Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127255 | ||
EdB, You asked: "Was the church responsible for Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials, The Papacy, Confessionals, Indulgences, and many other horrible thing as you put it or was it corrupt men that acted in the name of the church?" The answer is yes, the church was responsible. The orthodox views of the time declared Jews heretics and no longer worthy of human rights or life. The orthodox views of the time declared the Muslims heathens and no longer worthy of human rights or life. Christian orthodox views of the time declared people with moles, strange or reclusive behavior, or of a different point of view to be no longer worthy of human rights or life. The orthodox Christian views of the time determined a heirarchy in the church that created a situation conducive to being a respector of persons. The orthodox Christian views of the time declared that the Pope had to forgive sins, and that dirty rotten sinners ought to pay indulgences in order to get that forgiveness. The orthodox Christian views of the time declared that people needed to confess sins to a man, because they did not have access to God directly. Whether or not man's corruption did it, it all came from a poor interpretation of scripture, and the orthodox views of the time were responsible for justifying the actions. If those in control had followed the true doctrine of brotherly love, the witch trials wouldn't have happened, the Crusades wouldn't have happened, indulgences wouldn't have happened, the Inquisition wouldn't have happened. Cortez slaughtered the Aztecs because they didn't convert to Chritianity. And this, of course, because they didn't speak his language and had no idea what he was saying. Now this: "Love without restraint quickly runs amuck." Perhaps the kind of love you know runs amuck. The love of Christ is described in 1 Corinthians 13, and such does not run amuck. Love never fails according to what the Bible says. You wrote: "You talk about my pride my arrogance. It is not me standing outside of orthodoxy saying your all wrong! I know the correct answer! And if you follow me I will lead you to the truth!" Ed, if you don't recognize your arrogant attitude by this, your very own statement, then I don't know what else to say. If you don't recognize your pride in not considering anything I've said, disregarding the absolute values of scripture as I have presented to you, then I don' tknow what else to say. Call me names if you please. I'm pretty much done talking to you. This is a one-sided debate. I didn't come to you, you came to me. What this all boils down to is this: I think that it is not a commandment to go to church. You think it is. You have been attacking me. I have been defending against you. You want me to bend to your opinion, and because I do not, based upon a sound arguement and established precedent that you choose to ignore, you choose to insult me and call me names. So I'll tell you what. I'll give you what your pride demands: Ohhh, EdB, you're so absolutely right. How could I have ever been so misled as to believe that Christ set us free from law and tradition to establish love as the new doctrine. I am so terribly grateful that you have shown me the truth by giving me the commandment contrary to the precedent of Christ. Now that I have the commandment, the sin, taking occasion by the commandment, can work in me all manner of transgression. Again, I am thankful, for I was alive without the law, but now that you gave me the commandment, sin has revived and killed me. I was sooooo wrong to believe in righteousness by Christ and to let no man be my judge in regard to holy days or sabbaths. Truly, I thought righteousness was by faith, but now you've shown me better, that I can have all the benefits of being fallen from grace by standing on my own righteousness through works. This was sarcastic, but quite how I see it. You want to be right and to have me admit you are right. This thing is not going to happen if I disagree with you, and for good reasons at that. So, let me ask you one more time ... please stop insulting me and trying to force your opinion on me. I didn't want to talk about this with you because we are not going to agree. And it all comes down to the passage in Hebrews, of which we have differed interpretations based on one understanding or another. I'm sorry, but you will not convince me that such a passage that is clearly an exhortation to me is the commandment that it clearly is to you. Understand? Ancient |
||||||
2 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | EdB | 127269 | ||
Ancient Once again you speak of things you know nothing about. I think you need to revisit the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades to find out what exactly they were about. As far as a Salem witch trials which are mostly myth they had nothing to do with the church. As for the other problems you claim are the result of orthodoxy I will let someone from the catholic persuasion address your inaccuracies. As for this problem we have with Hebrew 10:25 it goes beyond my interpretation and yours. You said it is not a commandment therefore is optional. I’m saying very little of the New Testament is given as a commandment but none of it is optional. You said love covers all. I agree love is very important but love without morals, integrity, standard, precepts and commandments can quickly become corrupted. Love it the power the New Testament doctrines, advice as you call them, commandments to servant of Jesus are what gives that power direction. You said church is optional that some people need it but there are others that may feel they don’t and that is okay. Church and the worship of God is not optional and The reason is given right here in the Hebrews 10:25. We need to come together to build each other up to stir each other to better works. We are called to be our brothers keeper, how do we do this if were are not actively involved with them as in church? We can’t ! You said I’m attacking you yet did I call you arrogant, or prideful? Did I imply your doctrine was the reason people were killed in crusades, inquisitions? I’m not attacking you I’m attacking the doctrine you expounding. Your in effect saying if we do it in love we can justify most anything, from staying home from church to calling people whatever. You said I’m trying to make you say I’m right and your wrong, however it was I that conceded the fact that you were right going to church as stated in Hebrews 10:25 was not a commandment as such but rather an admonishment made for our good and that if we really wanted to serve Christ something we would do. You accuse me a not reading what you say. You say many things and in fact you have written more than four times what I have on this subject, yet you miss the most important part of the whole thread. That is the question is the words, actions and deeds recorded in the New Testament there as just a historical accountings of what took place or are they set down so we can duplicate, imitate and follow them as examples of Christian living. Jesus said pick up your cross and follow him, did he attend church? Yes! Paul said imitate me as I imitate Christ did he attend church? Yes! Yet you claim it as optional. I say it certainly in not optional. EdB |
||||||
3 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127278 | ||
Okay Ed, I'm going to be open minded and give you the opportunity to instruct me. This is a genuine offer of meekness. Please answer or expound on the following: 1) As God is the same yesterday today and forever, and God's methodology in instituting commandments is always quite detailed, should this not be the case in the New Testament as well? 2) If the Hebrews passage is a commandment, what are the specific parameters of this commandment? How often? Where? How many people should be attending? What day does this passage prescribe? 3) If Hebrews does not have parameters to follow, then is it really a commandment, according to the examples given in the past of God's lawmaking? How are we supposed to follow when we aren't told how? Or shall we just decide on our own what the parameters should be? 4) In what way do you consider love, being all encompassing, to have potential for failure when Corinthians says that love never fails? 5) What thing that I have said has given you the impression that we should love only in word, doing anything else however we please, as opposed to loving in deed and truth, as described in Corinthians? 6) If all commandments we have are summed up by love, are derived from love, and are fulfilled by love, then what commandments do you suggest do not fall within these parameters without contradicting scripture? 7) If love is once again the fulfillment of the law and from where the law is derived, then in what way does attendance at a church building adhere to this commandment or exhortation in Hebrews that cannot also be adhered to through a Bible study of five or six people? 8) Jesus said that where two or three are gathered in his name, he is there in their midst. At what point did two or three gathered become inadequate in favor of a church congregation? 9) With our present availability to as many as twenty bible translations, interlinear bibles, concordances, online websites, history books, a voice of our own to raise in song, radios to sing along to, homes to gather together, and dozens of commentaries and other books on various topics ... what thing can we not accomplish at our home that can only be accomplished at church? 10) What thing makes you believe that going to church is a commandment when loving your neighbor, in truth not word, fulfills the law regardless of going to church? Let us start here. If you respond with a bit of humility instead of insults, I will continue to discuss this. If you respond with more name calling or "you don't know what you're talking about" comments, then I will put this topic to rest unresolved. Whether or not I receive the instruction you wish to give will be entirely dependent upon your ability to behave like a Christian. Fair enough? Ancient |
||||||
4 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | EdB | 127282 | ||
Ancient Once again you argue over what is a commandment, how is stated, what parameters does it contain. Let me ask you a simple question why did God give us the Bible. Was it not for instructions for life? Let me address one point you brought up point 9. what can we accomplish at church was can't at home. How about compassion for one another? How about accountability to one another? How about edifying and encouraging and exhorting one another? How about being committed enough to put into deeds what we often pay lip service too. You come back to love and again I say I understand the importance of love but I also understand that God loved us enough to have his faithful men and women set down His Word before us. When my human father gave me advice I followed it. The older I got and more mature I got the more I was willing to follow it. When I was a child my father commanded me to bathe. As I got older it was no longer a ‘command’ but rather an admonishment I would follow. However I imagine if I never bathed he would sooner or later demand I did. God wrote the Old Testament to people that didn't know and love him through adoption as children. He therefore wrote in a commanding way. However in the New Testament we are sons and daughters and hopefully have matured enough in our walk with God to take his advice as though it were a commandment. You keep going back to salvation on this issue and I have repeatedly said I don't believe our salvation directly hinges on whether or not we go to church. However I think our willingness to accept an admonishment from God as though it were a command does speak of our relationship with God. The thing that really amazes me is each time I talk to someone that does not attend church they give me your points 1 through 10. However once they get in church and find a loving Savior they never give those arguments again. Your point 10 “What thing makes you believe that going to church is a commandment when loving your neighbor, in truth not word, fulfills the law regardless of going to church?” I guess if I was looking only to fulfill the law I might say love is enough, however if I was looking to do what my Lord and Master has asked of me I would keep the rest of the Bible. However I don’t look at church attendance as requirement but rather a privilege and privilege that only a Christian can truly appreciate and enjoy. EdB |
||||||
5 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127300 | ||
Ed, you are underestimating how powerful love is. It is the primary thing, and it accomplishes the fullest extent of the law. I don't think you are understanding this thing. Think on it for a while. Now, this 1-10 list is not a list of excuses. They are valid questions. I have every right to ask them if you are going to lay a commandment in my lap that is not clearly stated as a commandment, but instead given as an exhortation. If you REALLY want to teach me something, as I am giving you a sincere and genuine opportunity to do; I am open-minded to hear what you have to say, and to weigh it, and I am prepared to change my views if your arguement proves true. But I insist that you answer my questions and stop avoiding them. If you can't answer them, I will be forced to assume that you cannot, and under such circumstances, I will have no choice but to remain unconvinced of your arguements. Now, do you want to convince me or not? I'm ready to listen, but you must provide some answers to the very reasonable questions I have asked you before we can properly continue. Otherwise we are arguing over nothing more than opinion, conjecture, and the interpretation of a passage that we already disagree on. I did hear what you said in this last post, as you are tempering it down a bit, but I once again insist that you answer, else this conversation cannot be properly discussed. Ancient |
||||||