Results 1 - 20 of 130
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Lookn4ward2Heavn Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 186769 | ||
I like that Spurgeon quote, especially, "The guiding man is needed still...Their exposition can never be a substitute for our own meditations..." I think it would be correct to add that, as all men are fallible and no system of doctrine is Spirit-inspired and 100 per-cent error free, we must not base our faith on the teachings of others but on what God reveals personally to each of us as we meditate and study the Bible. It seems that an important purpose of Bible study is to own by faith the things God has spoken to us; to believe, not because someone taught it to us but because we have experienced the revelation of its truthfulness (John 4:41-42). I would think that as great in wisdom and exposition a Christian may be, only what God has confirmed to us as true need be believed. |
||||||
2 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 186801 | ||
It seems to me that confirming the truth requires both the written Word and the witness of the Spirit. Understanding itself only apprehends; it does not confirm that what has been apprehended is in fact truth. In other words, one may come to some understanding of something but that does not necessarily mean what he understands is truth. I somewhat enjoy the forum. My only qualm is that answers do not seem to be straightforward and attempts are made at analyzing the psyche (and judge the motives) rather than answer the question...at least, that is how my questions have been answered. Also, as I read some postings, there seems to be a stiffness as to doctrinal preferences. But, of course, on the internet you can't see a person's face or hear the tone of the voice, so my perceptions may be totally off...like I saw in an old newspaper cartoon, "Harry didn't know that he was chatting with a dog on the other end." |
||||||
3 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 186802 | ||
From the little I have read, that "Historically the church has been strongly calvinist" does not seem to be an accurate account of Church History. Would you be able, if it is not going beyond the scope of this forum, to provide a couple of references from the first two or three hundred years? |
||||||
4 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 186933 | ||
John, You're forgiven... |
||||||
5 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 186936 | ||
John, Yes, you may assume... |
||||||
6 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188306 | ||
Jeff, Haven't you heard, in passing, whether by a preacher or someone else something to the effect that we are only human and, therefore, can be expected to sin? I agree, such a statement does minimize and excuse sin. But why? Is it your position that Christians do not sin all the time, everyday? Is it your position that our created humanity has no bearing on our sinfulness? I ask questions with a view to discussion on certain points that I find interesting and wish to know if there are others with similar views. My intention is not to "stir the pot" or "an effort to foster divisiveness, ill-will, dissension or other disruptions" but to "sharpen iron with iron," primarily to either sharpen or change those views that I hold. Also, I may be misunderstanding another's views and discussions help to clarify understanding. I will admit, it seems to me that my views are not held by the majority. If the pot swirls, at it has for some, it is not - as far as I can see - my doing; it may be that some need to learn how to neither judge the questioner without warrant or feel threatened when certain questions are asked. As far as question I asked is concerned, it seems, one reason why I think we are behaving less than human - not as a human - when we sin is because God did not create mankind with the intention of their sinning against him; he made them without a sin nature although with a free will that makes the committal of sin possible. As such, as I see it, man does not sin because he is "human" but because he has "inherited" what is outside his nature as created, that is (what others call), a "sin nature". What got me thinking this way was my reading of Packer's (in 1973) quoting Baxter with reference to sin, writes that sin "does not make you more of a man, but less so; it brutalises you and tears you to pieces...We are only living truly human lives just as far as we are labouring to keep God's commandments; no further" (Knowing God, p.103). |
||||||
7 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188310 | ||
Searcher, Rom 7:1-25, I believe, reflects the condition of an unbeliever and, therefore, has no bearing on the question as it relates to believers Rom 5:12ff only confirms my statement that "God created humankind without sin". Rom 3:23 refers to man as a sinner, not as created by God. My question was asked because of what I, as noted, hear spoken casually in the pulpit and among believers. |
||||||
8 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188338 | ||
1. Upon noticing many taking offense at my questions, I have been making attempts to avoid "stirring the pot"; but, also, keep in mind that what you would have me consider (I've said precisely that many times to others) is not true in all cases; sometimes the majority is the problem. 2. Now, considering my initial question regarding if it is human to sin...what are your thoughts? |
||||||
9 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188376 | ||
Jeff, Your position as stated: "true Christians do not 'sin all the time, everyday'." 1. This assertion, it is assumed, is not limited to deeds. 2. Such a view also assumes the possibility for a Christian to spend (at least) one day without sinning either in word, thought, attitude, or deed. |
||||||
10 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188377 | ||
Steve, The point I am making is not to deny we are human - that's a given - but the assertion that it is only human to sin. God designed us not for the purposes of sinning, although given free will the potential was there, but for the purposes of fulfilling his will, which we have obviously failed to do. As such, we have all acted contrary to God's design, that is, original intent. Therefore, humans only act human - that is, according to God's original intent for the way humans are to behave - when they do what is morally right; they behave less than human (although being human) when they sin; their actions are more in accord with a beast rather than a human. God never intended for sin to be part of the human condition or nature. As a sinner, man cannot "ultimately do [what is] according to God's purposes"; nevertheless, God is able to ultimately fulfill His own purposes since He is sovereign. |
||||||
11 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188493 | ||
Hank, When I ask for a person's "opinions", "thoughts", or "views", I am asking on the basis of their understanding of the Bible. I have an opinion, that is, thoughts on what I understand to be the teachings of the Bible. I am of the opinion - "a view, judgment, or appraisel formed in the mind about a particular matter" (Webster's) - that the Bible teaches Jesus is God. This is my opinion, view, thoughts on the Bible. I also believe the Bible teaches it to be a non-negotiable teaching of faith. Now, do is there a problem with my "opinion"? With respect, I surmise that everybody has an opinion, view, thought on the Bible...even you. |
||||||
12 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188494 | ||
... | ||||||
13 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188495 | ||
Jeff, 1. Of course that is my assumption. Is sin in the Bible limited to deeds? If not, then my question would regard sin as all inclusive, that is, sin in word, thought, attitude, and/or deed? You responded, "...true Christians do not 'sin all the time, everyday'. Christians do sin (I certainly do) but not 'all the time'. All the time is as good as saying that it is my lifestyle. It is not my lifestyle to sin. Scripture says that it is not the lifestyle of any Christian to 'sin all the time, every day'." Now, if a genuine Christian does not sin - that is sin in all its forms as discussed above - all the time, everyday, it would appear that there is the possibility that a genuine Christian can spend, at the least, a whole day without sinning. If not, then, it seems to me that a genuine Christian is sinning all the time, everyday. Maybe the phrase "all the time" is confusing. I do not mean every single second (that's why I added "everyday"). What I do mean by "all the time" is the committal of sin - any sin - on a daily basis wherein not one day passes without having engaged in some form of sin, whether in in word, thought, attitude, or deed. 2. As far as your "Biblical guidance", you asserted that "Scripture says that it is not the lifestyle of any Christian to 'sin all the time, every day'," and merely cited Heb 10:26 and 10:19-23. You failed to demonstrate how the verses show your position is valid. 3. Now, if it is agreed that it is the lifestyle of a genuine Christian to not sin, then my question, I don't think, is out of place. If the genuine Christian's lifestyle is to not sin but rather be obedient to God, is it possible that a genuine Christian can be obedient for, at least, a whole day? I was not "rewording" the first question but asking another question based on your response. However, I may have missed something. Please clarify for me how my question is "a far cry from where you began". |
||||||
14 | By What Right Does God Rule Man? | Ps 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188302 | ||
PanJam, You said, "There is another reason, and that is His nature. God is pure, holy, sinless, and righteous. He only is Holy. By that fact, He only has the right to both rule and judge us." I agree. That God is good seems to me to be the overarching (over His being the Creator) and fundamental basis for God's divine right to rule. It does not seem to me that being Creator, in and of itself, does not give God a legitimate right to rule man. A father may beget children but if he is abusive, his children should be taken away from him and his right to parenting them be denied. What do you think? |
||||||
15 | By What Right Does God Rule Man? | Ps 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188303 | ||
See my note #188302. That God is Creator and powerful, to me, does not seem to be a legitimate and fundamental basis for God's right to rule; that God is good, more than anything else, seems to be what establishes God's the right to rule. Your thoughts? |
||||||
16 | By What Right Does God Rule Man? | Ps 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188308 | ||
Hank, My question assumes a Biblical answer will be given. I just asked the question and answered others giving my thoughts on it. See note, #188302. |
||||||
17 | By What Right Does God Rule Man? | Ps 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188309 | ||
Sorry for the confusion, John. I meant to say that God, as Creator, in and of itself, does not give God a legitimate right to rule man. I do believe God has a legitimate right to rule based, above all other reasons, upon his character as good. |
||||||
18 | By What Right Does God Rule Man? | Ps 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 188337 | ||
God was not abusive in giving His Son - something for which he also agreed to do - to pay for our sins in the same way a father is not abusive in letting his son - who volunteered for the armed services - go to war to protect the country. | ||||||
19 | Definition of "Perfect Will of God" | Ps 115:3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 195093 | ||
Doc and Lionheart, With all due respect: (1) I do not see where either posts provide a direct answer to my question. (2) Going down the thread, I do not find a Biblically supported explanation of just what the phrase in question means. I may have missed it somewhere and if so, please be so kind as to direct me. |
||||||
20 | Definition of "Perfect Will of God" | Ps 115:3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 195096 | ||
BradK, thanks for your answer and the Bible verse. 1. What can one understand to be the apostle Paul's intended meaning by the word "perfect"? For example, is the apostle here affirming that God's will is always accomplished in/through the believer and always exactly in the way God wills it to be accomplished? Is the apostle making a distinction between "good," "acceptable," and "perfect"? Or are these terms merely describing one and the same thing, (i.e. God's will)? 2. Considering the context, is the apostle implying that if one does not follow through with his urging - to (a) "to present your bodies," and (b) "not be conformed to this world" - they may fail to do God's will or do it perfectly? Furthermore, can the apostle's use of the word "perfect" mean or emphasize the quality of the act in relation to God's character as, for example, holy and good, and not necessarily the act as an act? |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |