Results 1 - 20 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Inability? | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 93663 | ||
JibbyJee: Congratulations! You have succeeded in being insulting and condescending to several of the most trusted, trustworthy, respected, proven, and scripturally accurate members of this forum. CAUTION: Posting to the Forum is not a right; it is a privilege. To abuse it is to lose it. Radioman2 |
||||||
2 | is it wrong to date or marry outside of | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 94881 | ||
Chief Exponent of Name It and Claim It Frederick K. C. Price 'Fred Price is the most notable of a growing number of black prosperity preachers. His church in Los Angeles now claims some 16,000 members. He is seen nationally on television and has referred to himself as the "chief exponent of Name It and Claim It."[33] Price has added his own unique twists to Faith theology by asserting that Jesus took on the nature of Satan prior to the crucifixion[34] and by claiming that the Lord's Prayer is not for Christians today.[35] Despite telling his followers that he doesn't allow sickness in his home, Price's wife has been treated for cancer in her pelvic area.[36] Referring to his wealth, Price says the reason he drives a Rolls Royce is that he is following in Jesus' steps.[37]' ____________________ NOTES 33 Frederick K. C. Price, "Name It and Claim It! What Saith the WORD? . . ," Ever Increasing Faith Messenger, Summer 1989, 2. 34 Frederick K. C. Price, "Identification #3" (Inglewood, CA: Ever Increasing Faith Ministries, 1980), audio tape #FP545, side 1. 35 Frederick K. C. Price, personal correspondence, 14 October 1992. 36 Pat Hays, "Betty Price Speaks at 1991 'Wisdom from Above' Luncheon," Ever Increasing Faith Messenger, Winter 1992,12-13. 37 Frederick K. C. Price, Ever Increasing Faith (television program), TBN, 9 December 1990, available from Crenshaw Christian Center, Inglewood, CA (audio tape #CR-A2). (http://www.equip.org/free/DC755-1.htm) |
||||||
3 | is it wrong to date or marry outside of | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 94893 | ||
Vehoka: Nowhere does the New Testament prohibit interracial marriage. Even in the OT, the prohibition against Jews marrying Gentiles was for religious -- not racial -- reasons, i.e., so as not to mingle idol worship with the worship of YHWH and so corrupt Israel. (By the way, I have no personal feelings toward Price. Nor did I post my opinion. What I posted is a quote from www.equip.org/free/DC755-1.htm/) Any and all forms of racism are offensive, reprehensible and just plain wrong. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
4 | The Problem with WoF in a nutshell | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95107 | ||
Vehoka: No, I was not referring to you in my post, ID# 95027. In the last 365 days, I have submitted 137 posts regarding the Word Faith movement. In all that time, there have been many, many WOF advocates who have posted to the Forum. In the past week there has been much conflict with user gracefull over the WOF issue. I definitely did not have you in mind when I submitted the Note to which you refer. I do not lie. I did not lie to you. I do not see one word of anyone's "opinion" in my Note, ID# 94881. What I see are facts re Fred Price -- documented and verifiable facts. So it is not a matter of me agreeing with someone's opinion. I merely accepted the verifiable and documented facts I quoted. Even if it were opinion, which it was not, quoting someone else's opinion and agreeing with it is not the same as writing my own opinion. As far as issuing disclaimers with my posts, I do so when necessary. I.e., when I have no scriptural or other factual basis for what I post, I label my opinion as opinion. I do not normally post anything that I cannot back up with Scripture or other factual evidence. I am not given to speculating on the Word of God. Once again, I was not referring to you when I said, "...some of the WOF advocates here on this forum thought I was criticizing...". Since I wasn't referring to you, then I made no assumptions about you. I took what you previously posted at face value and hoped that you took what I said at face value. I never even thought you were an "advocate" of the WOF. Nothing you have posted would indicate to me that you were. As far as having a kinder, gentler attitude toward the purveyors of heresy and blasphemy, see Hanks post, ID#95082. I agree with him. I have no reason to bear any ill will toward you. I'm sorry If you interpreted anything I wrote as being hostile toward you. I regret that there has been a misunderstanding regarding my motives and intentions. I welcome you to the forum. Grace and peace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
5 | The Problem with WoF in a nutshell | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95135 | ||
Hank: The idea (implied) that we are better off without the Bible and that experience and faith are somehow superior to the Bible is one of the oddest notions I've ever heard. Without the Bible, how do we know who or what to have faith in? "It wasn't until men began translating the bible...that there were difficulties with understanding what God has said...When you operate in the spirit, there is no need for translation." What's that supposed to mean? That ignorance is bliss? It sounds like he's saying that the Word of God is a hindrance to understanding what God has said. This is even more confusing when we consider that the Bible is the record of WHAT GOD HAS SAID. "When you operate in the spirit, there is no need for translation." Contrary to widespread opinion, there is no conflict between the Bible and the Holy Spirit. All we know of the Holy Spirit is contained in the Word of God. I give up! I guess we're living in the bizarro world where up is down and down is up. Sign me Bewildered, Radioman2 |
||||||
6 | The Problem with WoF in a nutshell | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95174 | ||
apostoloB: "Once again I caution you, judging the intent of a man's heart is a treacherous road to travel." Jesus: "for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." Mt 12:34b |
||||||
7 | The Problem with WoF in a nutshell | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95179 | ||
Truthfinder: Perhaps what we need is a translation of what apostoloB wrote. You write that you have not even read a single post of the pro-WOF posts. Good idea! I, myself, make a practice of not following the ceaseless and interminable threads regarding Calvinism vs non-Calvinism. Radioman2 |
||||||
8 | cronology of names in bible | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95675 | ||
EdB: I agree. Gbennett has made a fool of himself by his rude and obnoxious harrassment of the forum. His attitude and behavior in flooding the forum with posts and deliberately violating the forum's intentions by repeatedly re-registering and posting under new user names is offensive to all decent readers of this forum. He has discredited and disgraced not only himself, but Mormons everywhere. Yes, Ed, he did us a favor by presenting the true picture of Mormonism -- deceit, trickery and manipulation. By any definition, the Mormon church (LDS) is a cult. Radioman2 |
||||||
9 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95715 | ||
Joe: Not to disagree with you, but just to shed further light on this subject, I submit the following for the consideration of all: 'A common problem among interpreters of the Bible is that of "shifting gears". If a person approaches his interpretation of the Bible with, for example, a face value hermeneutic, then it is critical that he remain consistent with his approach. However, many often "flip flop" in their interpretation approach to maintain a preconceived understanding of a text. An example of this is the above. Preterists interpret "this generation" in the simple sense as meaning the generation concurrent with Christ and then suddenly "shift gears" and apply a figurative approach to arrive at a spiritualized understanding of the Rapture and the resurrection. That is an inconsistent hermeneutic and leads to error.' ____________________ (Did Jesus Already Return in AD 70? By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner) (http://www.solagroup.org/articles/endtimes/et_0003.html) Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
10 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95718 | ||
Darcy! Good point! And once someone says that the historical, grammatical meaning of the Scripture is not the true meaning, then he makes it impossible to ascertain what the meaning is. Because if we cannot understand the text by the normal use of English words and grammar, how would we ever know what it meant? Which is not to say that the Bible doesn't use figurative language. It does. And it's usually plain and clear in the context when figurative language is being used. It's like the old saying regarding Bible interpretation: When the plain (or literal) sense makes good sense seek no other sense lest it be nonsense. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
11 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95727 | ||
Darcy: I agree with you when you write: "I believe there is more than one level to a verse For example the sacrifies were a type of Christ. But get the first level right before you even attempt to get to the second level." That's exactly where many people err. They are so eager to jump on the application of a verse that they skip over the first two steps, which are to determine: 1. What does this passage of Scripture SAY? 2. What does it MEAN? What did it mean to the people living at the time when this was first written? What does it mean according to the words used and according to the context? If one doesn't take these steps in order, then one will likely err in the third part, which is application, i.e., what is the practical application for us today? Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
12 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95963 | ||
Part 1 Did Jesus Already Return in AD 70? 'By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner '"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." Matthew 24:34 'The above passage is found in what is referred to as the Olivet Discourse of Jesus given a few days before Christ's crucifixion. The context for Matthew 24:34 is Jesus' response to the questions of the disciples regarding His return and the end of the age. There are those in the church of Jesus Christ who understand "this generation" to refer to the generation to whom Jesus was speaking the day He gave the discourse. 'The apostle Paul recognized this error and warned Timothy of it when he wrote, "But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, and...spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some." (2 Tim. 2:16-18) 'Today, there is a resurgence of this teaching known as preterism. The term preterism comes from the Latin word praeterism and means "past" or already gone by. The basic teaching of preterism is that the great tribulation has already occured in the distant past, principally at AD 70. Those who hold to this teaching are known specifically as full preterists. There is another subgroup of preterists known as partial or moderate preterists. This latter group sees parts of the Olivet Discourse, or Jesus' teaching on end times, as partially fulfilled in AD 70 but other parts as yet to be fulfilled at the second parousia of Christ. Several efforts have been made to establish preterism as historically sound and biblical but the clear warning of Paul reminds us that it is an heretical and false teaching. The following reasons are offered to the student of Scripture and prophecy for consideration. Be a Berean (Acts 17:11) and examine the Word to "see if these things are so."' ____________________ To read the rest of this article and find out what "the following reasons" are, go to (www.solagroup.org/articles/endtimes/et_0003.html) - - - - - - - - - - - - - --Radioman2 |
||||||
13 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 95965 | ||
Part 2 'Did Jesus Already Return in AD 70? 'If the Rapture "has already taken place", then the resurrection has already taken place. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15 writes of the day when the final "trumpet" for believers will be blown and mortality will put on immortality. In this passage, he links the Rapture with the resurrection of believers. In other words, when the Rapture takes place, the resurrection occurs. 'Those who insist that the events of Matthew 24 are history and say that the "generation that sees these things" was the generation concurrent with Jesus nearly 2,000 years ago, must of necessity show that the resurrection has also taken place. The only way that is possible is to spiritualize the text by saying that the resurrection was a spiritual one and not a physical one. 'Moderate (or partial) preterist, R.C. Sproul recognizes this when he says, To maintain that these events [the Olivet teaching] were indeed fulfilled in the first century, one must interpret the relevant passages in a way that makes early fulfillment possible. The most severe obstacle [to that] is the absence of any historical record that the rapture of the living and the resurrection of the dead occurred. (R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, Baker Books, 1998, pg 161) 'There are two serious problems with understanding the resurrection as a "spiritual" event. R.C. Sproul says, The first difficulty is that it [Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 15] involves propositions and assertions that can be neither verified nor falsified empirically. ... if one announces or predicts things that will take place in the arena of real history involving physical reality, then empirical verification becomes relevant and crucial...It is unfortunate that the apostle failed to alert the Corinthians-and us, by extension-that he was speaking of a secret, hidden, spiritual resurrection. His language certainly suggests something else, particularly as Paul so clearly conjoins the resurrection of our bodies with the resurrection of Christ's body. The resurrected Christ is the firstfruits of all who will be raised. (R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, Baker Books, 1998, pg 162) 'And what was the resurrected body of Jesus like? First, the tomb was empty. In other words, there was a physical body in it but on the day of His resurrection, it became empty. A body had departed from it. Second, he had a glorified body. It was different from His previous mortal body, but it was the same body. Third, Jesus was visible to the disciples until the time He ascended and was touched by them and ate with them. Christ's resurrected body was a physical body, not a spiritualized one. 'A theological problem with a spiritualized understanding of the resurrection is likewise addressed by R.C. Sproul - If a spiritual body cannot be seen, touched, or handled, is it a body at all? It is one thing to say that our resurrected bodies will be spiritiual bodies, but quite another to imply that our resurrected bodies will be merely spirits. The Bible speaks of spiritual bodies. (R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, Baker Books, 1998, pg 164) 'A common problem among interpreters of the Bible is that of "shifting gears". If a person approaches his interpretation of the Bible with, for example, a face value hermeneutic, then it is critical that he remain consistent with his approach. However, many often "flip flop" in their interpretation approach to maintain a preconceived understanding of a text. An example of this is the above. Preterists interpret "this generation" in the simple sense as meaning the generation concurrent with Christ and then suddenly "shift gears" and apply a figurative approach to arrive at a spiritualized understanding of the Rapture and the resurrection. That is an inconsistent hermeneutic and leads to error. 'When spiritualization is introduced into one's interpretation, Pandora's box is opened and various meanings can be understood. The only way the integrity of the Author/author's wording and meaning can be preserved is by taking Scripture at face value. Taking Scripture at face value means that the student of Scripture recognizes the difference between what can be called the "simple sense" of a passage and what is understood as a literal understanding. A literal understanding includes the examination of the historical/cultural and lexical/syntactical considerations. It also recognizes symbols and figures of speech and realizes there is a referent for them. For further information on hermeneutical principles, see the "links" section of this website for an explanation. (Did Jesus Already Return in AD 70? By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner) (http://www.solagroup.org/articles/endtimes/et_0003.html) - - - - - - - - - - - - - --Radioman2 |
||||||
14 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96010 | ||
pre-, mid-, post-trib rapture, premill, preterism, predestination, election, cessation of the charismatic gifts, baptism for adults or infants... 'Secondary Non-Essentials 'The [following] subjects . . . whether affirmed or denied have no bearing on the status of a person before God. They are opinions, various positions held. Unfortunately, it is in these non essentials that many denominational differences result. 'SUBJECT '- Predestination, election, limited atonement, and free will '- Communion every week, monthly, or quarterly, etc. '- Saturday or Sunday Worship '- Pre, mid, post trib rapture. '- Premill, Amill, post millenialism, preterism. '- Continuation or cessation of the charismatic gifts '- Baptism for adults or infants 'IMPORTANCE Secondary Non-Essentials Any of them can be denied, or affirmed, and regeneration is not in question. 'RELIGIOUS GROUPS 'Denomination Division Denominational differences often result due to these issues.' ____________________ Adapted from Doctrine Grid (www.carm.org/doctrine/grid.htm) --Radioman2 [nonessentials] |
||||||
15 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96024 | ||
Suede: My sincere thanks to you for taking the time to provide more detailed information on why you believe what you believe. I find your posts interesting and educational. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
16 | Was Jesus born a Pharisee? | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96249 | ||
Do you have one or more specific Scripture references to back up your assertions? --Radioman2 |
||||||
17 | Prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) who is he? | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96254 | ||
Do you have one or more specific Scripture references to back up your assertions? --Radioman2 |
||||||
18 | Were not all Jews of Jesus's time either | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96255 | ||
Do you have one or more specific Scripture references to back up your assertions? Also, what are "TECTONS"? --Radioman2 |
||||||
19 | Were not all Jews of Jesus's time either | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 96274 | ||
OK! Thanks for providing the answer to my question. I honestly did not know what tectons were. It didn't occur to me that the word might be Greek and not English. :-) --Radioman2 |
||||||
20 | why God denied cain's offering not ables | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 99454 | ||
Where would Cain get a copy of the first-century Letter to the Romans? | ||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [40] >> |