Results 1641 - 1660 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1641 | Does God have a spiritual body? | Eph 5:25 | Reformer Joe | 54208 | ||
Well, now isn't that a demonstration of our love for one another! "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." --John 13:35 --Joe! |
||||||
1642 | Are you asking about a mystical body | Eph 5:25 | Reformer Joe | 54293 | ||
So why shouldn't we believe that God has feathers, then? How is that "clearly" the case? Scripture never says that man "looks like" God. But this raises an interesting point. Dake says that because God is triune, that God actually has THREE bodies. Do you believe this as well? And what about the pre-existent Christ. Being in very nature God, did He have a body as well? If so, what happened to it when He was born a man? Or does He have two bodies now? Historically, Christians have held that Jesus has two natures, one human and one divine. The human nature is confined to space, the divine one isn't. Each are united to the other but there is no mixing of the two. One cannot compare the post-incarnate Christ's human-deity personhood with God the Father allegedly having a body, since it is perfectly clear from Scripture that Jesus' body was knit in the womb of Mary, a created thing. Nowhere does it say in Scripture that the Father from all eternity has possessed two natures like Christ has since the incarnation began. As has been pointed out before, the Bible indicates that God is spirit, and flesh and spirit are not the same thing. Jesus said: "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." --Luke 24:39 and "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." --John 3:6 So while God may appear in a form for the sake of humanity, that does not mean that such is his natural form. Or we could just as easily say that God exists as a burning bush or as a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, or a burning oven or any number of ways He chose to make himself visible in the pages of Scripture. What needs to be clear is that being confined to physical space is by its very nature the opposite of being omnipresent. If God the Father, having only a divine nature, is confined to a man-sized body, that nature cannot also be everywhere. Whether you call this heresy or not, it is wrong. --Joe! |
||||||
1643 | To whom Christ died? | Eph 5:25 | Reformer Joe | 70444 | ||
Amen. --Joe! |
||||||
1644 | Worthy of Honor but not of Respect | Eph 5:33 | Reformer Joe | 65755 | ||
One thing that I think is being missed here is the role of the church in dealing with abusive situations. If a Christian wife is being abused by a husband who is also a professing believer, where is the church discipline? There should be elders to whom the man is accountable, so that when unrepentant sin is made known (and in such situations it should be made known, for the husband's sake and for the sake of the name of Jesus Christ), the leadership God has established in the communion of saints can restore the family. And while the wife is to be submissive to her husband, the civil government is also God's tool to punish evildoers as well (Romans 13:1-3). Submission of authority is never license to rebel against the Supreme Authority. The apostles violated the commands of the civil authority when it conflicted with their mandate from Jesus Christ, but they made it clear why they were doing so. Church members are under an obligation to disobey commands from their elders to sin, and a wife is obligated to repectfully disobey her husband when he wants her to sin. --Joe! |
||||||
1645 | Why Rabbi? | Eph 5:33 | Reformer Joe | 66589 | ||
For the record, Charis, I prefer "Saint Joseph." And that is biblical, too! :) --Joe! |
||||||
1646 | Circus Churchianity vs.Spirt-led worship | Philippians | Reformer Joe | 54390 | ||
Welcome to the Forum, nuge, and thanks for sharing your perspective. I happen to be blessed as member of a church that is, from my understanding of biblical worship, approaching worship correctly. Some of the aspects of true worship that American evangelicalism in general hos distanced itself from are the following. 1. Worship must be centered to and directed toward God, not man-centered. Look at how many songs sung in our churches today place an undue emphasis on the words "I" and "me." While it is certainly not unbiblical to include praise to God for what he has done for us personally in our day-to-day lives, it is essential that worship focus on God's grandeur and majesty and His attributes and Christ's chief role as our REDEEMER, not as our "buddy" or "emotional healer" or "best friend," existing only to meet our selfish needs. 2. True worship arises from a correct understanding of who God is. That's theology. That's doctrine. Many of the writers of our most cherished hymns were theologians and ministers of the word of God, not professional entertainers, as you so aptly put it. Skim through a hymnal and look at some of the richness of the content. The hymns, while perhaps a little outdated in wording for some, contain TEACHING and INFORMATION about who God is. Isaac Watts, John Newton, Charles Wesley, Martin Luther, and many others wrote God-glorifying songs in response to the Spirit working through God's word in their inner beings. By contrast the modern church has penned such vapid and theologically destitute songs like "Heavnely Father, I Appreciate You." How that incenses me! I appreciate my neighbor who loaned me his lawn mower; I do not use such a weak, pathertic sentiment as "appreciation" to express the awe and reverence I should have for a holy God who infinitely hates my sin and yet fixed His saving love on me so that while I was yet ungodly, Jesus dies for me. One does not have to necessarily maintain the same musical style in worship (although I do find a timelessness in a great number of the hymns that the early-90's pop ripoffs no not share), but there has to be some substance there. We do not worship God without a reason, so our worship should fix itself precisely on those reasons why our Triune God is worthy of praise. 3. Lastly, the church has somehow bought into the entirely unbiblical notion that to bring people to Christ it is necessary to look much more like the world. While Paul does see the need to become "all things to all men," he did not compromise or dilute the revelation of God in doing so. Like you imply, people have substituted business principles and group growth dynamics for the true worship of God in Spirit and in TRUTH. And the sad fact is that while many churches do not promote serious falsehood, there also exists a serious absence of truth. Without either, we have empty, feel-good, fluff. I got the latest issue of Moody Magazine in the mail, which deals with the worship wars. I was saddened as I read article after article on worship style, getting many pages deep into the section before the idea of substance was even addressed at all. And it is substance that is at the heart of our worship dilemma. I would recommend two very good books that address this very issue. The (much) older one is the _Religious Affections_ by Jonathan Edwards. The more recent one is called _Losing our Virtue_ by David O. Wells, and the latter book should be on the reading list of everyone concerned with the direction church has taken. Have I hit my 5000-word limit yet? :) --Joe! |
||||||
1647 | Circus Churchianity vs.Spirt-led worship | Philippians | Reformer Joe | 54500 | ||
Keep me posted on what you think of it. I would like to hear someone else's opinion on it. | ||||||
1648 | Am I saved until Christ returns? | Phil 1:6 | Reformer Joe | 82786 | ||
"When you recieve the Holy Ghost people wont be able to see it but they will hear it when you speak with other tounges. Many people choose to say it isn't essential ecspecially those who haven't experienced it." Some people like Paul said it is not essential (1 Corinthians 12:30). "They want to say it's not necessary to speak in tounges to receive the Holy Ghost. Why? because they don't want to admit they may be wrong and may not have that relationship they proclaim." Some want to say it's necessary to speak in tounges to receive the Holy Ghost. Why? because they trust in easily faked experiences and have some need of sensationalism in addition to (or in place of) the truth of God's words, and they don't want to admit they may be wrong and may not have that attention-getting gift they claim to have. "Read on it talks about some of the characteristics of a believer. NOTE it says these signs SHALL follow them that BELIEVE.... In my name they shall cast out demons; they shall speak with new tounges;..." Why did you stop there? You know that you aren't a true, Holy Ghost Christian unless you have been bitten by a snake and walked away unharmed and have imbibed a good dose of poison. Please don't take just half the Scripture. If casting out demons and speaking in tongues are necessary evidences of having received the Spirit, so is the rest of it. So go buy your arsenic and, Bottoms up! --Joe! |
||||||
1649 | Am I saved until Christ returns? | Phil 1:6 | Reformer Joe | 82796 | ||
'1st... 1 Co. 12:30 The passage states... do all speak with tongues concerning the Gift of the Spirit. I would ask you does every Christian have the gift of Faith because they believe on Jesus. The bible says without faith in him we cannot be saved, so where is the line drawn? Just becuase God would choose tounges as the initial evidence of the Holy Ghost does that not mean there couldn't be a gift of the spirit "tounges?"' So are you suggesting, according to your perspective, that there are many who receive the Holy Ghost (manifested by speaking in tongues) and then never speak in tongues again? Paul asks the question, "Do all speak in tongues?" in such a way that the implied answer is "no." "The gifts were for the church and to bless the body whereas the Holy Ghost is for the individual." Where do you get the idea that the Holy Spirit is just "for the individual"? The very fact that they are spiritual gifts suggest that they come from the Spirit. You do realize that the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost are One and the same, right? "How do you explain Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." Easy: the Holy Spirit prays for us. If these groanings cannot be uttered, why do you consider the syllables you are UTTERING to be these "groanings"? "Why would God have empowered all the people in the upper room with the same "gift of the Spirit?" What would God need 120 people everyone in the place to be used in the same gift what was the purpose and what did it accomplish at that moment, but as a sign when they went outside Peter stood up and said this is the Holy Ghost which the prophet Joel prophesied about...." And those 120 were speaking known human languages. That is why the Jewish hearers, before conversion, could understand each in HIS OWN LANGUAGE. What you are passing off as a sure sign of receiving the Spirit is not the same thing as was manifested at Pentecost. Regarding Mark 16, you wrote: "I would propose that a true believer has the ability whenever he comes in contact with a demon possessed individual to cast it out 2) that we should all speak with tongues ((((my question is directly towards 2, how do you explain this)))) 3) in the event you are physically harmed (which we know we arent to tempt the Lord our God) God will protect his true believers or if we were to accidently drink something harmful God would protect us. " How would snake handling be tempting God? It seems that it would be a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate to the unbelieving world the wonderful promises of God for his people. Maybe the "don't tempt God" line is used so much for those last two because it is a lot harder to counterfeit recovering from a cobra bite or from a 12-ounce can of Drano. No one wants to seem to fear tempting God by "speaking in tongues." By the way, nothing in the verse says that ALL will speak in tongues, anyway, unless we conclude that ALL must do the rest. Spirit-filled believers die of snake bites. Spirit-filled believers die from accidental overdoses. It happens, so your theology must accomodate that. How do I explain Mark 16? It doesn't appear in the earliest manuscripts and breaks the flow of the narrative completely, so I believe (as many respected scholars do) that the last part of Mark 16 is a later addition. "1Cr 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Here Paul states he speaks with tongues MORE THAN YE ALL... stating they also speak with tongues but he does it frequently. Here it appears the whole church in Corinth which was in fact a grounded church spoke with tongues." The Corinthian church was a grounded one?!? You really need to study those two epistles a little more. The fact is that Paul clearly indicates that some had the ability to speak in tongues and some did not. "here it states they were astonished when they saw them receive the Holy Ghost for "FOR THEY HEARD THEM SPEAK WITH TONGUES" there is no immediant visual evidence one receives the Holy Ghost but as Jn. 3:8 states it's like the wind you can hear it" John 3 has nothing to do with tongues. That is quite a reach. Nothing about hearing anything. Very bad exegesis. --Joe! |
||||||
1650 | Am I saved until Christ returns? | Phil 1:6 | Reformer Joe | 82797 | ||
"I don't mean to be argumentative. I have debated it with myself for sometime and after experiencing it for myself there is no way I will be convinced otherwise." Well, if experience is truly the definitive teacher for you, I am certain that you will not be convinced otherwise. Just curious: what would you say to Mormons who are equally is convinced that the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ because they prayed about it and felt the famous "burning in the bosom"? Experience is subjective and a horrible lens for interpreting Scripture, especially considering the deceitful sinfulness which still seeks to reign in our hearts. True Christian experience flows from biblical truth and is not the basis for determining it. If speaking in tongues is "meeting Jesus," how do you explain the two thousand years of God's saints who somehow managed to accomplish much greater things than you and I for His kingdom and yet did not speak in tongues? Were the expansion of Christianity, the Protestant Reformation and the modern missions movement really accomplished by so many individuals who did not show the sign you insist is necessarily a by-product of receiving the Spirit? --Joe! |
||||||
1651 | Phil 3:2/ Legalism | Phil 3:2 | Reformer Joe | 54396 | ||
Oh, here it comes! The old "Constantine corrupted that olde tyme religion" line of thinking. Please, Bub, share with us the identity of the community with which you worship. Since you have such disdain for the "poor journalism" of the Gospel writers, seem to have an allergic reaction to the epistle to the Hebrews, and now are hading down the "Christianity is pagan" road, please be honest and forthright enough to tell us the name of the body in which you "Sing the Song of Moses and the Song of the Lamb." --Joe! |
||||||
1652 | Phil 3:2/ Legalism | Phil 3:2 | Reformer Joe | 54397 | ||
It is not a report against the Law, but rather against those who seek to make the Law the means of justification. Paul elsewhere writes: "What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET." But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." --Romans 7:7-12 and "Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law." --Galatians 3:21 God's law was and is holy, but it could never impart life because our depraved natures respond to it by breaking it. Enter grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone! --Joe! |
||||||
1653 | Phil 3:2/ Legalism | Phil 3:2 | Reformer Joe | 54497 | ||
You wrote: "God forbid that the history of your religion be explored! I’d be embarrassed to look at it too." MY religion is the one that is supposed to be held by all those participating in this Forum. It is called "historic, biblical Christianity." Contrary to what you seem to mistakenly hold. This Forum was never established for people of every theological stripe known to man to come and throw their two cents in. The Lockman Foundation extsablished this Forum for Christians who believe the ENTIRE Bible to be the word of God to come study it together. 'I think it’s a great epistle…..check out Steve’s “allergic reaction” to the word “gospel” in Hebrews 4:2 and 6……why don’t you check it out for yourself, I’m sure you allergies will kick up as well.' Nice try, but we aren't talking about Steve here. I have no problem with Hebrews 4 at all, nor any of the passages in the epistle I cited on Wednesday morning to point out that the ritual washings and sacrifices in the Torah have no meaning whatsoever for "grafted-in" Gentiles since they have been culminated in the Messiah. You, however, have avoided that post to this moment. 'if you need a “label” I can’t help you out……but I’ll work on one' It is a very simple question: do you worship with other people who believe the same things you do? Does that fellowship call itself anything? You know what I am asking, and you are avoiding giving us the answer. I wonder why... --Joe! |
||||||
1654 | 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! |
||||||
1655 | 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! |
||||||
1656 | ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved | Phil 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 100161 | ||
"Won't work. Can't be sustained because it is from self effort that you attempt to perform the task regardless of how many graces you 'conjure up'." So grace is something we conjure up, now? "Isaiah' mention that there is none righteous has to do with a very specific time in Israel's history having to with their rebelliousness [which is as the sin of witchcraft; no righteousness here. No, not one was.]" So Paul lived long after Isaiah. What did he mean when he said "No one is righteous."? "But she said she is saved. Now what self effort needs be expended on her part that is different from the time she wasn't saved. I think I'm reading her correctly and that is what she is asking." Tell ya what: why don't we let her answer for herself? A novel concept, to be sure, but let's try it and see what happens... "Empowers us to fight?" I know that quoting extensive Scriptures will probably do no good here, since the cement in your mind has already set, but here goes: Fight the good fight of faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called, and you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. --1 Timothy 6:12 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith --2 Timothy 4:12 So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh--for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. --Romans 8:12-13 Beloved, I urge you as aliens and strangers to abstain from fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul. --1 Peter 2:11 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. --2 Corinthians 10:4 Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. --Philippians 3:13-14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts. --Romans 13:14 Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or remain absent, I will hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel --Philippians 1:27 For this purpose also I labor, striving according to His power, which mightily works within me. --Colossians 1:29 Fighting, warfare, striving, pressing on; all of these WE are commanded to do by the power that comes from the Spirit of Christ. Need more? --Joe! |
||||||
1657 | ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved | Phil 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 100182 | ||
"Self-effort, perhaps?" Okay, I am really trying to connect the dots of your thinking here. (Sentences with verbs would help, by the way.) I am quoting Paul and Peter, and your constant response is "self-effort." Is that what Paul and Peter are teaching, in your view? If so, are they wrong to teach it? --Joe! |
||||||
1658 | ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved | Phil 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 100186 | ||
"NO" to which question? I asked two of them. You are being extremely unclear in your posts, Ken. At first you were arguing with me, and now it seems that in spite of the fact you are arguing with me, that you are saying the same thing I was saying before. Either you are not understanding what I am posting, or you are doing a horrible job of coherently presenting an opposing view, or you haven't got it down in your head what you yourself believe our role is in our sanctification. From the scattered ideas that appear in your post, it is pretty impossible to determine which is the case. " Keeping our faith in Christ frees Him [by our faith in Him] to excercise His FAITH in us." Please show me one instance where the Bible says that that the faith which saves us is HIS faith. I am asking for a direct quote here, not a rambling paragraph. "See the woman with the issue of blood and ponder that for awhile." What does that have to do with our struggle against sin in our lives? Not much, except for the source of the power. The Christian life is not a passive one. --Joe! |
||||||
1659 | ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved | Phil 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 100199 | ||
"First off I won't tolerate your snottiness. I trust I'm at least clear on that. And because you aren't clear on the rest....Well that's your problem..Study to show yourself approved." Great Scripture there. What book is it in? "If you were full of the Holy Spirit you would be as Christ, wouild't you?" No. "Who would be living and having His way in you if you were? Hmmm..Who is it that presently has his way with you?" I prescribe less bumper sticker theology...too many slogans get in the way of Truth. --Joe! |
||||||
1660 | ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved | Phil 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 100206 | ||
'Really? I said "as" Christ, not Christ. So you should ponder who you might be. You're not making much sense here.' Sure I am. I can be full of the Holy Spirit, but I will never be completely as Christ until I am in heaven. 'We sing a chorous that goes "From Glory to Glory He's changing me, changing me. His Likeness and image perfected in me ,the life He has shown to the world."' Okay. He IS changing me. I agree completely. That is a work in progress. I firmly believe that one day I will be identical in nature to Jesus' human nature. That day has not arrived yet. No one walking the earth is as Christ right now. " 2 Cor. 3:18 (NASB-U) But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit." Again, Christians ARE BEING transformed. The action is not complete. "Since you say you don't know who would be dwelling in you to have His way leads me to believe you are something "extra-Christian" or "sub-Christian".. " I never said anything of the sort. "I wonder if you can discern any kind of truth, Joe, Sorry but I think your dogma handups have muddied your waters.." Okay, quick poll for the rest of the Forum: am I imagining things when I say that the posts I have been responding to are scatterbrained? Is my discourse that "muddied"? --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 ] Next > Last [97] >> |