Results 1 - 11 of 11
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125744 | ||
Tim You opened the door let us walk through. You said, "You used the example of when the 'perfect' has come. Scripture never identifies what the 'perfect' is, so we are speculating when we try to guess." Exactly we don't know what the perfect is because scripture never identified it. Yet a major event is hinged on it. If we say tongues have passed away then the "perfect" has occurred so what is it's identity? If the perfect hasn’t yet come then tongues are for today. What is the answer? You said we must use sola scriptura yet scripture is silent. What then is the answer? If Peter were alive we would go with his decision but then where would Sola Scriptura be? If Paul were alive we accept his decision but again to violation of Sola Scriptura. If any Apostle were alive he would be the decision maker. At one point we would have abided by “The church’s” decision on the issue. However we “arbitrarily” rejected all earthly authority and made a rule if we can’t justify it by scripture it must be wrong. Perhaps that was our error. Is there a chance we missed Christ on this? Is that why we have questions and no answers, apparent contradictions where we know no contradictions exist, 3000 plus denominations instead of one church of Jesus Christ? There is no place in scripture that claims Sola Scriptura. If we use scripture for a model we see men coming together to make decisions that they can all stand in unity over. Later we see the church in various councils coming together to make a decision that they all can stand in unity in. This basically continued again putting political issues aside until the “age of enlightenment” where man decided he was smart enough and therefore needed no other man to tell him what was right and what was wrong. We even made it appear holy and very offical by wordsmithing a slogan like sola scriptura. Something that seems so right but yet doesn’t define the very thing an important event is hinged on. Tim I think you made my case with your statement, “Scripture never identifies what the 'perfect' is…” EdB |
||||||
2 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | Theo-Minor | 125754 | ||
The "perfect" is identified in Ephesians 4:11-16. The perfecting is when we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. This, unity in faith, is the answer on the fleshly level. The spiritual and individual level of perfection is a new and glorified body in the resurrection. (Phillipians 3:11-12) It is my "opinion" that the gifts are still for today. There is no scripture suggesting that the gifts will pass away barring "perfection," as stated earlier in this exchange. I do not think the body of Christ has been perfected. There are too many people misguided, and there are too many divisions in the church to believe there is unity in faith. The problem with the gifts is not their availability to us today, but the selflessness it requires to be worthy of such gifts. Until we relearn humility, selflessness, and self sacrifice, we will never see clear to the faith it takes to perform such miracles. This is my opinion on the matter. |
||||||
3 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125809 | ||
Theo-Minor You mistake the context of this thread. It is not a discussion on gifts but rather can we totally rely on sola scriptura or do we have to make judgement calls. If we do have to make judgement calls who then is qualified to do it. Everyone, a person that read the Bible daily, theologian that devoted his life to Biblical study, majority, minority, who makes the call? EdB |
||||||
4 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | Theo-Minor | 125813 | ||
Ahhhh, I see. My mistake. I am personally of a dispensational theology. I believe that we should go from particular to general, concluding facts of doctrine from solid, discernable scripture, and not try to interpret scripture according to doctrine. If it doesn't say it, you may, if you choose, apply a principle to your own life that you may have gleaned from scripture, but that doesn't make it doctrinal fact, and any such theories should be kept in this light. If something is not said, it is not said, no matter how much we might like it to be. Origen did make an interesting point in The First Principles ... To paraphrase ('cause it's not right in front of me), "Those things that the apostles wanted us to know, they said clearly, and repeatedly. As for the rest, the mysteries of God are reserved for those that seek God earnestly and desire the deeper things of Holy Scripture." I do believe that there are mysteries in the Word, but once again I have to say that they are discernable through solid scripture. You simply need the spirit working in you to put the pieces together, and you need a good, solid background in the word. As for who's qualified ... anyone is qualified. Remember that God chose a young man to be one of the greatest prophets; he chose a child to slay a giant and become a king; he chose fishermen and farmers to become the ministers of a new age. God is no respector of persons. Someone can look at something once with a pure heart open to learn and see a mystery that eludes scholars. I do think, however, that with the more extensive background of a scholar, and with the obvious desire to learn evident by the wealth of knowledge they consume, a scholar is more likely to discover something deep and new. But again, this is not absolute. Theo-Minor |
||||||
5 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125817 | ||
Theo-Minor I agree with the jest of what you said, however my question is when scripture is silent, but a decision must be made who makes the call? You suggest everyone is capable and I say that is exactly why we have 3000 plus denominations plus probably thousands more indepentent and non denominational churches. That is a long way from Christian unity. As a side note. You also quoted everyone's favorite passage, God is not a repector of persons. However I believe you apply it wrong. God did respect people over others, David was chosen King over Israel, Moses to lead the people from the Egypt, John Peter and James Jesus' inter circle. The verse you quoted was made by Peter when he realized God also called gentiles to salvation. It has nothing to do with empowerment, anointing, or favoring one over another. God Himself said, Esau I hated Jacob I loved. EdB |
||||||
6 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | Theo-Minor | 125827 | ||
When the scripture is silent, but a decision must be made, the Holy Spirit makes the call. 1 John 2:27 But the anointing which you have received of him abides in you, and you need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teaches you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it has taught you, you shall abide in him. Remember that love is the point. If you're talking about a point of doctrine, if it's not written, it's not doctrine, it's opinion. If it's a matter of behavior, "love one another" is the key. I came to that conclusion in a single night. I had no scripture to support it, but went to a Bible study and argued church Elders into the ground because it was so solid it tore their doctrine to shreds. I discovered later that I had quoted as many as twenty scriptures in the New Testament that I had never read. The understanding is this: that love is the key. The New Testament can be understood by the doctrine of love. As for all the denominations, I think it's evil. Multiple denominations exist because of pride. Period. Two people had a discussion. One brought up a new and possibly valid point. The other disagreed. The one doing the disagreeing was in control, so the other left and made a new church denomination. Point of fact, the very first church split was over the dispute of the translation of a single word. How's THAT for pride?! Respector of persons ... What was David when God chose him? A shepherd, yes? Moses, the adopted son of Pharoah? John, Peter, and James ... fishermen? I hear what you're saying, but did God respect them over others, or were they simply the ones He chose? Once chosen, is it becoming of God to abandon His promises to them? SOMEone had to be chosen. David was chosen because he had a heart after God's own. Who knows about Moses, or Elijah, or Jeremiah, or Isaiah. Again, SOMEone had to be chosen. That makes them blessed in my opinion, not respected more than others. The variety went from shepherd to king. By the same qualifications he chose David as a child, so, too, could he choose a young, unlearned person. That's sort of the point. There is no respect of persons with God. He chooses whom He wills, regardless of their station or experience. With Esau ... remember that Esau traded his birthright for a "bowl of that red stuff there." Also, the word hate being used there, in both the Hebrew and the Greek, is a word that means something more akin to "loved less." And this, because he traded his birthright for a bowl of soup. Theo-Minor |
||||||
7 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125830 | ||
Theo-Minor Respector of Persons - It makes no difference what David, Moses or whoever were before God choose them, God choose them over everyone else therefore God is a respecter of persons in that aspect. Therefore the verse you used is not true in the context in which you used it. However it is true in the context the Peter expressed it. God is no repecter of persons as far as Jew or Gentile once they are in Christ Jesus. As to the subject of this thread- What you said about pride is exactly right however if we really want to walk in Christ we have to find a way to be in unity with our brothers how do we do that if they are in one denomination and we in another? EdB |
||||||
8 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | Theo-Minor | 125834 | ||
Love your neighbor as yourself. That is the commandment of Christ. What matters in the end is that we all adhere to the doctrine: Believe in Jesus Christ, whom God raised from the dead, and love one another as he gave us commandment. As long as pride exists, we will never be in complete agreement, but having minor differences in doctrine does not make anyone any less of a Christian. Some believe in full submersion baptism. Others just a sprinkle. Some believe in speaking in tongues for this day in age, others that the gifts are only for the past. There are tons of doctrines out there. If we believe in Jesus, that God raised him from the dead, and love one another as he loved us, we are Christians, and that's that. The respector of persons deal I have to disagree with you on. I believe that who they were before God chose them is exactly the point. If God can choose a shepherd to become a king, he can choose a middle school student to learn the secrets that will baffle scholars. Whether or not this can be attributed to favoritism ... I choose not to have an opinion. Going through the many scriptures, which I choose not to expound upon right now, there are dozens of examples demonstrating precisely what it means to be a respector of persons, and scripture clearly tells us time and again that God does not act according to this behavior. |
||||||
9 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125866 | ||
Theo-Minor Your taking this scripture and making if fit what you want to fit. Peter used this scripture to say God does not limit salvation on any one nation or people. However God does have favorite people that He empowers, gifts or otherwise shows favor to. David being an example. He found favor in God's eye. God calls him the apple of His eye. While you and me are sons of God adopted in through the blood of Jesus we are not the Apple of God's eye. Therefore the trying to take this scripture and say God does not show partiality between people is untrue. If you don't want to discuss this fine but don't yank scripture from context to and try to make it say something it doesn't EdB |
||||||
10 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | Theo-Minor | 125887 | ||
Hey Ed. I wasn't referring to Peter's use of the phrase. While it is certainly one amongst many that add weight to the discussion, there are many others to consider. As a matter of dispensation, we have to go from particular to general, not general to particular ... meaning that we should view all the evidence and form an opinion, not form an opinion and bend the evidence to that opinion. Consider these passages: Romans 2:11 For there is no partiality with God. Galatians 2:6 But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)--well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me. Deuteronomy 10:17 For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe. Job 34:18 Yet He is not partial to princes, Nor does He regard the rich more than the poor; For they are all the work of His hands. Job 37:23-24 As for the Almighty, we cannot find Him; He is excellent in power, In judgment and abundant justice; He does not oppress. Therefore men fear Him; He shows no partiality to any who are wise of heart. Somehow, I think you might be missing my point. God treats everyone the same. Some he blesses more than others, some he gifts more than others. There are some he chooses for things, and some he does not choose. My point was never that he does not or could not have a favorite. Only that your station in life has no bearing on God's decision. He will choose whom he will, whether rich or poor, king or servant, young or old, wise or foolish. God does not show partiality. Whether or not he favors one above another is not relevent to the point I was making originally that God can choose whomever he pleases. In this thing I am not mistaken. Remember that he once chose a donkey to rebuke Balaam. It isn't and wasn't my intention to say that God shows no favoritism. Only that he can choose anyone, and your age, race, social standing, education, trade, etc., has nothing to do with anything. Theo-Minor |
||||||
11 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | EdB | 125929 | ||
Theo-Minor I evidently misunderstood your point. I agree totally with your statement, "My point was never that he does not or could not have a favorite. Only that your station in life has no bearing on God's decision. He will choose whom he will, whether rich or poor, king or servant, young or old, wise or foolish." Sorry EdB |
||||||