Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 138536 | ||
Shankara - The name of this web site is Study Bible Forum; therefore, it wouldn't hurt a thing to stick to the subject! By that is meant this: In Post 138071 and in all others in which theological views are aired, it is the express intention of the Lockman Foundation that any such statements be backed up with specific scriptural references. For example, the following statement in Post 138071 is general, assumptive, and bereft of scriptural reference: "Everyone knows morality is open to cultural interpretation." Really? How does "everyone" know this? And where does the Bible say that a "cross-culture dictum" (whatever that is) is "a good rule of thumb...to measure the value of a moral judgment against"? Would you think me steeped in and blinded by my mind-set of "fundamental/Calvary" orientation if I should suggest that God's word is not a "good rule of thumb to measure the value of a moral judgment against"? The Bible is not a "rule of thumb" for anything. It doesn't deal in rules of thumb at all. It is God's absolute truth, the inerrant guide to faith and practice. "Cross-cultural dictims" are meaningless to the regenerate believer in Jesus Christ. "Thus saith the Lord" is the only "dictum" that counts. References: Ten Commandments (Exodus 20); Prov. 14:12: John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Romans 1:16; 2 Tim. 3:16; Romans 6; Judges 21:25. --Hank | ||||||
2 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Shankara | 138942 | ||
To: Hank, I see my liberalism threatens your comfort zone of fundamental absolutism concerning conventional, mainstream Christianity, and I certainly respect that,even though, I vehemently disagree. I come to this conclusion based on your use of "their" language and terms. I know you are as welded to your belief-system as I am to mine, but at least, I have been where you are now, so I am familiar with both sides of this coin. If you have no nagging questions that are left unanswered (adequately, that is)by your beliefs, and if you get everything you need from this religious view, then I will say no more, though, I did not get what I needed from this narrow rung on the spiritual ladder, no matter how hard I tried. Remembering the spiritual view as I would imagine it to be from your perspective, reminds me of those hapless despairing days of fundamentalism. That perspective simply never worked for me, no matter how many times I went down on my prayerful knees or climbed up Calvary to the cross; it only left me void and empty with only a handful of emotionalisms and simplistic, puerile teachings that could not be questioned since the strictly Calvary interpretation allows for no questioning leading to contrary conclusions; those that do so run the risk of being labeled blasphemous and contrary, and in all likely probability are assessed to be demonically inspired. Now, truthfully, how can anyone go up against a belief-system with that sort of closed circuit net around it; your demonized and counted out before you can offer the first challenge. No, that sort of totalitarianism is not for me, thank you. I have found what I know beyond any doubt is at least part of some wonderful truth, if not the whole of it indeed. In coming to this conclusion, I use the criteria that Jesus Christ suggested we use in evaluating any spiritual teaching and more particularly the people involved in it: "By their fruits ye shall know them." This is all I can go on, so you see where I am coming from. But there is one thing I can tell you without hesitation: the fruits I am now getting are luscious and sweet, as well as filling to the soul and they work in my whole life unlike anything I have ever involved myself in before. I am trukly blessed for having found the path back to the Garden. Good luck and many blessings in yours. | ||||||
3 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 138961 | ||
Shankara - Thank you for your response. Please rest easy. Have no consternation of mind or vexation of spirit. Your liberalism does not threaten my "comfort zone of fundamental absolutism" -- your terms, not mine. Too often too many people are too apt to pin labels on others, and even on themselves, without stopping to take counsel of what the labels may be saying, if anything, about those on whom they are so swift to pin. Labels like liberal, fundamental, and such like are so freely, frequently, and loosely used that they can mean many different things, which is tantamount to saying they mean virtually nothing. I have no clear concept of what you mean by 'fundamental absolutism' -- I generously assume you do -- but if by the term you mean somebody who believes in the core doctrines outlined in the Nicene Creed, then I suppose you could label me as a 'fundamental absolutist.' Similarly, if in your economy a 'fundamental absolutist' is somebody who believes in the verbal, plenary inspiration of Scripture, feel free to pin the label on my lapel. I call myself by none of these names however, but there is no mystery about my position. I am a very ordinary Christian -- not especially 'liberal' nor especially 'fundamental' nor especially anything else. I never refer to myself as a liberal or a fundamentalist, and I never refer to myself as a born-again Christian, because I hold that there neither is nor can be a Christian who has never experienced the new birth in Christ. I profess and defend the belief that has been common to nearly all Christians at all times and see no need whatever to embellish the term Christian with a row of qualifying adjectives. ...... You speak of many times going down on your prayerful knees or climbing up Calvary to the cross, and that these acts left you empty and void. I have no earthly idea of what you are talking about when you say you climbed up Calvary to the cross nor, as in another part of your post, you write of a 'Calvary interpretation' which 'allows for no questioning leading to contrary conclusions.' Thus, not knowing what exactly you are saying, it would be foolish to respond to something in a specific way when I don't know what I'm responding to. But in a general sort of way, I will say this: That what happened at Calvary, the finished work of Christ on the cross, is the centerpiece of all Scripture. Without it neither you nor I nor anyone else who has ever lived on this earth has as much hope of salvation as a snowball in the pit of the fires of hell. God forbid that man should loathe the 'Calvary interpretation' of Christianity; and God have mercy on the soul of anyone who would 'climb up Calvary to the cross' and come away void and empty. --Hank | ||||||
4 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Mommapbs | 138968 | ||
Greetings Hank - why is it that so many folks have trouble or angst over ther term "born again?" I'd really like your input on this, you wrote: I never refer to myself as a born-again Christian, because I hold that there neither is nor can be a Christian who has never experienced the new birth in Christ. Every believer in Jesus Christ is, by definition, "born again." Yet why are we so hesitant to proclaim this and what has been tied to this reality to make is so unpopular? (imo, legalism might fit here) The message of the Incarnation has been kept in the manger; imo, the reality of "Christ in (us), the hope of glory" (Col 1:27; 1 Peter 3:15) been ignored and perhaps even lost by some . . . Any suggestions or observations? Blessings, mommapbs |
||||||
5 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Morant61 | 138969 | ||
Greetings Mommapbs! If I may attempt to speak for Hank, I think what he is saying is that one cannot be a Christian without being born again. Therefore, it is pointless to call one's self a 'born again Christian'. It would be like saying "I'm a born human being"! :-) Just to muddy the waters, it is interesting to me that the phrase 'born again' does not actually occur in the Greek of the New Testament. The phrase used in John is 'born from above', which for some unknown reason was translated as 'born again'. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Mommapbs | 138979 | ||
Hi Tim - wanting to be "clear as mud" on this . . why is being "born again" often perceived negatively? Discuss "born from above" a bit. Can we connect this to Ez 36:26, 2 Cor 5:16,17? Thanks for your input. Blessings t |
||||||
7 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Morant61 | 139005 | ||
Greetings Mommapbs! I think that the 'world' views 'born again' in a negative sense because they associate the phrase with their understanding of a fundamentalist. However, I have never viewed the phrase negatively. Yet, like Hank, I think if one is 'born again', one is saved and if one is saved, one is 'born again'. So, why use both together! :-) Yes, I do think that Ez. 36:26 and 2 Cor. 5:16-17 refer to being 'born from above'. A real change takes places in us when we accept Christ. We are re-created or born from above. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
8 | Take from the wicked give the righteous | Bible general Archive 2 | Mommapbs | 139009 | ||
Thanks Tim - as part of my Christmas devotional, I'm focusing on the Incarnation of Christ - not just the Birth as recorded in Bethlehem, but rejoicing over the "new birth" (ours) as recorded in Heaven! Abide with us Emmanuel - God in flesh appearing - be born in us today! (Those old song writers really had it right!) Blessings to you and yours! |
||||||