Results 261 - 280 of 1459
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: John Reformed Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
261 | Is the UPC a Christian Church? | Matt 24:11 | John Reformed | 97533 | ||
Lower case c "catholic" means universal. Because of the proliferation of false christs espoused by false teachers, the true church found it necessary to put forth an explanation of the Trinity that is as faithfull to Scripture as man can possibly be. Thus...The Athanasian Creed. You already said you did'nt understand this doctrine. Are you now determined not to learn from others? Frankly, what you did write had some serious errors. Take a deep breath and learn from one of the great saints; Athanasius John |
||||||
262 | Is the UPC a Christian Church? | Matt 24:11 | John Reformed | 97527 | ||
The Athanasian Creed Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Spirit uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensibles, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; And yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say: There are three Gods or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is afore, nor after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three persons are co-eternal, and co-equal. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and made of the substance of His mother, born in the world. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God. One altogether, not by the confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead; He ascended into heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty; From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies; And shall give account of their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved. |
||||||
263 | The Sacred Romance | Num 28:11 | John Reformed | 97466 | ||
Dear Searcher, I am totally ignorant of the content of this book. My post to VR was in regard to his concern about it. My purpose was to exhort him to take responsibity and to ascertain whether the book was founded on scriptural truth or not. In this day and age one cannot be too wary! I apologize if some inherent skeptisizm showed through in what I said. My remark "mumbo-jumbo" comes to mind. :-( Thanks, John |
||||||
264 | were angels saved by works? | 2 Pet 2:4 | John Reformed | 97462 | ||
Dear DL5, Your answer is indeed simple, however, I would feel more comfortable with it if you had provided a scriptural foundation. 1) Satan was the first created being to commit an evil act, but, the bible does not support the notion that creatures are able to create something out of nothing. Aside from that, what makes you think that "evil" is a created thing? 2) While it is true that the elect angels did not rebel, the question is: Did they not sin because they were elected by God? Or, were they elected by God because they did not sin? 3) To me at least, it appears to be apparent that God placed the Tree of Knowledge in the garden as part of His eternal purpose, which was to have His Son save a people who would love and serve Him throughout eternity. I don't believe that the "Tree" was created after the fall of the angels for this reason: Gen 1:31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. "We do not know precisely what their sin entailed—it was doubtless some act of willful rebellion against God—or precisely when they lapsed into sin, but at the end of Genesis 2, the events of which come within the sixth day of Genesis 1, God pronounced that all that he had made was "very good" (Gen 1:31); therefore, it would seem that the angelic fall had not yet occurred. But at the beginning of Genesis 3 we find the Tempter enticing Eve to sin against God. So apparently Satan and his angels fell at some point in the period of time between Genesis 2 and Genesis 3." (Robert L. Reymond) John |
||||||
265 | were angels saved by works? | 2 Pet 2:4 | John Reformed | 97406 | ||
Dear Darcy, Check out my post to Makarios ( ID# 97389 ). It may help you to establish when Satan fell. John |
||||||
266 | were angels saved by works? | 2 Pet 2:4 | John Reformed | 97389 | ||
Dear Makarios, You may find the following article of some interest: Angels are rational, moral beings (2 Sam 14:20; Matt 24:36; Eph 3:10; 1 Pet 1:12; 2 Pet 2:11). As originally created, all of the angels were morally good (Gen 1:31), but apparently only two-thirds of them—the elect angels (1 Tim 5:21)—remained in their created state of integrity, specifically, those under the command of the archangels Gabriel (meaning "God's mighty hero," Dan 8:16; 9:21; Luke 1:9; 26) and Michael (meaning "Who is like God? No one [implied]!," Dan 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9; Rev 12:7). One-third of them, under the command of their archangel (we do not know what his name was originally4; we know him now as Satan, "Adversary"), by an act of will kept not their original state and fell with him (John 8:44; 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 6). We do not know precisely what their sin entailed—it was doubtless some act of willful rebellion against God—or precisely when they lapsed into sin, but at the end of Genesis 2, the events of which come within the sixth day of Genesis 1, God pronounced that all that he had made was "very good" (Gen 1:31); therefore, it would seem that the angelic fall had not yet occurred. But at the beginning of Genesis 3 we find the Tempter enticing Eve to sin against God. So apparently Satan and his angels fell at some point in the period of time between Genesis 2 and Genesis 3. Of course, the angels who did not fall—the elect angels—were kept from falling according to God's eternal plan by his preserving power. Their election, because God did not elect them out of a totality of a fallen angelic order inasmuch as these elect angels never fell, can only be understood along supralapsarian lines. For reasons sufficient to himself, God simply by decree granted to these angels perseverance in their created integrity and denied it to Satan and his angels.(Robert L. Reymond Professor Emeritus of Systematic TheologyKnox Theological Seminary) God Bless, John |
||||||
267 | were angels saved by works? | 2 Pet 2:4 | John Reformed | 97384 | ||
Dear Maharios, "Yes, God is at work in those who believe (Phil. 2:13).", and, "...I do not believe that man can thwart any purpose of God's." What of those angels that rebelled? Or Adam before the fall? Neither had a sin nature. Yet both fell from a state of innocency. I see no evidence that would refute the arguement that election of individuals (both angelic and human) are elect according to God's purpose and not because of any work on their parts, ie; grace. I have a hard time grasping the idea that a third of the heavenly host was inherently liable to rebel while the rest were inherently loyal. (of course I have a similar problem with fallen man). John |
||||||
268 | were angels saved by works? | 2 Pet 2:4 | John Reformed | 97379 | ||
Dear Makarios, "God did not "choose" Angels on the basis of works or on the basis of grace...God created angels for His purpose" Were we not created for His purpose as well?... Phil 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure. Eph 3:10,11 so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places. This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord, Paul tells us the eternal purpose of God includes both men (Jews and Gentiles) and angels (rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places.) Col 1:16 "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him."...ALL THINGS! Perhaps I am missing your point? Tell me...do you believe the Bible teaches that man can thwart God's "eternal purpose"? John |
||||||
269 | How do you say "repent" gently? | Acts 3:26 | John Reformed | 97092 | ||
Rom 12:10 Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor; It is indeed a pleasant experience when fellow christians find themselves in one accord. I also believe that if we take Isa 1:18 as our model, we must not neglect verse 20 and the consequences of continued rebellion in unbelief. Your thoughts? John |
||||||
270 | How do you say "repent" gently? | Acts 3:26 | John Reformed | 96950 | ||
Dear Debbie, You are not wrong. In fact you are absolutely right! Acts 5:31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Acts 11:18 When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." 2 Tim 2:25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, Repentance - There are three Greek words used in the New Testament to denote repentance. (1.) The verb metamelomai is used of a change of mind, such as to produce regret or even remorse on account of sin, but not necessarily a change of heart. This word is used with reference to the repentance of Judas (Matt. 27:3). (2.) Metanoeo, meaning to change one's mind and purpose, as the result of after knowledge. This verb, with (3) the cognate noun metanoia, is used of true repentance, a change of mind and purpose and life, to which remission of sin is promised. Evangelical repentance consists of (1) a true sense of one's own guilt and sinfulness; (2) an apprehension of God's mercy in Christ; (3) an actual hatred of sin (Ps. 119:128; Job 42:5, 6; 2 Cor. 7:10) and turning from it to God; and (4) a persistent endeavour after a holy life in a walking with God in the way of his commandments. The true penitent is conscious of guilt (Ps. 51:4, 9), of pollution (51:5, 7, 10), and of helplessness (51:11; 109:21, 22). Thus he apprehends himself to be just what God has always seen him to be and declares him to be. But repentance comprehends not only such a sense of sin, but also an apprehension of mercy, without which there can be no true repentance (Ps. 51:1; 130:4). (Easton's Bible Dictionary) Repentance is essential. But it is not a work which we manufacture or summon up by way of human will-power. Rather, it is a grace bestowed by God upon those whom He calls. Thank you for sharing your God-given insight on this important aspect of salvation. God Bless, John |
||||||
271 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 96121 | ||
Friend Darcy, If you were to study church history you would find that the creeds developed by the church fathers were an attempt to protect the flock from ravenous wolves, who sought to spread heresy among God's people. It seems that you have had a bad experience in which the creed of a particlar church caused grief to you and your wife. You neglected to say if that church backed-up this creed with scripture. Did they? If they did not offer an arguement from scripture that convinced your conscience that it was God's truth, then you were right to seek fellowship elsewhere. But, just because some men mis-use God's Word by twisting it into a false creed does not justify your attitude twords creeds in general. John |
||||||
272 | Titus 3:5 regeneration help please | John 3:3 | John Reformed | 96112 | ||
Regeneration - only found in Matt. 19:28 and Titus 3:5. This word literally means a "new birth." The Greek word so rendered (palingenesia) is used by classical writers with reference to the changes produced by the return of spring. In Matt. 19:28 the word is equivalent to the "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). In Titus 3:5 it denotes that change of heart elsewhere spoken of as a passing from death to life (1 John 3:14); becoming a new creature in Christ Jesus (2 Cor. 5:17); being born again (John 3:5); a renewal of the mind (Rom. 12:2); a resurrection from the dead (Eph. 2:6); a being quickened (2:1, 5). This change is ascribed to the Holy Spirit. It originates not with man but with God (John 1:12, 13; 1 John 2:29; 5:1, 4). As to the nature of the change, it consists in the implanting of a new principle or disposition in the soul; the impartation of spiritual life to those who are by nature "dead in trespasses and sins." The necessity of such a change is emphatically affirmed in Scripture (John 3:3; Rom. 7:18; 8:7-9; 1 Cor. 2:14; Eph. 2:1; 4:21-24). (Easton's) John Reformed |
||||||
273 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 96109 | ||
Well Darcy, As long as we are to discard our creeds, I suppose our doctrines must be cast aside as well! By saying that you believe creeds are harmfull to the Body of Christ, you have inadvertantly stated a creed of your own. By stating it in a public forum, you have exposed a desire to have all persons believe as you do. Hmmm...interesting. :-) If you were the founder of a new denomination, would you not think it necessary to inform prospective worshippers what you believed and why you believe it (based on Scripture)? I know you don't mean to do so, but in actuality you are advocating anarchy! Let everyman believe antthing he wants to believe as long as he says he got it from reading the Bible! This is a prescription for chaos. Does it not seem more reasonable to allow church leaders to formulate creeds but to insist on a biblical foundation for them? John |
||||||
274 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 96101 | ||
Dear Darcy, Your churches creed is fairly non-specific. There is no statement that sticks out as being overtly heretical, bit neither is there anything that is a strong statement on Salvation; The person of Christ; eschatology etc. Frankly, if I were to look at this "creed" alone (having no other information available) I would not be able to say it was truly christian. It also troubles me that the Scriptural foundations for these statements are not provided (in fairness...perhaps you just did'nt include them). Your statement about the new (ill-informed believer) really proves only his immaturity in Christ. But my main contention is that for a creed to be accepted as true it must be an accurate reflection of that which the Bible teaches. Even then it still remains secondary to the Scripture itself! Creeds are written by fallible men and therefore are subject to error. Nevertheless, they are absolutely essential and should be developed, taught and studied in the light of God's Holy Word itself. John |
||||||
275 | Seven Church "ages"? Is it scriptural? | Revelation | John Reformed | 96085 | ||
Thanks EdB, An interesting (if somewhat forced) hypothesis. "Church of Ephesus It was a church in the middle of wanton materialism, paganism and heathenism. Church from 30 AD - 100 AD"...What age has not been charecterized by these condititions? "Smyrna means "Myrrh" which carries the meaning of suffering. Similar to the church during the period 100 AD to 314 AD From the death of John to the edict of toleration by Constantine which ended the persecution of Christians."...There are many places in the world today that christians are sufferring martyrdom, and in numbers that rival those of the early church. The same is true as for the explanation of the remaining four church "ages". If one were to visit Ethiopia; Sudan; China; etc., how do you believe the christians in those countries would react to the news that the church was living in an age of riches, self sufficency and complacence. This definition may find some credulity in the western democracys, but would probably be laughed to scorn in most of Third World christendom. It seems to me that the ones who have formulated this interpretation had the USA as the primary focus, especially regarding the "Philidelphian age". Why should anyone believe that this hyothesis is at all credible? I do appreciate your effort...but I was looking for an answer founded on teaching from the Bible itself. Thanks again, John Reformed |
||||||
276 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 95830 | ||
Dear Darcy, "I didn't say no teachers or Pastors. The believers all have gifts 1 Cor 12:28 for the Church. The main problem with the creed is that the creed is used to prove the Bible correct or not." Like all things, creeds may be mis-used by wicked men for their own evil purpose. But let's not throw out the baby with the bath water. The main problem is men also twist the Bible! We don't blame the Bible do we? Then why blame a sound creed because it was mis-used! You also said Creeds are not for you. But the moment you attempt to explain what you believe, you are espousing your personal creed based upon your interpretation and understanding of Scripture! I'm begining to think that the problems which you have encountered at certain churches has pejudiced you against organized churches period! John |
||||||
277 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 95824 | ||
Pressly again: "Accordingly, the Church from the beginning has found it necessary to act upon the principle of having a creed. Even in apostolic days, when an individual desired to be received into the household of faith, and to enjoy the privileges of the Church he was required, not simply to make a general declaration of his faith in the Sacred Scriptures as the word of God, but to signify his belief of certain great doctrines which the Church received upon the authority of the Bible. For example, when the Ethiopian eunuch, after being instructed by the evangelist Philip in the doctrines of Christianity, desired to be received into the Church by baptism, Philip demanded of him a profession of his faith:—"If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." The eunuch then signified his belief, not simply of the lively oracles, as a revelation from God, but of the fundamental, distinguishing doctrine embraced in the creed of the Church, as founded on the word of God:—"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (Acts 8:37.) In the primitive days of Christianity, the creed of the Church was brief and simple, embracing a few of the leading fundamental doctrines of the Bible. But in process of time false doctrines were propagated, and the Scriptures were misinterpreted to make them countenance these doctrines; and hence it became necessary that the Church should declare explicitly what she understood to be the truth taught in those portions of Scripture which were perverted by the advocates of error. And thus as errors were multiplied, it became necessary that the creed should be enlarged, that a testimony might be lifted up in defence of the truth and in opposition to error." John |
||||||
278 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 95823 | ||
Ok Darcy, Your example of a perfect church seems to be a small group of people who meet at a house for worship and bible study. No goverment, no leaders, no teachers aside from the Holy Spirit. But what steps were taken by the early church when multitudes were added to their number? They had to get organized to meet the needs of those new babes in Christ! "If all who profess the name of Christ understood the Bible in the same sense and interpreted the Bible in the same way, a creed distinct from the Bible would be unnecessary. In that case, all that would be necessary to ascertain that there exists agreement among the members of the Church would be simply a profession of faith in all the doctrines of the Bible. But, since it is not so,—since, among those who professedly regard the Bible as the rule of faith and life very different interpretations are put upon the word of God,—it becomes necessary that those who associate together in an ecclesiastical capacity should adopt a creed, in which there is a plain exhibition of what they understand to be the doctrines of the Bible. In no other way can it be known whether there exists among them that agreement which is indispensably necessary to secure co-operation in their efforts to advance the interests of Christ’s kingdom." (Pressly) It does no good to ignore reality. How can a group of people be in one accord if they lack that which plainly states THEIR interpretation of the Bible? John |
||||||
279 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 95807 | ||
Dear Darcy, The following reflects what I believe a creed to be: A creed, according to its general acceptation, is a summary of certain principles adopted by an association of individuals as articles of belief, by which they agree to be governed. The word is of Latin origin, being derived from the verb credo (I believe). According to ecclesiastical usage, a creed is an exhibition in human language of what are believed by its framers to be the great doctrines of the Bible. As a formula of the faith, it possesses no independent authority, but derives its very existence, and all the regard to which it lays claim from the Bible. It does not profess to make known any thing which has not already been revealed, nor does it undertake to constitute any thing truth which was not truth before; but its office is simply to draw forth from the word of God the great truths therein revealed, and state them in plain, intelligible language. (http://www.covenanter.org/Pressly/churchfellowship.htm) A creed is man's attempt to set forth the those doctrines which accurately reflect the truth of Scripture. Any church that sets it's creed on the same par with Scripture itself (claiming infallibility of it's creed) is apostate and I would shake the dust off my shoes and depart from it! Thankfully most churches still hold to sola scriptura (The Scripture alone). Check out Pressely at the web site listed above. John |
||||||
280 | A New Reformation? | Revelation | John Reformed | 95801 | ||
Dear Darcy, Check out http://www.reformed.com/pub/church.htm for a different perspective than your own regarding church membership. Is Church Membership Optional? By: Stephen Pribble -------------------------------------------------- “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves” (Hebrews 13:17) God has given us His inscripturated word, unchanging, written in the Bible; He commissions the preacher to expound and apply that word to the situation facing us, driving it home in our lives as the carpenter drives the nail. The preacher speaks for God, because God has spoken in the Bible; His voice resounds with the familiar “Thus saith the Lord.” The church has the responsibility to listen, and to evaluate everything heard in light of God’s revealed truth. We will consider the curious modern phenomenon of the unattached believer. This none-too-rare species fancies himself somehow to be a member of the universal church, but not of the local church. Like Joseph of Arimathea, he is “a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews” (John 19:38). Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the Apostle exhorts his readers—recent converts from Judaism—not to turn back from Christianity, their new-found faith, to the old, comfortable ways of their apostate religion. For these brave souls, embracing Christianity had involved great sacrifice and pain—being cast out by family, friend and community, cast out of the temple and synagogue, cast out by a religion that by this time, through its accommodation and compromise, had become officially recognized by the Roman Empire, and driven to a fugitive band of unproven men and women who possessed no real estate and clung only to the promises of God. Over and over in the book of Hebrews we find strong warnings to these recent converts not to turn back, not to forsake the truth of Christianity at any cost. In our text the Apostle orders these new Christians, “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves.” It is to these two commands of Scripture—obey and submit—that we will direct our attention. What do they mean, and how can we obey? John |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Next > Last [73] >> |