Results 1141 - 1160 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1141 | Help | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 76532 | ||
1 Peter 3:19 (ESV) in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, Please note that in v. 19 the word "back" simply does not appear. Nor am I aware of any Bible verse that says Jesus went *back* to the people of Noah's day and preached. 1 Peter 3:18-20 (ESV) For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, [19] in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, [20] because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. |
||||||
1142 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80334 | ||
'While historic Christianity has debated the issue of whether or not Jesus actually descended into hell (e.g., to proclaim the gospel, declare victory, etc. [1 Peter 3:18-19), no orthodox believer ever held to the belief that Christ suffered and atoned for our sins in hell, rather than on the cross. 'Yet, Word of Faith teachers, including Joyce Meyer, teach the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels -- a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture. The entirety of Christ’s atoning work (i.e., His suffering and death in our place) occurred on the cross (e.g., 1 Peter 2:24), ending with His proclamation, “It is finished” (John 19:30). The Christ of Faith theology literally had to become sin, taking on the nature of Satan while in hell, thereby needing to be born again in hell before His resurrection could occur.' (To read the entire article, please go to: http://www.equip.org/search/ and in the search field enter the words Joyce Meyer.) |
||||||
1143 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80422 | ||
Ed: Sorry? There's nothing in your post for which you should be sorry. You hit the nail right on the head regarding WOF. Well said! You write: "The biggest problem is they will not listen or read anything that may open their eyes." Once again you are right on target. I was just thinking today, even before I read your post, that every time I've ever confronted a WOF follower with the error of their doctrine, whether on the forum or here where I live, they absolutely would not listen to anything. They wouldn't even consider that their WOF gurus (many of them on TBN -- The Blasphemy Network) might be in error. Do they seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote. Not once has any WOF follower I've encountered ever replied to the contentions made by me or the sources. Yet their WOF masters are infallible, according to them. Thank you, Ed, for saying what needs to be said regarding the dangerous and harmful WOF doctrine. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
1144 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80431 | ||
gracefull: You write: "...Hank LIED in his book..." Thank you for providing us with an example of what I just wrote about, which is: "Do they (WOF followers) seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote." You write: "I pointed out to you on other posts where Hank LIED in his book..." I missed the other posts in which you pointed out that Hank lied in his book. If you will provide me with the ID#s of those posts, I would like to read them. Thank you. Radioman2 |
||||||
1145 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80433 | ||
P.S. I found your posts regarding Hank by using the search feature. So I would like to cancel the request I made of you that you provide ID#s for your posts. | ||||||
1146 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80475 | ||
?God created man in “God’s class,” as “little gods,”? Matt 24:11 "Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many." I have a question for all who would defend the word of faith movement and its super-star preachers, including Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Fred Price, Paul and Jan Crouch, John Avanzini, Benny Hinn, Jesse Duplantis, and Marilyn Hickey. For a moment, forget their unbiblical doctrine of the prosperity gospel. What about their teachings concerning the nature of God, Christ and man, as summarized below? 'It (the Word of Faith movement) asserts that God created human beings in “God’s class” as “little gods.” Before the fall, humans had the potential to exercise a “God kind of faith” and could call things into existence. Humans took on Satan’s nature by rebelling against God in the Garden of Eden, thus losing the ability to call things into existence. In order to correct this situation, Jesus Christ became a man, died spiritually (taking Satan’s nature upon Himself), went to hell, was “born again,” and rose from the dead with God's nature. After this, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to duplicate the Incarnation in believers so they might fulfill their calling to be little gods. 'It follows, then, that those who have had the Incarnation duplicated in them by the Holy Spirit (thus giving them the ability to exercise the “God kind of faith”) should be successful in every area of their lives. Furthermore, hardships like indebtedness, illness, and even being left by one’s spouse show lack of faith because these problems should be eliminated by “claiming” God’s promises. While certain details of the above outlined doctrine vary from teacher to teacher, the general outline remains the same.' (www.equip.org/free/RC010.htm) |
||||||
1147 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80493 | ||
Don't believe everything you read on the World Wide Web. I, too, went surfing for info on CRI. This is what I found: The website www.rapidnet.com has nothing good to say about CRI. They have leveled serious accusations against CRI in their many postings that bash the organization. Oh, I almost forgot to mention: The above anti-CRI website is also opposed to and strongly critical of the following: Benny Hinn; National Assoc. of Evangelicals; Tim and Beverly LaHaye; Larry Burkett; the Evangelical Free Church of America; Pat Robertson; D. James Kennedy; RC Sproul; Billy Graham; John MacArthur; Radio Bible Class and its principal publication "Our Daily Bread"; Campus Crusade for Christ; and Dr. James C. Dobson. Did they leave anybody out? Oh, yeah. They sound like a reliable, credible source of information, don't they? (Go to www.rapidnet.com Then in the Search field type Biblical Discernment Ministries) ad hominem. marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. |
||||||
1148 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80498 | ||
Tim: You provide two excellent reasons not to view the story of Lazarus and the rich man as a parable. Unfortunately, well-trained JWs have heard this argument before, but reject it. In their indoctrination, they are trained to have an answer for everything, unaware that their answers don't answer anything. Yet to their credit, the JWs' answers consist of something other than ad hominem attacks. Radioman2 |
||||||
1149 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80500 | ||
Does God Always Heal? 'We have been made disturbingly aware of a number of problems that predictably arise wherever the healing/prosperity/confession movement spreads. It finally reached a point where we no longer had any choice but to do something about it. 'One very real problem is that the emphasis that is placed upon Christ bearing our diseases at Calvary undermines the biblical emphasis upon Christ bearing our sins. Whereas the preaching that we read in the New Testament is always centered around Christ’s death or our sins and resurrection for our justification (Romans 4:25), one finds that the preaching, and even the casual conversation of this current movement is dominated by the subject of bodily healing. Followers of the movement display practically an obsession with the topics of healing and “confession,” as though these subjects were the gospel and there’s little else in the Bible worthy of much discussion. Even if these doctrines were Biblical many who hold them would be guilty of being extremely unbalanced, not giving enough attention to many important aspects of Christian faith and living. 'Another unfortunate result of the preaching of these doctrines is that people lose their victory in Christ, and become shaken in their faith, because someone gave them a “biblical” formula for success, and it didn’t work. (...) 'To have the audacity to tell one of God’s children that if they are sick it is because of their own sin or lack of faith is to abound in presumptuousness, and be bankrupt in compassion. I’ve known of more than one person who demonstrated this insensitivity until God dealt with him by laying him flat on his back, and when none of his “principles” would work he suddenly developed an empathy of those he had once judged. We never see it portrayed in Scripture that perfect health is the sign of spirituality. To set up such a standard is to divert God’s people from the spiritual standard that Scripture does set forth (such as in 2 Peter 1:5-9). 'Ken Copeland and others teach that we must resist sickness in the same way that we resist sin. This also disturbs us. We’ve seen too many good Christians striving to “believe” their sickness away, and finally collapsing into self-condemnation and utter discouragement over their “lack of faith” or the “sin” in their lives. Most likely, there was a divine purpose for that sickness in their lives, and it would have been a lot easier on them, after they prayed in faith and nothing happened, to have ceased striving and simply rested in the comforting sovereignty of God. 'After being forced to go to this extent to prove that it is not always God’s will to heal, we do want to close on the positive note that we do believe that divine healing is for today. We see no Scriptural basis to doubt that we can expect to see healing take place here and now. Healing should be a regular part of the life of all churches (James 5:14-16). We also believe that faith plays an important part in receiving healing, and that the Church has much to learn about faith, and how to more effectively receive it for healing. We feel that many who saw this need embraced the “healing in the atonement” doctrine because it seemed to offer a more solid basis for faith. Unfortunately, however, this basis is not the Scriptural basis, and therefore it has created more problems than was hoped it would solve.' - Elliot Miller (This article has been edited due to space limitations. To read the entire article, see STATEMENT DH018, Healing: Does God Always Heal? [www.equip.org]) |
||||||
1150 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80525 | ||
Gospel according to Price Joe: You have so correctly pointed out: "Things that Jesus verbalized are not any more or less true than the Psalms or Pauls' teaching in 2 Corinthians." If I may, I would like to expand a bit on your point here. - - - - - - - - - - 'Another case in point is that God allowed affliction to come upon Paul, not answering his prayer for deliverance, so that Paul would not become too high minded as a result of the visions and revelations he had (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). [Frederick] Price’s response to this passage, which is typical of the movement, is: “Now that was Paul’s estimate of the situation. God didn’t tell him that He gave him that to keep him humble, but Paul was a man who was prone to brag and boast. Therefore he took it upon himself to believe all of this that was coming upon him was going to help him to stay humble.”[3] 'In this statement we find a disturbing lack of concern for the authority of the inspired authors of Scripture. There is nothing within the context of this passage to qualify this statement of Paul’s as being merely his own, possibly errant, opinion. Paul makes the statement with the full authority that, by virtue of inspiration, was rightfully his. If by our human rationalizing that Paul was one prone to boast (which finds no basis in Scripture), we have the freedom to dismiss his declaration in verse 7 as being misguided, then we may also dismiss anything else he said that does not fit into our doctrinal scheme. Once this happens, our basis of trust in the Scripture become effectively undermined. However, we find that Paul derived this estimate of the situation from the Lord’s answer to his prayers: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness” (verse 9). 'Paul learned to be content with this abiding affliction, for the Lord taught him that at the very moment that he was weakest in himself, the power of the Lord would be most evident through him, bringing glory to God rather than Paul (verses 9, 10). This lesson desperately needs to be learned by many who are being influenced by the false unlimited healing/prosperity doctrines today. 'Affliction can certainly be a tool for good in God’s hands. In Psalm 119 we read the following: 'Verse 67: Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Thy word. 'Verse 91: It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn Thy statutes 'Verse 75: I know, O LORD, that Thy judgments are righteous, and that in faithfulness Thou hast afflicted me. 'There has been times, even in the Bible, when God’s people have had to accept and live with illness. Rather than telling him to “claim his healing,” Paul gave medicinal advice to Timothy: “No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and frequent ailments” (1 Timothy 5:23). 'This verse should have special significance to all who think the Bible supports some of the extreme teachings of our day. Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”? By giving medicinal advice, and telling Timothy he has frequent ailments (thus acknowledging their ongoing existence rather than “speaking healing into being”) Paul is completely out of line with the current wind of doctrine.* As Kenneth Hagin puts it” “People confess their lack and build up a sense of lack in themselves. As they confess these things, these lacks gain ascendancy in their lives.”[4]' [1] Price, Frederick K. C., Is Healing For All? Harrison House, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1976, 9. [2] Ibid., 10. [3] Ibid., 12. [4] Hagin, Kenneth E., Right and Wrong Thinking, Kenneth Hagin Evangelistic Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 24 (http://www.equip.org/free/DH018.htm) |
||||||
1151 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80604 | ||
"...Codex B or Vaticanus (Vatican 1209) of the fourth century CE, which is one of the few Greek texts that actually contains punctuation." That some copyist ADDED punctuation to a COPY of the Greek text proves what? 'If you think you're on safe theological ground because of a pet verse, better look twice. Simple prooftexting has its perils.' --(Gregory Koukl, Stand to Reason) One of the Watchtower organization's favorite tactics is to isolate a verse of Scripture from it's context (and re-translate and re-interpret it to fit their teachings) in order to proof text a particular doctrine of theirs. |
||||||
1152 | why do you think that jesus went to hell | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80671 | ||
Did Christ take back the keys? Nowhere in the Bible is there a clear verse of Scripture to indicate that Christ TOOK BACK any keys or that Satan had possession of keys. In the entire King James Version of the Bible, the word "key" appears in 6 verses. The word "keys" appears in 2 verses. Thus, "key" and "keys" appear a total of 8 times in the KJV. The following is ALL the Bible has to say about key(s): Jud 3:25 And they tarried till they were ashamed: and, behold, he opened not the doors of the parlour; therefore they took a key, and opened them: and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth. Isa 22:22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. Lu 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Re 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Re 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. Re 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Re 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. |
||||||
1153 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80763 | ||
You have some good ideas here. I agree that dumping all these digressions under one thread leads to confusion. It also leads to a long, long cumbersome thread in which it is difficult to find what one is looking for. Rather than go off on tangents under an existing thread, it would be better if people who have a subtopic would start a new and separate thread for it. There is a risk of such a separate thread getting lost in the shuffle and having no one respond to it. This is because often an individual will not respond to a question or note that is not addressed directly to him/her. As a result, one risks starting a new thread (instead of piling on posts to an existing thread) and then having no one respond to it. I suppose it's human nature for folks to do things the way they've always done them, even when it no longer works. Thanks for your input on this problem. |
||||||
1154 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80766 | ||
Amen. Common sense rules -- especially when combined with the scriptures and reason. | ||||||
1155 | FAITH? | 1 Pet 1:7 | Radioman2 | 95780 | ||
NASB Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. AMPLIFIED Romans 10:17 So faith comes by hearing [what is told], and what is heard comes by the preaching [of the message that came from the lips] of Christ (the Messiah Himself). |
||||||
1156 | Healing by Strips physical or not | 1 Pet 2:24 | Radioman2 | 82541 | ||
1. Healing...a gracious privilege - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Just as salvation is by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8), so all God’s blessings and gifts are ours by His grace or unmerited favor. We do not earn them. We do not deserve them. "No one in the New Testament demanded healing. People came to Jesus beseeching Him. They did not look on healing as their right, but as a gracious privilege extended to them." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Note: The following is a direct quote from: Assemblies of God Beliefs: Divine Healing (http://ag.org/top/beliefs/position_papers/4184_healing.cfm#top)] Divine Healing: The Privilege of All Believers [Part 1] Just as salvation is by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8), so all God’s blessings and gifts are ours by His grace or unmerited favor. We do not earn them. We do not deserve them. No one in the New Testament demanded healing. People came to Jesus beseeching Him. They did not look on healing as their right, but as a gracious privilege extended to them. As the privilege of believers, the promise of healing does not rule out suffering for Christ’s sake and the gospel’s. We are expected to be prepared to follow His example (Hebrews 5:8; 1 Peter 2:19,21; 4:12—14,19). Nor are we to look to divine healing as a substitute for obedience to the rules of physical and mental health. Jesus recognized the need of the disciples to get away from the crowds and rest awhile (Mark 6:31). Jethro saw that if Moses did not delegate some of his responsibilities to others, he would wear away (Exodus 18:18). Neither is divine healing a means of avoiding the effects of old age. Moses did retain a clear eye and his natural strength until the day of his death (Deuteronomy 34:7). But this privilege was not granted to King David (1 Kings 1:1—4). The gradual breakdown of old age, pictured so graphically in Ecclesiastes 12:1—7, is the common experience of believers as well as unbelievers. Healing is still available to the aged, but the part that is healed usually continues to age like the rest of the body. We do not yet have the redemption of the body. Even we who have the firstfruits of the Spirit groan and travail in pain like the rest of creation, waiting patiently for the fulfillment of our hope (Romans 8:21—25). No matter what we do for this body, no matter how many times we are healed, if Jesus tarries we shall die. However, the Bible does not tell us this to discourage us, but to make us realize that we must encourage and cultivate our life in the Spirit, for the Spirit quickens (resurrects), and that is our real hope (Romans 8:11). In fact, even though outwardly one is perishing, inwardly one is being renewed day by day (2 Corinthians 4:16). Actually it is this inner renewal that makes us best able to have the faith to claim the privilege of divine healing. To the woman healed of the issue of blood, Jesus said, "Your faith has healed you" (Mark 5:34). Paul at Lystra, when he saw that the hearing of the gospel had brought faith to be healed into the heart of a cripple, commanded him to stand up (Acts 14:9,10). The inner renewal of the mind (Romans 12:2; Colossians 3:10) is seen also in the great faith of the Roman centurion who recognized the authority of Christ’s word (Matthew 8:5—13) and the Syrophoenician woman who believed that even a crumb would meet the need (Mark 7:24—30; Matthew 15:28). That divine healing comes through faith is further confirmed by the fact that unbelief hindered its reception at Nazareth (Mark 6:5,6) and at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:14—20). There Jesus indicates the necessity also of expressing faith by praying and fasting (Mark 9:29). Prayer is one of the chief means of healing in the Old Testament. Many of the Psalms include prayers for healing. Many of the prophets prayed for the healing of others. James 5:15 promises that the prayer of faith will save the sick and the Lord will raise them up. ____________________ To read more go to: (http://ag.org/top/beliefs/position_papers/4184_healing.cfm#top) |
||||||
1157 | Healing by Strips physical or not | 1 Pet 2:24 | Radioman2 | 82544 | ||
2. Healing...a gracious privilege [Note: The following is a direct quote from: (www.ag.org)] Divine Healing: The Privilege of All Believers [Part 2] Great faith then receives healing through the simple Word of the Lord. But Jesus did not turn away from those who had little faith or weak faith. Those who are sick often find it is not easy to express faith, and Jesus did a variety of things to help them. Some He touched (Mark 1:41; 8:22), took their hands (Mark 1:31; Luke 14:4), or laid His hands upon them (Mark 6:5; 8:25; Luke 4:40; 13:13). Others He helped by a variety of acts, some of which called for faith and obedience on their part (Mark 7:33; 8:23). Others found that to touch Him or His garments helped them express faith (Mark 3:10; 5:28; 6:56; Luke 6:19). Peter’s shadow had the same effect for a time (Acts 5:15). So did the handkerchiefs and work aprons from Paul’s tent-making shop (Acts 19:12). The faith, however, had to be in the Lord, not in the means used to help them express their faith. This seems to be the reason for the great variety of means used, lest people get their eyes on the means rather than on God. In the same class is James 5:14, which instructs the sick to call the elders of the church to anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. It is not the oil (a symbol of the Holy Spirit) that brings the healing, but the prayer of faith. The promise "anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing" is closely connected with prayer, asking in Christ’s name (John 14:12—14; 16:23,24). His name, however, is the revelation of His character and nature. We have that in us only if we abide in Christ and His words abide in us (John 15:7). Then our will lines up with His, and we can ask what we will, and it shall be done. Some have tried to limit healing (especially the promise of Exodus 15:26, the covenant of healing or health) to Israel. But the healing of the centurion’s servant and the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman show that healing is the privilege of Gentiles also. In fact, there is healing for those who desire it and will respond to Jesus, even though He has not yet dealt with their sins (as in the case of the impotent man at the Pool of Bethesda, John 5:2—9,14). Others have tried to set divine healing in opposition to or in competition with the medical profession. This need not be so. Physicians through their skills have brought help to many. It is true that the Lord is the Great Physician. It is also true that the Bible condemns King Asa because "in his disease he sought not to the Lord, but to the physicians" (2 Chronicles 16:12). But Asa had already sought for help from Syria in an act of unbelief and disobedience when he refused to rely on the Lord (2 Chronicles 16:7). The emphasis is not that he sought physicians (which in this case may have been heathen physicians), but that he refused to seek the Lord. It is evident that the physician had an honorable place in Israel (Jeremiah 8:22). Jesus also presented the medicinal use of oil and wine by the Good Samaritan in a favorable light (Luke 10:34). When the woman with the issue of blood was healed, we are told she "had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse" (Mark 5:26). If it was wrong for her to go to physicians, this would have been the perfect place for Jesus to have said so. But He did not. Instead, He accepted the faith she now expressed and commended her for it. Even today God has performed many miracles for those given up by doctors. ( . . . ) We recognize that there have been abuses today. But we must not let that cause us to retreat from a positive proclamation of the truth of the Scripture. The apostles were able to say, "What I have I give you" (Acts 3:6). Gifts of healings are among the variety of gifts and manifestations of the Spirit set in the Church as the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:4—11,28—30). Like the other gifts, these seem to be administered through members of the Body for the edification of those who need them. (Just as the word of wisdom does not make a person wise, the gifts of healings do not make people healers. Rather as a fresh word of wisdom is given for each need, so a fresh gift of healing is given by the Spirit for each individual sickness.) ( . . . ) In humility we recognize that we do not understand all that pertains to divine healing. We still see through a glass darkly. We do not understand why some are healed and others are not, any more than we understand why God permitted James to be martyred and Peter delivered. Scripture makes it clear, however, that our part is to preach the Word and expect the signs to follow. ____________________ [Note: Edited due to space limitations. The above is a direct quote from: Assemblies of God Beliefs: Divine Healing (http://ag.org/top/beliefs/position_papers/4184_healing.cfm#top)] |
||||||
1158 | is matted hair inappropriate for woman | 1 Pet 3:3 | Radioman2 | 86169 | ||
Your adornment must not be merely external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; 1 Pet 3:3 (NASB) AMPLIFIED 1 Peter 3:3 Let not yours be the [merely] external adorning with [elaborate] interweaving and knotting of the hair, the wearing of jewelry, or changes of clothes; If this verse prohibited women from braiding the hair and wearing gold jewelry, then it would also prohibit them from putting on dresses. Please read the verse in 1 Peter 3. Also notice the use of the word "merely" in the verse. |
||||||
1159 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Radioman2 | 101160 | ||
A Logical Defense But in your hearts set Christ apart as holy [and acknowledge Him] as Lord. Always be ready to give a LOGICAL DEFENSE to anyone who asks you to account for the hope that is in you, but do it courteously and respectfully. [Isa. 8:12, 13.] (AMPLIFIED 1 Peter 3:15 Emphasis added.) If we shouldn't use arguments[footnote 1] to promote the Gospel--because it's leaning on human wisdom and not God--then what are we to say? I have been challenged a number of times recently on the use of intellectual arguments and rational persuasion in the defense of the gospel. In other words, the whole idea of Christian apologetics is called into question as being unbiblical. For example, one reader said: "don't resort to...arguments to evade the clear statements of truth in the Bible,...be guided by Bible truth and put our trust in it first and foremost." (On the surface, this sounds OK. However, if you read this quote in the context of the post in which it is written, you will see there is more to it than meets the eye.) Another wrote: "I want to see Scripture not no (sic) mumbo jumbo from Strong['s] or any other different references. I want Scripture." Another asked: "Is this article inspired by revelation, or, the Spirit of the living God, or, is it man's wisdom?" The implication by these readers seems to be: you must choose between the use of intellectual arguments and rational persuasion or Bible verses alone. It's either/or. The assumption here is that the two are mutually exclusive options. If we shouldn't use arguments[footnote 1] to promote the Gospel--because it's leaning on human wisdom and not God--then what are we to say? How would you answer this question? Please tell us why you answer as you do. Whatever your reasoning behind your answer, tell us what it is. ------------- [Footnote 1] When I use the word "argument" here, I do not mean it in the sense of "quarrel" or "disagreement." I mean it in the following sense: "argument -- 2 a : a reason given in proof or rebuttal b : discourse intended to persuade 3 b : a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion" (www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary). --Radioman2 |
||||||
1160 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Radioman2 | 101166 | ||
John: Good point, John, and I agree with you. I was in the United States Marine Corps. My M.O.S. was Field Radio Operator. (My brother, Sonarman, was in the Navy. He was a sonar technician.) Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 ] Next > Last [66] >> |