Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Matt Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | This is why...? | Bible general Archive 1 | Matt | 1816 | ||
The reason they are called non-denominational is there non-affiliation with a denomination. This in and of itself does not mean that they will have no standard or set theological teaching. I have seen just the opposite in some cases. I have been a part of a major denominational church that, because of the heirarchy of government, was more reliant on their "leaders" for guidance than they were on scripture and God. I would not and would strongly encourage others to be careful with broad categorizations. I have seen some wonderful well led churches, both denominational and non- as well as the opposite. The titles of denominational and non-denominational strictly deal with the way they are governed. Local control versus heirarchy. God Bless! |
||||||
2 | Is prophecy dead? | Matt 11:13 | Matt | 1769 | ||
Just to clarify, are you saying that because no one could be 100 percent correct, then there are no prophets? No, I am saying that I would put anyone that claimed to be a prophet to the tests I presented. I also want to clarify that I am not saying that the individual would have to be 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time but that their prophesying would. You are right when you mentioned the record of prophets whose lives were a mess (by the way isn't encouraging to see God use ordinary men such as these in extraordinary ways?). What I can say is that these men's prophesies were 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time for if a man speaks from God those words cannot be erroneous or incorrect. I do not take the stance that there are no prophets today. I do take the stance that I know of none in the definition I put forth in our previous discourse. There are absolutely some very spiritually mature and wise men speaking and preaching, exhorting, rebuking and comforting. I am here today under God's grace because God used some men such as these in my life. I could not however place them in the previously defined category of prophet. I am very careful in regards to things such as this as I have been burned before by the words and ideas of men that use scripture to support their own ideas instead of using scripture to form their ideas. Where scripture speaks let us listen and were scripture is silent... As we have discussed this I think I am coming to some clarity on a few things. So much of the terms we have been using are so closely aligned with the current word of faith movement (example: Toronto movement and those like it in Florida, Texas and elsewhere) that many people upon hearing them tend to think of them in those terms. I would agree that these movements are not of the Spirit and would probably go further, based on your previous response, and say that they are heretical. If you are interested, a couple of GREAT books on the subject are 'Counterfeit Revival' and 'Christianity in Crisis' both by Hank Hanegraff. These are nonsensationalist looks at these events from a scriptural basis. I would strongly recommend them to anyone interested in apologetics. In areas such as this I just hope that we can entertain them as an inhouse debate and not divide over them. God's ways are not my ways and His thoughts not my thoughts. I just place myself before Him and pray that He use me and guide me through the leading of the Sirit and the scriptures. Again, thank you for this apportunity to discuss this. I hope to do more on this or other topics. I am trying to manage more time to spend on this site as I am finding it a blessing. God's love. |
||||||
3 | Is prophecy dead? | Matt 11:13 | Matt | 1765 | ||
I think one of the confusing things in this entire discourse (I just read through your communication with RCSCROLL) is definition of terms. Prophesies (1 Cor 14:3) translates - to be a prophet, speak forth by divine inspiration; to predict. To break forth under sudden impulse in lofty discourse or in praise of the divine counsels - or under the like prompting, to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, comfort others. (Thayers 4395) If one is to "speak forth under devine inspiration; to predict" I would hold that the two tests I put forth do in fact hold and do not only hold if predicting the future. To be 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time would be an absolute requirement if one was in fact speaking forth by divine inspiration. How would one know if the "prophet" was correct? I would say the best test would be scripture. You also assume that I am assuming that you are only referring to "all the 'wackos' out there are what I mean when I ask about present-day prophets.". While I agree that there are in fact numerous wackos out there I was not in any sense only referring to them. Again these two test are absolutley correct. My first test is just applying the definition of prophet. Someone claiming to be a prophet either is a true prophet or is a false prophet. A true prophet speaks on divine inspiration thereby their prophesy should be 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time. Second we are told to test all things by scripture. A person is a prophet if and only if they meet the full definition of a prophet. Be careful not to apply a part of the definition to make the whole. Just because someone speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation does not make them a prophet. A prophet does these things under divine inspiration. A good study here is 2 Cor. 11. As to apostleship, In a broader sense the name is transferred to other eminent Christian teachers; as Barnabas, Acts 14:14, and perhaps also Tmothy and Silvanus, 1 Th. 2:7 Ro. 16:7. But in other cases is to be taken in the narrower sense of the 12. (Thayers 652) Let us be careful with our terms and definitons. There is much difference in perception from person to person in many of the terms we are using. My final thought for now. You mentioned in one of your earlier posts that all things you mention you have experienced. I make the following note out of love. Be careful in using experience as a judge. Our ability to discern truth from experience is very poor. For instance I find the idea of being slain in the Spirit to have no scriptural foundation. The few attempts I have heard to justify this by scripture are a huge stretch. Never base a positon on abscure passages of scripture. Likewise never base them on experience. The ONLY truth we have is that laid out in scripture. I know from what I have read of your comments you agree with this. Let us continue to strive, with God's help, to constantly become more grounded in it. God Bless. I enjoy these conversations very much. Iron sharpens iron. |
||||||
4 | by faith vs. through faith? | Rom 3:30 | Matt | 1753 | ||
What is the distinction between justification by faith and through faith? | ||||||
5 | Non-denominational theology? | Bible general Archive 1 | Matt | 1750 | ||
"Non-denominational" theology would be as widely varied and difficult to categorize as "denominational" theology. I have been a part of three non-denominational churches and I could not even begin to lay out the differences, many immense, between them. A non-denominational church does not have the heirarchy or top down governance that denominations do. They often work together and join forces in the efforts but are not governed by a head group. I am not sure this answers your question as it is very broad. I know there are some excellent sources available that discuss the different denominational and nondenominational churches. A good place to start would be the Christian Research Institute www.equip.org. I have found their resources to be excellent. God Bless. | ||||||
6 | Is prophecy dead? | Matt 11:13 | Matt | 1748 | ||
I would be honored if you would consider the following thoughts of a layman. First, I believe there is room within Christianity to debate the idea of cesation of spiritual gifts. I believe these discussions help iron sharpen iron. I also believe that these should not cause us to divide. Also there seems to often be confusion between spritial gifts and talents. I believe we are all blessed, through the Holy Spirit, with talents that we are to use for the building up of the kingdom. The question is do the "gifts" still exist today. In terms of prophesy I would strongly suggest the following thought. If a person is truly a prophet then their prophecy should be 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time. This is would be a good test. Another would be to test everything they "prophesy" in light of scripture. I love the example of the Bereans when they tested everything Paul told them in light of scripture. They did not just take his word on it even though he was Paul. Here is what I do know. The Bible is the inerrant inspired word of God and I can trust without hesitation what it says. I cannot make the same statement of the "prophesies" that are currently being given by men. I have yet to hear of any modern day prophet that would "pass" the two criteria I mentioned above. This does not mean that God could not or would not send a prophet but that is up to God and we are warned repeatedly to be wary of false prophets. | ||||||
7 | Is Lamec a descendant of Seth or Cain? | Genesis | Matt | 141 | ||
Be careful in your reading. In Cain's lineage Lamach's father is METHUSHAEL and in Seth's lineage Lamach's father is METHUSELAH. If you sketch out a family tree of each it is evident that the Lamach in Cain and Seth's descendents is not the same Lamach. This should not be any more of a problem than confusing any other two people with the same name. Also, be careful with the timing issue. Just because Seth is dealt with in chapter 15 following Cain's lineage do not assume that it is chronologically correct. I would strongly suggest a book by Henderson and Henderson called "Living by the Book" if you want to develop your bible studying skills. God Bless |
||||||
8 | not a hair will perish cp. persecution | Luke 21:18 | Matt | 139 | ||
Read the entire passage from 21:10-19. The idea that not a hair on your head will perish and persecution are mutually exclusive takes the message out of context. Luke is not saying that they will not have physical harm come to them (v.12) but because of this they will have the opportunity to testify (v.13). In regards to v. 18 continue on to verse 19. The idea here is that God knows us and is watching over us. Those who persecute can only kill the body but God gives us life both here and for eternity. See Luke 12:4-9. Just for reference, a great book on bible study is Living by the Book by Henderson and Henderson. |
||||||