Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | DocTrinsograce | 240088 | ||
Hi, Maus... Okay, that's good, otherwise we'd be left in a Study Nonsense Forum. You mentioned something about experts annoying one another with differing views of hell. Given the context of our forum, I am assuming that by experts you mean there are orthodox Christian exegetes or theologians who disagree on eternal perdition. Would you please name a couple of them and tell how their views differ? In Him, Doc |
||||||
2 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | Maus | 240092 | ||
google Wikipedia "Hell" for starters. | ||||||
3 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | DocTrinsograce | 240093 | ||
I would prefer if you could summarize your assertion, please. | ||||||
4 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | Maus | 240097 | ||
Doc: You are asking me to summarize something that is so widely known, because you want to vet me as being capable of answering questions on this forum? | ||||||
5 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | DocTrinsograce | 240105 | ||
Hi, Maus... You are the one posting on the forum, under the responsibilities and presuppositions as specified by our gracious host. Wikipedia is not. The onus of responsibility is on you to substantiate your assertions. Granting the benefit of the doubt might yield something instructive to us all. As our Lord stated on one occasion, "Wisdom is vindicated by all her children" (Luke 7:35). Your responses have not lent credence to what you have stated so far. Furthermore you offered to discuss a single subject at once (post #240074), which thing I had supposed to be a sincere offer. Since the Socratic approach failed... allow me to explain... The NASB translation is based on a doctrine called sola Scriptura. The forum itself is rooted in the support of that presupposition. Indeed, as Christians, we live by every word of God (Deuteronomy 8:3; Matthew 4:4) -- not on some of them or the ones we like or even just the ones we understand. All Scripture is God breathed and all of it is necessary (2 Timothy 3:16-17) -- not some of it or the parts we like or even just the ones we understand. God spoke and we are required to listen to Him (Hebrews 1:1-2) -- not just to some of what He says or the parts we like or even just the parts we understand. Suppression of the truth is a very dangerous thing (Romans 1:18). Outside of God's self-revelation, we would only vaguely know Him (Romans 1:19). God Himself has revealed His righteousness to us (Exodus 9:27; Deuteronomy 32:4; Psalm 119:137; Isaiah 45:21; Jeremiah 12:1; Micah 7:9; Romans 7:12), His Holiness (Leviticus 19:2; Psalm 22:3; Isaiah 6:3 Ezekiel 36:21-23; Habakkuk 2:20; Revelation 4:8; 15:3-4), His justice (Exodus 23:7; Matthew 5:20; 25:31-46; Luke 19:22; Revelation 20:11-15). The doctrine receives more attention by our Savior than does the doctrine of heaven -- I will leave you to search that out for yourself. So if God Himself has taught us of these things, do you actually come to us to tell us they are unimportant? I doubt your "experts" represent Christendom. The doctrine of hell (as a place of eternal damnation) is averred by Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. Indeed, relative to Protestantism the doctrine is explicitly affirmed in such documents as the Three forms of Unity, the Book of Concord, the Westminster Standards, the Savoy Declaration, etc. etc. Some of our non-confessional friends have even expressed it here. As to Plato... One of my theology professors used to say, "Even a blind hog can stumble upon an acorn from time to time." Have you taken the time to read the Terms of Use -- the ones you agreed to when you joined the forum? You should understand that every time you post you are explicitly affirming your agreement with those terms. Consequently, when one posts things contrary to those terms, one's persuasiveness drops precipitously. We are necessarily an eccumenical community; but there are doctrinal prerequisites in the Terms of Use. Son, you may be able to contribute to our forum in a positive way, despite a rocky start. Reading the Terms of Use, then walking them out on this forum, will give the best evidence of good intentions. In Him, Doc |
||||||
6 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | Maus | 240106 | ||
Doc: Son? I am 68 years old, and nobody's "son." Don Holmes asked a question, which I was lead to believe that I could answer to the best of my ability. Matter of fact, my answers to him were the only ones to which he expressed satisfaction. One poster flat told him that he was not saved if he didn't believe in Hell. You admonished him for not following "the rules exactly." Sounds to me that this form is "Your way, or the highway!" It is written that man prepares his horse for battle, but God gives the victory. It is also a tenent of the faith that while man may act as agent for God, it is God Himself who does the persuading. We speak only what God gives us to speak, and the spirit of God moves upon the hearer's heart. There is a difference between "Chapter and verse" and the moving of the spirit. There is a difference between denominational tenents, and the simplicity of the Gospel. What is there that I said, that cannot be supported by Scripture? And you can't play dumb and interrogate me, when you should know the answers already. You do know the Scriptures, do you not? I did read the terms of use, and nowhere did it say that I had to conform to any denominational views or tenents. Lastly, I have noticed that there isn't a lot of repeat questioners. Perhaps one dose of this forum was enough? |
||||||
7 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | DocTrinsograce | 240107 | ||
Hi, Maus... So tell us: are you a Russellite ("Jehovah Witness")? In Him, Doc |
||||||
8 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | Maus | 240110 | ||
I was "born again" into a Pentecostal church when I was 17, and it took me 33 years to escape that. Since then I have been "gun shy" of associating with any denomination. My beliefs are still Protestant, and I have spent many years studying the Scriptures. I find "Bullingers Figures of Speech in the Bible" to be valuable, as well as the Aramaic English New Testament, the Hebraic Roots Bible, the King James Bible, Biblica Hebraica Stuttgartensia, and the New Living Translation, amongst many others. I found "Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation", by Peter Cotterell and Max Turner useful. BDB, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, pretty much almost all of the reference books which are used by mainstream Protestant denominations. I believe that Jesus' Hebrew name is Yehoshua the Mashiyach, but the Greek "Jesus the Savior" is just as good. The Jehova witnesses did much damage to Jesus' hebrew name, few Protestants wanting to have anything to do with anything sounding Jehova Witness. I believe that Jesus is YHWH of the Old Testament also, and the one who created the Heavens and the Earth; under the authority of, and by the power of the Father. I believe that Jesus and the Father are two distinct individuals, of the same substance and spirit, so as to be One ... as it is written YHWH, YHWH, Elohim. The name "Elohim" is a uniplural noun, of which we have no equivilance in English. Nowhere did any of the Apostles pray to anyone except Jesus and the Father in the heavens. In other words, I do not believe in the Trinity, nor Monotheism. I believe that the law (Torah) is instilled into our hearts upon conversion, so while we are under grace, we are led by the spirit of God to obey the precepts of Torah. It is written, in 1 Corinthians 2:11 that "No one can know a person's thoughts except that person's own spirit, and no one can know God's thoughts except God's own spirit. This leads me to believe that as a person's spirit is that person, living in an Earthly body, God's spirit is God, in His personal presence ... and not a separate entity. God is in all things, and all things are in God, but there is a presence of the Father by which He makes His personal "self" vulnerable to His "Children in Christ." I believe that Sunday is not the Sabbath, but if someone wants to rest on Sunday instead of the Sabbath, I find no fault, just as long as they don't call Sunday the Biblical Sabbath. |
||||||
9 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | azurelaw | 240165 | ||
Dear Maus, Though you mentioned that you have read the TOU, I wonder you might have missed the below statement: Postings must be consistent with Biblical Christian doctrine (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, Chalcedonian Creed, and Canons of the Council of Orange) Please consider that your disbelief in the Trinity contradicts to what the above Creeds affirm. Furthermore, on your other post (240071) you advised the poster to view the subject of HELL with "tongue in cheek". I don't understand how a Christian could treat a subject, which Jesus talked more than any other persons in the Bible, with a light heart. Though we should not overly exaggerated Hell, yet, we cannot water-down or ignore the teaching of it for Jesus has repeatedly warned the audience about it. Shalom Azure |
||||||
10 | belief in hell? | Rev 20:15 | Maus | 240166 | ||
CREEDS Apostles Creed: It says nothing about the divinity of the Holy Spirit, but the doctrine is considered by many to be implicit in it. Nicene Creed: “And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets.” Jesus is spoken of as begotten of the Father, not created, like the Angels, and being co-equal with the Father, existing alongside, at the Right-hand of the Father, working the will of the Father. The Spirit of God is spoken of as proceeding from the Father directly, and not begotten nor created. I believe that to worship the Holy Spirit, is to worship the Father Himself. I believe that the Holy Spirit is the Father, in His most personal presence, and not just His over-all being in all things, and all things being in Him. The Trinity doctrine, on its face, fails to make this fine distinction to the lay-man. Proceeding from the Father, is not the same as being begotten or created. So, while I do not believe in the Trinity, as the Holy Spirit being a third and independent person from the Godhead, I believe that the Holy Spirit is the Father, in His most personal “self”. The Holy Spirit is the Father … is Jesus, is Elohim, is YHWH. The scriptures speak of the Spirit of God, and also of the Spirit of Christ. Since there is not two Spirits, but only one, He, of necessity, must be the Spirit of which our Lord and the Father are Echad (one). As Jesus and the Father are two distinct “persons” of the same essence, so the Holy Spirit is that essence of sameness which binds them. A fine hair-splitting, to be sure, but a view which does no violence to the Trinity doctrine, since the net result is the same. I will concede that I should be more specific when I say that I do not believe in the Trinity. I commit the same abbreviation when I say that I do not believe in monotheism, for the Father and the Son are One. Chalcedonian Creed: That Jesus walked this earth in human form and weakness, and is also God, YHWH Eloheem, is well within anything that I have expressed. Cannons of the Council of Orange: It is all by the grace of God. |
||||||