Results 1 - 13 of 13
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 145965 | ||
swerv ::: Let's narrow this thing down. Pick one doctrine, any doctrine, which you see as having been corrupted by orthodox Christian teaching, and show clearly with scriptural references taken in context wherein orthodox Christian teaching has altered or corrupted it. --Hank | ||||||
2 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | child of light 777 | 145969 | ||
Beloved Hank, we touch through the many miles and agree with you that swerv has zeal, but not according to knowledge. For his rationalizations (or irrational-izations) sound more like Scripturaly unsupported rantings! Either come up with something substantial that is backed by Scripture or get off your soap box swerv. We are not to use this as a platform to promote personal dogma and open quarreling, but instead are to follow our Lord Jesus in Spirit and in Truth with both fellowship and brotherly love! Can we please act like like the saints we are? Beloved heavenly Father, we give you thanks and praise and honor and glory! Abba, Father we ask You to calm swerv’s quarreling attitude and show him the most excellent way... the way of love! We humbly ask this as your beloved obedient children... In the Wonderful name of Your one and only Son Yahoshua (Jesus)! AMEN and AMEN! With God’s love, child of light 777 |
||||||
3 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 145980 | ||
Child of light 777 - Thank your for your resonse and crediting me with zeal. But I have a question to you as to why you consider my statements as irrational. If I was on this forum 2 years ago I would have been asking questions about why the "Church" believes in 1st day worship or why the "Church" believes in the rapture theory and I can only assume I would receive many positive responses confirming the common beliefs since I would not be questioning something that goes against the mainstream belief. I have struggled with these issues over the past few years and actually set out two years ago to reiforce my belief system. Unfortunately, when you take a hard look at the scriptural background for these doctrines you will find that there are problems with the interpretations. One of the best examples is Daniel 9:27. Most of the Christian community believes the "he" refers to the antichrist when in fact the clear context is in regards to Christ and the final week of the 70 week prophecy of Daniel 9. The rapture/tribulation theory (widely promoted by the "Left Behind series") is supported by this misinterpreted text. I look forward to your comments. Merv |
||||||
4 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 145994 | ||
Hi Merv, I hope you (and the rest of us) continue to struggle with certain issues over the next 2 years- and then some. We all need to wrestle with the things of scripture and be challenged in our thinking. That's how we learn. I've learned and been challenged a great deal in my almost 3 years on the SBF. Unfortunately most, when challenged, seek comfort in the safety of other like-minded individuals and leave in disgust. If it is truly your "hope that this forum can give me a great opportunity to discuss the Bible with fellow believers", then stick around, learn and grow. It's OK to disagree, but the maturity is in HOW we handle disagreement. As John Maxwell has wisely said, "Learning is the beginning of listening." Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
5 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147013 | ||
Hey Brad: Do you believe in following the unclean/clean meat diet of God ? Merv |
||||||
6 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 147020 | ||
Hi Merv, Well, I hadn't given it much thought and don't honestly know to what you refer, so I guess not:-) Could you clarify? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
7 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147238 | ||
Ok Brad: Thanks for your honesty !! Look at Math. 15 and Mark 7 (paralell passgaes) and Acts 10 - 11. Determine if you think that from these texts that Jesus/God has cleansed all meat. Remembering that God clearly established in Lev. 11 what animals were unclean (example pig). You can also look at Is. 65:4 to see waht angers God !!!! Also look at Daniel 1 to see why Daniel did not want to defile his body. You would agree that in the NT we are are told our bodies are the "temple of God". If God required only "clean" animal sacrifices in OT would it make logical sense in the NT that God would change what He designated to be unclean to now be clean. Is there any ripture in the NT where we see either Jesus or one of His disciples eating a unclean piece of meat ??? This same principle of arguement used for holding we are still required to be obedient to God's diet, can be used to show we are still to recognize God's Sabbath. Remember we are to follow God and not man. Look forward to what your conclusion is !! Merv |
||||||
8 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 147278 | ||
Hi Merv, Here is my brief answer to your question. I would look at 3 things: 1. We need to understand what the relationship of believers was prior to the cross: Eph. 2:11-13 says, "11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “Uncircumcision” by the so-called “Circumcision,” which is performed in the flesh by human hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ." 2. As I believe the cross to be the pivotal point in scripture, what did it do regarding our relationship to the law? Paul tells us in Romans 6:14, "For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace." And further, in Romans 7:6, "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." I think this is a key distinction to note. Also, in Col. 2:14 he writes, "having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross." 3. I would submit Romans 14 in answer to you. We should note that the "kingdom of God is not food and drink". (vs. 17) The overriding principle is verse 14: "I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean." The operative word here is, "grace". I should show grace to you because, "we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another." I would accept you as a brother, regardless of out differences in how we view the law. I would hope you could do the same. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
9 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147413 | ||
Yes Brad: I appreciate loving your brother attitude as Jesus commands. But the important question is what does Jesus expect of us as life reflecting Hid life. Jesus was sinless which is our obligation out of love for what Christ has given to us through His shed blood. To stive for anything less would be making a foll out of Jesus if His death would still allow us to live in sin. God's laws are "clearly" said to be put on our hearts in the new covenant. Clearly we must each stive to understand what God's laws are in accordance to the new covenant. To just say we live by freedom and liberty is making a mochery of God's law which were meant to keep us close to Him in relationship to love. In love, Merv |
||||||
10 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | BradK | 147436 | ||
Hi Merv, Did I detect a little sarcasm in your response? I trust not:-) I'm not trying to be flippant or cavalier, but honest. I think Galatians 5:1, 13 answers the abuse of freedom and liberty quite well. No one- least not myself- is "making a mockery of God's law." As I've said before, the Christian life is not about seeing how close to the edge we can get, but about seeing how close to the Savior we can be. How about Gal. 5:16 as to what we should strive for? I just hope that those who seek to be "lawkeepers" are not fooling themselves into thinking they're living holy. The law can give one a false sense of righteousness and even pride. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
11 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147538 | ||
Brad: I appreciate this discussion and how the debate does reflect our love for our brother. I apologize if I have made inappropriate comments. Also, sorry for bad spelling and grammar. Should check before I sent them off. But Brad - you cannot say "lawkeepers" are trying to be holy or gaining righteousness. No one on this board has yet to explain why God is commanding us the be "lawkeepers" or "legalistic". Because that is what you are saying when you refer to keeping His law. The law does not save - only the blood of Jesus saves us from our sin. Once we repent - to follow "love thy neighbor" means we will not disobey God (Rom.13:8). Adam and Eve did not have to do anything but not disobey God. They were created in righteousness (right relationship with God - justified because there was yet sin). So they had a perfect relationship with God - the only thing they could do to "screw it up" was to disobey God. Jesus brought us back int right relationship with Him but again we are the ones if we do not obey will "screw it up". In respect, Merv |
||||||
12 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | mark d seyler | 147541 | ||
Hi Merv, I've been following this thread with much interest. I haven't joined in because you are discussing this with very capable partners, who represent my views most ably (sp?). But Merv, I have a question for you. After we have come to the Blood of the Lamb, after our atonement, when (and I say "when" because we all do) we fail to keep the requirements of the law, does this disqualify us from our salvation? If it does, then our salvation is based on works, and we are "fallen from grace". If it does not, then, how can a Holy God allow that? Or, do you make the claim that you no longer commit any sin? Ok, so more than one question! :-) Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
13 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147550 | ||
Hey Mark: Glad to here from you !! I look forward to discussing these issues with anyone. I will repeat that I grew up in Protestant denomination so I have held the same beliefs as my fellow forum members. Even further than this when I was challenged originally two years ago I had the full intention to show my co-worker that his belief in the Sabbath, No eternal hell, Non-immortality of the soul, prophecy, diet, and the Sabbath - were not scriptural because mainly I "just" knew it could not be right according to what I believed. I was by no means a theologian but I had been told so much as I grew up that there are many "cults" out there. So off I went into the scripture to find my answers to these issues. Now I want to make this clear that I went to scripture and scripture alone to find the answers. Obviously I had the verses that my co-worker used to support his view so I had reference points. My most of my understanding came from scripture and the inadequate responses I recieved from pastors and fellow Christians on the subject. The more I got unscriptural answers or non-contextual answers the more I searched for truth. Most of my family members - instead of giving me scriptural background for the doctines of the Chruch they instead pointed me to a certain pastor or certain minister that would get me back on track. The conclusion, is that certain doctrines held by the "church" are not scriptural and are just plain wrong. Just as the Roman Catholic Church tries to surpress the truth - I have come to the same conclusion that the Protestant community is not being honest in the history of these doctrines. Will continue, Merv |
||||||