Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: Theopnuestos Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Meaning of Spirit filled | Bible general Archive 1 | Theopnuestos | 40461 | ||
"want His truth more then the thrill of beating someone into submission of letting you believe what is wrong by being willing to say whatever is needed to do so, without caring whither or not what you say is true." There are some very serious accusations here which you make without any knowledge as to the truth of them. "Beating someone into submission" is not my purpose here, and I do care about what I am saying as to its truthfulness. Does "thou shalt not bear false witness" mean anything to you? This commandment sets forth the vital importance of truth. Yet accusations are made without any demonstratable knowledge as to whether they are truthful or not. Secondly, since this is a personal attack, I guess you didn't read the four questions at the bottom this time! Have a nice day - I will not be replying to this thread anymore. You seem convinced that any action is warranted in defense of your views. You seem satisfied that you are justified to levy false accustaions, accusing someone of lying by design, et. al. The point I made I supported with careful textual fidelity. Needless to say, I will not be falsely accused in public without accountability. You have levied a charge of deceitfulness by design in order to support my point. I charge you to present your evidence. If you cannot present objective, valid evidence, I expect an apology. Have a nice life and repent. Matt. |
||||||
2 | Meaning of Spirit filled | Bible general Archive 1 | Theopnuestos | 40462 | ||
Hadn't forgot about your post - in the middle of moving and have less time to research my answers. Will get back to you on this soon! Thanks for your patience! | ||||||
3 | Meaning of Spirit filled | Bible general Archive 1 | Theopnuestos | 40182 | ||
How you were able to make a comprehensive psychological profile and motive evaluation from my post is amazing. From my post you discerned that "I think myself better than others." How did you come to that conclusion? What evidences did you observe that left you with no other rational choice but to label me as one "Who thinks himself better than others?" To say it is not a good answer is one thing. Why is it not a good answer? Was not the textual interpretation correct? I do not see why you do not accept it other than you thinking it is not a good answer. "Your answer to my other question seems to be you find it hard to change or that you believe Spirit fullness is a black or white deal." I am still waiting for evidence which results in that conclusion. The texts you originally listed do not support your conclusions. "Your answer to my other question seems to be you find it hard to change..." Yes, I do find it hard to change from a rational understanding to an unfounded one. This thread is going no where. "you have mountain moving faith because the Spirit is totally free in you" I choose the latter - because, regardless of what you or I think the Spirit is totally free to do what He designs. God is primarily concerned about His own happiness, so He will remain free - because He totally is! What you or I think about it is irrelevant - the Spirit is free! The Spirit also possesses mountain moving faith - I possess that which He has ordained for me to possess at any one time. Whether that be mountain moving faith or whatever - it all comes from Him. The truth is, I possessed no faith - and now I do. That's that. "hope you can see why its not a good answer" Don't see it, sorry. Can't - no evidences provided to support your claims. To expect me to accept your position without any rational explaination is unfair - how am I able to make any decision with such a lack of proof? Regards, Matt. |
||||||
4 | Meaning of Spirit filled | Bible general Archive 1 | Theopnuestos | 39942 | ||
I have an article which I believe is recommended reading for everybody titled "Guidelines for Godly Dispute." I also recommend B.B. Warfield's "The Dogmatic Spirit." After several character assaults you proceed with your premise which you claim supports your conclusion that there are varying levels of the "Spirit" which one can have. Just a little argumentum ad hominem to start your post, eh? You seem to know the contents of Eph. 4:30 - Did you read 4:29, 4:31-33 also? Just in case you missed them, here they are: "29 Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. 30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. 32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." Reading Eph. 4:30 "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." what I hear is stop doing those things Paul just mentioned. There is no information at all in this text that tells me anything about "spirit-filled"-ness or any degrees of "spirituality." 1 Thes. 5:19 simply tells me not to quench the Spirit. In what way am I not to quench the Spirit, what is quenching the Spirit? I find Matthew Henry's comments on Eph. 4:30 to be helpful with understanding this text - "In the midst of these exhortations and cautions the apostle interposes that general one, And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, v. 30. By looking to what precedes, and to what follows, we may see what it is that grieves the Spirit of God. In the previous verses it is intimated that all lewdness and filthiness, lying, and corrupt communications that stir up filthy appetites and lusts, grieve the Spirit of God. In what follows it is intimated that those corrupt passions of bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, and malice, grieve this good Spirit. By this we are not to understand that this blessed Being could properly be grieved or vexed as we are; but the design of the exhortation is that we act not towards him in such a manner as is wont to be grievous and disquieting to our fellow-creatures: we must not do that which is contrary to his holy nature and his will; we must not refuse to hearken to his counsels, nor rebel against his government, which things would provoke him to act towards us as men are wont to do towards those with whom they are displeased and grieved, withdrawing themselves and their wonted kindness from such, and abandoning them to their enemies." The quenching of the Spirit refers to suppressing the conviction, instruction and correction of the Spirit. Do not sear your conscience - do not disregard or ignore the feelings of guilt you have over your sins. The inference of the "Spirit-filled" philosophy is that the "power" available to us waxes or wanes in proportion to our "spirituality." This thought cannot be obtained from the TEXT of Sacred Scripture. If you want that RTF document, "Guidelines for Godly Dispute," let me know by sending an email to theopnuestos@hotmail.com. I apologize for the use of the word "crappy." It is just one of those words which don't "ping on my radar", but I can see how others may be offended by it. Let's replace "crappy" with "unsupported conclusions." I read all 4 and can honestly say YES! Regards, Matt. |
||||||
5 | Are you refuting or adding information? | Rom 13:1 | Theopnuestos | 39388 | ||
"If only all Marines (and other servicemen) would submit to the Law of God." - Amen. "Had the last lawful order given by a CO been to "attack" you would have done so. Am I right?" The short answer, right. ...AND I can follow two orders from two different authorities at the same time so long as they do not conflict. However, once I stepped off the boat, I was under the authority of the Prime Minister of England, The King of Norway, and whatever they have in Germany and Holland(PMs?). If I violated the law I was under the power of that ruler. That of course does not take into account any State Department or Defense Department discussions which may follow. These would be negotiations after the fact. But here is the crux of the issue a I see it - The instruction that "you cannot serve two masters" is the summation of a teaching regarding personal motives - those that are done for personal gratification versus those that are done to please the Father - Christ said that we cannot "serve two masters" at once within the context of teaching about what our heart's attitude should be when - praying in private instead in public to be seen, letting our demeaner go while we fast so that others will know we are fasting, drawing attention to our giving to the poor, the storing up of treasure on earth instead of heaven "for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. " ... "No one can serve two masters - for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth." This is what I mean by "master of our affections." Do we love the attention we get when others see our charitable deeds? Or do we love pleasing the Father who would have us hide our actions from man and give it to Him as a gift of a child's expression of love for his Father? Think about those telethons for charitable organizations. Has it ever struck you why anybody would pay an exhorbitant price to have their named engaved, embossed, cut into stone or what-have-you for the priveledge of being associated with some great charitable or historical event? Vanity! People love to feel good about charitable giving! It is the top reason people give to charities. And the charitable organizations know it. "So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full." "But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal - for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." We obey the civil authorities because we want to obey God - for this is pleasing to Him. The operative words are "we want to." I hope I stayed on thread - it seemed to travel there a bit. I'll have to sign off on this one for now - doing the big move and will be packing up pc's soon! Matt. |
||||||
6 | invitation to salvation/accepting Christ | Bible general Archive 1 | Theopnuestos | 39293 | ||
While my post focused on the attention to doctrine, I too am somewhat in agreement with you. God also created our emotions and that definitely falls into the category of loving the Lord with our all. During a sermon, when convicted of sin in my life, I cry, when I am reminded of the assurances He has given us of my eternal place with Him, I am filled with joy. I love the sound of clapping during music that is upbeat and exhalting of Him. And I am struck with awe every time a sinner repents. Our emotions have every place in the worship service, as do our minds. The thrust is to restore that balance from it tipping to far into "feel good" worship. I also believe in the singing of songs such as Isaac Watts "Alas! And Did My Savior Bleed?", particularly the version before is was PC'd up, that is the original that uses "worm" instead of today's politically correct version which uses sinner." "Alas! and did my Savior bleed And did my Sovereign die? Would He devote that sacred head For such a worm as I?" See Job 25:4-6 for worm reference. I want to hear all that God has said of us and to us - "I would see Jesus". If He called Peter Satan, and rebuked His disciples as well as the Pharisees, then what benefit is it to us to only be exposed to the "positives." Our knowledge of our sin moves us to seek to hide under His wing and consequently, sanctification. When we see how great our wickedness, then the brightness of His forgiveness illuminates our hearts with great hope! Regarding the side thread of accepting salvation, I missed a reference - The references you cited don't provide any information regarding the role of this type of invitation in a worship service. The first speaks of the hearts attitude; the second speaks of the adoption of the saved, there change of relationship status that is; the third is in regards to the surety of our salvation, the fourth has me perplexed why you quote that one. Paul's forgiveness he received as an example for the depth of forgiveness we should exhibit? Is that the reference? All of everything that God declared good at our creation should be given to Him in our sacrifice of praise, our minds as well as our emotions. Our emotions should be tempered by a clear, rational cogent understanding of God. We should not supplant the rational understanding with emotionalism. But, rather both should be present with the emotions filtered by a proper perspective of the Father. To regard God other than who He is is to engage in idolatry. That is one of the chief errors of emotionalism. There is also the element of that which is edifying. Jubilant celebration of which the type most commonly associated with these types of worship services(ongoing altar call) has its proper context. The sabbath service should be devoted to the proclamation of the word of God for that is when you are most likely to have the unregenerate in the congregation. If they wanted John 3:16, then would turn on ESPN and look in the stands - what they need to hear is God's righteous standard by which He will judge all the world AND God's answer to that. Not just God's answer. The unregenrate or new Christian is "unchurched" and does not understand - the care of nurture should be the ministry of the congregation. Gathered together with the visible church, it is better to sacrifice than to seek after one's own. I referred to conviction of sin, there must be the preaching of what God has declared as sin. We must be constantly(Ps 1:1-3, Mt. 4:4) be exposed to the standard of righteousness to shed the light of that righteousness on our darkness. We must be exposed to light then given an outlet to rejoice when we have turned - that outlet is our emotions which when given with a contrite heart is a sweet smelling aroma to Him. Ps 51:17 "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise." That, to me, is balance. Your servant, Matt. References(all [NIV]): Job 25:4-6 How then can a man be righteous before God? How can one born of woman be pure? If even the moon is not bright and the stars are not pure in his eyes, how much less man, who is but a maggot- a son of man, who is only a worm!" Ps. 1:1-3 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. But his delight is in the law of the Lord , and on his law he meditates DAY and NIGHT.[emphasis mine] He is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither. Whatever he does prospers. Mt. 4:3-4 The tempter came to him and said, If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread. Jesus answered, It is written: Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God. Ps 51:17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise. |
||||||
7 | Submit to all authority | Rom 13:1 | Theopnuestos | 38950 | ||
"No man can serve two masters" - I get the point of this but when you go to another country you are under the authority of that other master. You must obey his laws also. I serve many masters - my boss, my representative, senator, governor, and president! And, of course, the Lord God Omnipotent! I am not under his laws in my own country, of course, but when I am within his borders I am simultaneously under both - for I must obey the local laws, even as a citizen of another country, and represent my own "master" well as his servant also. When I was in the Marine Corps - I was under a truck load of masters - and when we went to Norway I was under every authority of every government we visited - England, Holland, Germany and Norway - at the same time I was under authority of the Corporal, the Sergeant, my Staff Sergeant, my Gunnery Sergeant, my Master Sergeant, my Chief Master Sergeant, my Leuitenant, Captain, Major, Colonel, General, Commandant of the Marine Corps, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of Defense, President, and Christ! So we do serve many masters, but we cannot serve masters of opposing requirements - Christ was referring to "masters of our affections." Hope this helps. Soli Deo Gloria, Matt. |
||||||