Results 1 - 20 of 27
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: quvmoh Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Creeds and Confessions Needful? | Bible general Archive 4 | quvmoh | 205904 | ||
Greetings, I cannot say about many of the Baptists denominations, but about the Southern Baptists. We adhere to the Baptist Faith and Message, which isn't a Creed but a statement of what we believe. It does summarize and touch on various confessions and creed. As for sola scriptura, the Bible, as in the Old and New testaments, is the only authority of God's word because other so called holy documents fail the test of canonicity. Like the apocrypha, for example, doesn't hold true to prophecy as being scriptural, as well as authors being ambiguous, and many other reasons. The book of mormon isn't concidered to be scripture either, and neither is the koran. The view that many of the churches I have belonged to hold that Christian History, tradition, and even creeds and confessions are good for helping to interpret the scripture, but that they must give leave to the Authority of scripture first. If something with theology or interpretation is inconsistant with the Scripture, you alter the theology or interpretation, not the Bible. Many false beliefs, assumptions, and inconsistant theologies have emerged in the Church as a whole because someone placed another source on equal authority to the Bible. By being sola scriptura, we try to prevent that as much as possible. quvmoh |
||||||
2 | Does Paul contradict Jesus? | NT general | quvmoh | 203047 | ||
One last bit that I intended to mention, but didn't. There are no contradictions in the Bible. Paul doesn't contradict Jesus. Instead, he clarifies what Jesus taught. Every apparent contradiction can be easily explained when viewed with in the context of scripture. Quvmoh |
||||||
3 | Does Paul contradict Jesus? | NT general | quvmoh | 203346 | ||
Wow .. the second epistle of John has 15 chapters??? |
||||||
4 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203273 | ||
It is important who the "Sons of God" were. As John wrote in his 1st epistle, "Beloved how wonderful it is that we are called the Children of God." Paul told the Romans, "We cry out "Abba, Father." Even the author of Hebrews asked "To which of the angels did God say 'Today you are my son, today I have begotten you.'" The implication is that none of the Angels have ever earned that title. To be called a son or a daughter or a child of the Most High is an honor and a pleasure that no being in all of creation or beyond it can ever attain except those who are washed and cleansed by the saving blood of Christ Jesus. While it may seem trivial to some about this issue of who these groups are in this passage in Genesis is referring to, it is vital that we comprehend the damage and insult it is to give our title of Adopted children of God to a being such as an angel whose entire purpose is servitude. The true believers and followers of God through out the Bible are the Children, sons, and daughters of God. No one else is given that title. We don't even deserve it because of our sinful past. Yet through his mercy and grace, we receive it gladly and lovingly, secure in the knowledge that nothing we do will ever change the fact that we are God's beloved children. Quvmoh |
||||||
5 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203294 | ||
I don't want to get into a debate over something such as this, but Angels do not fit the criteria you describe here. Angels don't have dominion over anything. Angels are servants to God. Jesus even says that Angels neither marry, nor are given in marriage. Hebrews, I believe is the book, comes right out and tells us that humans are higher than Angels. If you follow the term "Son(s) of God" through the scripture, you see it is referring to Either human followers of God and Jesus or to Jesus himself. Its simple reading of the context of scripture. To insert Angels as the meaning of this phrase in this passage is a blatant misuse of the Context of Scripture. Quvmoh |
||||||
6 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203302 | ||
But look at the context of the passages. In Genesis 6, in the chapters leading up to it you have the geneologies of Seth and Cain, which have names listed in both ones. You also have afterwards, God preparing for the Flood because Man was wicked. There is no serious mention of Angels at all until Abraham, save for the Angel with the Flaming sword guarding Eden. It makes far greater sense within the Context to interpret this passage as when the two family lines fused into one than two assume that Angels came down for a brief moment to have sex. In Job chapter 1 and 2, the first 5 verses of Job talks about Job and his family gathered together for prayer and worship of God, and Job praying for his Sons. Yet that seems to always be conveniently tossed aside and ignored when leading into verse 6 and beyond. In Luke 20, the context clearly points to humans set up in verses 27-24. Also, I don't know what translation you are using, but in the NASB there is a clear change of thought when it comes to the "sons of God" phrase, and clearly points to the Saved Humans. Luke 20:36 "or they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection." The passages in Romans 8 and Galatians 3 both clearly identify Human believers in Christ. I'll even add one for you. 1 John 3:1 "See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called Children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know him." And another that clearly refutes Angels as being identified as "Sons" or "Children" of God. Hebrews 1:5 "For to which of the angels did He ever say 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten you.'?" Then you have this later on .. Hebrews 5:5 "So also Christ did no glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him 'You are My Son, Today, I have begotten you.'." I'm sorry, Tim Moran, but I cannot in good conscience believe or promote "sons of God" phrases used in the Bible to being in reference to Angels. The Context simply does NOT support it at all. Quvmoh |
||||||
7 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203308 | ||
As I stated earlier, I'm not wanting to argue. I was merely using the passages you quoted to better strengthen my own claims. Quvmoh |
||||||
8 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203309 | ||
I was clarifying the context of the passages he gave, showing that the context supports what I had previously said. I didn't intend to come across as harsh, merely trying to strengthen the support of my claims. Quvmoh |
||||||
9 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203313 | ||
um .. what?? The passage in Luke is stating that angels don't marry, nor die. He's not calling them "sons". He's calling the humans in heaven the "Sons". As for the Nephilim, I have one simple little tiny question. How many Nephilim did Noah take onto the Ark? Quvmoh |
||||||
10 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203314 | ||
I mean no offense to Tim or anyone if I come across as a bit strong. I realize this isn't a critical issue in regards to salvation, but I am convicted to ensure that Context is not taken lightly and that my own claims are within context and well founded. Quvmoh |
||||||
11 | jews,gentiles,ethninticity??? | Genesis | quvmoh | 206258 | ||
There are two primary trains of thought about this. Open genealogies or closed genealogies. The strict and literal that I referred to is the closed genealogies. However, the open says that the genealogies are really outlines, giving us the important figures of the family line which even skip a generation or two between named. Norman Geisler's book, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics goes into far greater detail about this topic than I can provide. As for the figure of 3 million, its an estimate based upon the figures presented in the book of Numbers as well as in Exodus. Exodus 12 says that the journey started with 600,000 men, aside from children, and obviously not including women. The figures in numbers present a total of 2 - 3 million. The introduction to the Book of Numbers in the NASB study Bible gives 2 million as the population count. I've heard it higher from sources like Josh McDowell on tv and others. quvmoh |
||||||
12 | jews,gentiles,ethninticity??? | Genesis | quvmoh | 206276 | ||
I'm not an advocate of evolution in the least. In fact, I'm a creationist. I'm not saying I have the answers, all I'm saying is that there is plenty of time for God and Nature to develop a single family into the multitude of nations and races we have now. quvmoh |
||||||
13 | witnessing to church going homosexuals | Gen 9:25 | quvmoh | 202905 | ||
Greetings, Usually I keep quiet, only reading the comments. However, I feel it is my christian duty to respond to this. There is a saying that floats in my mind. "Care for the Sinner, but hate the Sin." While I would welcome a person into my congregation who has a need to hear the word, I would NOT, under any circumstances, promote, tolerate, embrace, or condone any act that the Bible clearly declares as sinful. While I respect science, progress, and learning, I must disagree with the noted Medical and Psychological associations and say that Homosexuality is a choice. Ultimately, a choice is made to participate, whether that choice is made freely or forcefully. If we compromise our beliefs to accept what the Bible, our primary source of knowing the Will of God, mandates as wrong, then what will be next? What is the next compromise we make? In closing, I'll end with another saying that floats in my mind. "Give a mouse a cookie, he'll want a glass of milk." Quvmoh |
||||||
14 | who was Ezra | Ezra | quvmoh | 203053 | ||
Its more Old Testament history than anything else, but the books of Ezra and Nehemiah both go into detail. Quvmoh |
||||||
15 | Careful Bible Study -- Not Mysticism | Jer 23:16 | quvmoh | 206897 | ||
Your thoughts on this is? How does this one man's comments apply to us today and apply to the Bible? What does the author say afterwards about these observations? What is his advice concerning this? No offense intended, Doc, but .. So what? Quvmoh |
||||||
16 | Careful Bible Study -- Not Mysticism | Jer 23:16 | quvmoh | 206901 | ||
What is wrong with what the response I gave? I want further insight about the copied article. How does it relate to us as Christians Today? How does it relate to the Bible? Why did the poster feel compelled to put that up on the forums? I apologize if my response is offensive. It was not intended to be such. It is intended to get more information. Was the post intended to educate us? Was it intended to encourage conversation? Was it intended to show how resourceful the poster is and how extensive his library is? There is nothing provided but a copied article with the original author's name given. There is nothing else there. No comments. No insights. No scripture verses aside from the one where it is filed in to. Not even a comment about how to copied article relates to the verse in Jeremiah. I applaud Doc on his resourcefulness and the extensiveness of his library. However, how does the copied article relate to this verse in Jeremiah? While it is becoming a Christian not respond at all, it is equally becoming of a Christian to explain what is provided. Quvmoh |
||||||
17 | Careful Bible Study -- Not Mysticism | Jer 23:16 | quvmoh | 206902 | ||
Hank, You're right about one thing. I don't know who Sinclair Ferguson is. I haven't read any of his works and I wouldn't know him if he walked up to me on the street and shook my hand. My post is not to criticize Sinclair Ferguson, but against Doc. What is posted was well thought out and well organized, and I assumed copied well. But I ask again .. So what? As I replied to WOS's comment, How does this article relate to the verse in Jeremiah? I don't know where this article comes from because there isn't a book cited, nor is there a website given, nor is there a date .. nothing. Zilch is given, Hank, about where this comes from other than a Name. All I am asking for is an explanation or insight about how this copied article relates to Jeremiah 23 or vice versa. Is that too much to ask for? This article implies by the title that Bible study is important. How can I study and take it to heart if I don't even know anything about the article or Sinclair Ferguson? What is the context? quvmoh |
||||||
18 | Careful Bible Study -- Not Mysticism | Jer 23:16 | quvmoh | 206922 | ||
... | ||||||
19 | Careful Bible Study -- Not Mysticism | Jer 23:16 | quvmoh | 206955 | ||
... | ||||||
20 | Binding and Losing? | Matt 16:19 | quvmoh | 205990 | ||
After looking back, Agreed, Jesus was directing most of his comments to Peter, but as I pointed out, the context shows that Peter wasn't there by himself. The other disciples were there as well. On a number of occasions, Jesus tells the disciples that they will receive access to greater abilities through the Holy Spirit. So while it's directed at Peter, it does not negate the fact that others were listening and would have applied the message to themselves as well. Peter wasn't the only Disciple after the Resurrection to have performed miracles and wonders. quvmoh |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |