Results 1 - 20 of 22
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: savedsince1980 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | free will or predestine ? | Bible general Archive 4 | savedsince1980 | 217798 | ||
That's difficult (for me), finding passages that support a false doctrine. But, here goes...when I was a Baptist (for about a year, in 1980) they taught us free will and once-saved-always-saved. I cannot recall one scripture they quoted to support the free will doctrine. How about Matt. 26:39? Jesus shoes us that he has a free will. I think that people have a free will to reject Jesus. But, I don't think they have a free will to accept Jesus. They have to be called first. This is a hard saying. | ||||||
2 | Christ did not do away with the tithe | Gen 14:20 | savedsince1980 | 217769 | ||
But, Jesus himself was walking under the law. The new covenant was not instituted until his death and resurrection. If tithing is important why is is not even mentioned at the council in Jerusalem (Acts 10) which was deciding which laws to tell THE GENTILES it was necessary to obey? | ||||||
3 | Christ did not do away with the tithe | Gen 14:20 | savedsince1980 | 217786 | ||
... | ||||||
4 | Christ did not do away with the tithe | Gen 14:20 | savedsince1980 | 217789 | ||
Maybe I should have said that teaching tithing is heretical. If an individual's conscience tells him/her to tithe (give a tenth), then that's not heresy. What is heresy is teaching that others should tithe. This is equivalent to what Jesus said in Matt. 23:4...For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (KJV) The modern-day Pharisees, often trained in seminaries and bible colleges, spout tithing as if it's straight from the Lord when, in fact, it is a tradition taught to them by men/women who missed the whole point of tithing in the first place. (Reread Gen. 14:20 carefully.) | ||||||
5 | Tithing before Mosaic Law | Gen 14:20 | savedsince1980 | 217790 | ||
Maybe I responded to a response, not to your original post. | ||||||
6 | Tithing before Mosaic Law | Gen 14:20 | savedsince1980 | 217849 | ||
My point is that, just because somebody (even Abram) did something before the Law it doesn't mean that it is something that Christian believers should be doing today. I could name a long list of things that Abram did that we don't do today. The foundation for tithing is extremely weak. | ||||||
7 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | savedsince1980 | 217850 | ||
I don't owe her an apology since I haven't spoken with her. I just stated an opinion. She obviously doesn't like it when you talk about her boss. | ||||||
8 | Why does Jesus have mercy on Demons? | Mark 5:13 | savedsince1980 | 217910 | ||
God's day to you also. In my opinion, each of the gospel accounts is in chronological order within itself. To see how they relate to each other you have use a chronological bible or at least a chronological gospel harmony. The one I just checked (see here: http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/harmony/ ) places Mark 5:1-19 after Mark 1:34. In my opinion, their time was not up. The punishment of fallen angels and demons is still in the future. In my opinion, different demons require different techniques. As you may recall the kind of demon that causes psychotic and/or epileptic behavior (see Matt. 17:14-21) requires both fasting and prayer to expel. I don't know why that is. In my opinion, it is a tougher demon, possibly higher up in the pecking order so to speak. | ||||||
9 | Why does Jesus have mercy on Demons? | Mark 5:13 | savedsince1980 | 217914 | ||
That's why I said "in my opinion." It's a qualifier that makes it clear that I am not quoting a scripture, kind of like what the Apostle Paul wrote "But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment." (1 Cor. 7:6.) He was expressing his opinion that unmarried people should remain unmarried. How often do you hear that preached in church? But, it was after all just his opinion, not the word of the Lord. | ||||||
10 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217859 | ||
Where should we derive doctrine then? From the opinions of man? Or from the plain and easy-to-understand word of God? | ||||||
11 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217866 | ||
Then, is what I said not correct? | ||||||
12 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217870 | ||
I think that's where you and I differ. I believe that the entire bible, all 66 canonical books, are inspired (literally "God breathed.) Acts isn't simply an historcial narrative to me. It's the word of God, and therefore a fact and not an opinion. | ||||||
13 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217880 | ||
The Apostle Paul would disagree with BradK or Doc. See here: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Tim. 3:16-17 KJV) He didn't say "some scripture" or "most scripture." Also, the lieral translation of "given by inspiration of God" is "God-breathed." So, all that remains is the decision to believe that the bible is "God-breathed." Otherwise wwhy even bother reading it? There are thousands of other books out there that aren't God-breathed. | ||||||
14 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217881 | ||
The hermeneutic principle has to be subordinated to the literal, plain message contained in the scriptures. Remember that the hermeneutic principal is manmade, not God-breathed. In every case where the hermeneutic principal alters the plain message the hermeneutic principal should be discarded. I have little regard for manmade contrivances such as dispensationalism. | ||||||
15 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217884 | ||
Had David been anointed king yet? Was there a law against polygamy? | ||||||
16 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217887 | ||
No. But, if David executed a man after he was anointed the king by Samuel, and the king made the laws, then David didn't sin. He was the law. If you can remind me of the chapter and verse I'll take a look at it. You're not talking about Uriah are you? Mark |
||||||
17 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217891 | ||
Agreed. But, the narrative says that. I doubt anybody would follow that example given the outcome. Mark |
||||||
18 | Should I get baptized again? | Acts | savedsince1980 | 217892 | ||
But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee: (Deu. 20:17 KJV) David sinned because he comitted adultery. He didn't sin because he had Uriah killed. Uriah was already under a death senttence from God (see above.) Mark |
||||||
19 | Is Desiderata in the Bible? | Romans | savedsince1980 | 217933 | ||
You believe the Latin Vulgate? That translation is based upon the defective Alexandrian manuscripts. | ||||||
20 | Is Desiderata in the Bible? | Romans | savedsince1980 | 217934 | ||
It's amazing how many people think certain sayings like "God helps him who helps himself" are in the bible. It speaks of a general illiteracy and non-desire to really know the bible. Yeah, "kids" don't know a whole lot yet. | ||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |