, even though they know it will destroy them and everyone around them. The compulsion to drink is so deep that they often resort to stealing, lying and cheating just to get a drink." And that is bondage to sin. I don't think John will diagree with that at all. It is not the alcohol that is the "demon," though. The "recovery model" that you seem to approve of makes the sinner out to be a "helpless victim," not the voluntary slave to sin that the Bible characterizes a drunkard to be. You wrote: 'The apostle Paul in Romans 14:21 tells us that we are to avoid doing things if it causes our brother to "stumble" or "is offended or is made weak," even if our conscience is O.K. on the matter.' No, what Paul tells us to avoid is putting our Christian freedom ON DISPLAY before the weaker brethren (look at the following verse). By the way, the same chapter tells the weaker in conscience not to judge the stronger one, as you did by implication in the first paragraph of your post. "I am convinced that the enemy of our souls wants to promote drunkenness as much as possible. He wants to keep many in a daze every moment of their lives so they never get serious with Jesus. The enemy has almost succeeded in doing this in some cultures around the world." I (and, I would assume, John also) agree completely. --Joe! |
||||||
515 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68737 | ||
You wrote: "Quite simply, your questions in this most resent post to me are not worthy of an answer when you conduct yourself in such an ungodly manner" Is this the example of godliness I should follow? Here is a selection from your own posts. "I can reasonably take to task any who add meaning into key verses that clearly is not there." [Still waiting for that task-taking...] "Having been well schooled in philosophy, and therefore knowing how to lay out the facts and rationally paint a picture by what is given, it is quite shocking at times to behold the irrational meanderings we see at times by those who defend a position purely from the basis of emotion rather than logic, reason and fact." [Are my meanderings irrational and based in emotion?] "So you see, it comes as no surprise to me that men and women will both consider the threat of peer pressure to be more than they are willing to handle if ALL of God's word is allowed to be the final authority in relation to their beliefs that they reflect outwardly." [My biblical points are nothing but caving in to peer pressure?] 'I was making that very point in reference to Adam's having been given only one wife. "So what?" is a general overview of what I was trying to say in all that. I only wish others would be as discerning as you have been.' [So I am not discerning?] "You can overlook the obvious, but then that is all you would be doing. You appear to be the only one in this discussion who has called this into question. Everyone else appears to be aware of this fact and are avoiding it because of its implications." [Who's avoiding, here?] "I could provide a rebuttal by saying that you are anti-intellectual, as Dr. Charles Stanley once addressed in a very interesting sermon, but then that would be a return sucker punch." [Nice job of "not insulting someone"] "So, one is left with following the rules of reasoning of these people in order to TRY and show them the severe lack in their reasoning." [So people's disagreement with you is based in a severe lack of reasoning?] "I think this is a legitimate question that is being ignored by those who engage in nothing better than knee jerk, emotional reactionism. [So I am just a knee-jerk, emotional reactionary?] This is not a matter of tit-for-tat one-upmanship, this is about what I consider to be a legitimate question." [Apparently not legitimate enough to address my respose, which I have posted no less than three times in the past couple of days.] If only I had the same upstanding ethical posture that you have adopted in your debate! --Joe! |
||||||
516 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68735 | ||
"You do not know me nor do you know how I live." Forgive me. Are you a practicing polygamist or not? " Quite simply, your questions in this most resent post to me are not worthy of an answer when you conduct yourself in such an ungodly manner..... " So the throne of Christ is YOURS ;) Now how about my first post of biblical problems with polygamy, which you still have ignored? I asked in quite a polite manner, and you so rudely blew me off. You are blatantly refusing to engage in the most powerful arguments against your position, coming onto the Forum as if you are bringing "true light" to all us hopeless theological peasants. You repeating yourself again and again does not make you any more right than you were when you first posted. If you want to be seen as credible here, you will have to meaningfully engage some of the points that I have brought up. --Joe! |
||||||
517 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68727 | ||
You wrote: 'Besides, I never said that polygamy is God's ideal for marriage, as many have assumed concerning my position. I also never claimed that God "endorsed" polygamy. What I DID say is that built into the protections that beneift the first wife, God made "governing provision" for a man to have more than one wife. Many have assumed from this that my meaning had to do with endorsement and even commandment.' Okay, then please answer us directly: according to you, does God care whether mankind in general is polygamous or not? You wrote: "One cannot help but to wonder at the declaration that Adam's having been given one wife became an unwritten law for all mankind. By what authority does one make such a claim when God's silence on such an alleged Law is agonizingly evident?" I repeat my earlier (and as yet unanswered) point: How many times is Genesis 2:23 quoted elsewhere in the Bible? Who quotes it, and in what contexts? Is it given as an instructive example, a normative principle, in those instances or not? You see, Don, you are what I like to call a "one-issue wonder." Every last one of your posts on this forum have had to do with polygamy. Since it is not a doctrinal standard of your church, it is more likely a personal issue in your life. Most likely, if you do not repent of your thinking, you will continue to ignore the biblical support Ihave given and go off and try to find another forum on which to post your views, insisting all the while how you have continuously "stumped" everyone to whom you have presented your views. You are not going to find sympathy and support for your proclivity here, Don. It simply will not happen. You can convince yourself that it is due to our thinking, hopelessly mired in what at least purports to be a monogamous culture. Nevertheless, you are not going to be getting the "thumbs-up" here. Just out of curiosity, what do the pastor and deacons think of your views? Do they encourage you sharing your perspective with the rest of your congregation? --Joe! |
||||||
518 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68725 | ||
Why did you leave parts out? Here is what the commentary actually says: "husband of one wife--confuting the celibacy of Rome's priesthood. Though the Jews practiced polygamy, yet as he is writing as to a Gentile Church, AND AS POLYGAMY WAS NOT ALLOWED AMONG EVEN LAYMEN IN THE CHURCH, the ancient interpretation that the prohibition here is against polygamy in a candidate bishop is not correct..." I am sure that the authors of this commentary would have appreciated you being intellectually honest and not trying to present them as endorsers of polygamy. Secondly, the "qualifications for elders" passages are by no means the nail in the coffin for the notion that God endorses polygamy. Why are you so allergic to responding to my previous posts? Could it be because the word of God properly applied is nothing but a head-on collision for your sinful, lustful lifestyle? --Joe! |
||||||
519 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 68687 | ||
Wake up! I am not finished yet! :) "Do not be with heavy drinkers of wine, Or with gluttonous eaters of meat; For the heavy drinker and the glutton will come to poverty, And drowsiness will clothe one with rags." --Proverbs 23:21 "Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin." --James 4:17 You wrote: "So, I do believe my point is valid. What other 'sin' in the Bible is ambigious, or left to personal standards? Can some of us lie a little more than others and be okay, while others have less tolerance for it? ;-)" I would say that some sins mentioned in Scripture are sins by their very commission (such as lying), while others are sins by commission to excess, thereby being a violation to the commandment to exercise self-control. For example, praying for (and therefore desiring) one's daily bread is not a sin, but greed is. Rest is commanded, but laziness is forbidden. I don't think that I would go so far as to limit it merely to unbridled "personal standards." We are called to act with wisdom, and Christ-like wisdom always comes into play where there is not the clear command in Scripture. --Joe! |
||||||
520 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 68683 | ||
I hope it wasn't his scientific scholarship which had him exiled to the nether reaches of Arkansas! :) --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ] Next > Last [97] >> |