Results 121 - 140 of 6029
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: DocTrinsograce Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
121 | God hates divorce | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203355 | ||
Dear upset, A sold Bible believing church will be confessional... they will explicitly state their beliefs. Here are some that I'd vouch for: http://www.founders.org/misc/chlist/ Ma'am, believers understand that our sins are covered by the blood of Jesus. We are not going to heaven because of our perfect lives, we are going to heaven because of our perfect Savior. I can assure you that many of us have been saved from far worse sins. Believers understand that God has been incredibly lavish in His forgiveness. If a perfect and holy God is satisfied by the atonement of Christ, believers understand that they cannot possibly hold anyone to a higher standard. In Him, Doc |
||||||
122 | Specify religion Jesus Christ an angel. | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203381 | ||
If that's the worst mistake you've made through hast, I can beat it! Once, in my hast, I posted that Spurgeon said, "...let us live and die with Jim..." :-) Let's eliminate all hast... and let's do it post-haste! | ||||||
123 | God hates divorce | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203407 | ||
Hi, justme... The Lord does not call those to minister in offices of His church without providentially preparing them to be fit for that calling (1 Corinthians 12:18). The church simply affirms God's choosing, and He makes His choice clear by making them suitable. All members must minister, but not all members minister in the same capacity (1 Corinthians 12:28-30). Each member's ministry, though differing from the ministry of other members, is nevertheless honorable and essential (1 Corinthians 12:21-25). In Him, Doc |
||||||
124 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203427 | ||
Dear Cheri, Sabatarians alone insist that "He has never rescinded this ordination." Sabatarians are enormously in the minority when it comes to this opinion. Please do not make blanket statements as though they are undisputed. That is a practice both presumptuous and misleading. The Baptist divines asserted the following -- based on the Scriptures -- an expression shared by the majority of Christendom, "As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by His Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, He hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto Him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord's day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished. (Exodus 20:8; 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2; Acts 20:7; Revelation 1:10)" In Him, Doc |
||||||
125 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203432 | ||
The verses in parenthesis were the basis of these God-led decisions of the church. I'll take the church's Godly, Holy Spirit, Bible based understanding of the Scriptures over Sabbatarian sects and Judaizers in half a heartbeat! Give me the blood-purchased church over cults any day. "Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to think of ways that you can expound Scripture without assistance from the works of divines and learned men who have labored before you in the field of exposition. If you are of that opinion, pray remain so, for you are not worth the trouble of conversion, and like a little coterie who think with you, would resent the attempt as an insult to your infallibility. It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others." --Charles Spurgeon "And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ... so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes." (Ephesians 4:11, 12, 14 ESV) |
||||||
126 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203440 | ||
Dear Cheri, You wrote, "They were performing sacrifices at that time -- Paul completed a vow..." The vow is referenced in Acts 18:18. Where does it say that a sacrifice was associated with that vow? Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, 'Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.'" When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law), then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second. (Hebrews 10:5-9 ESV) With the infinite superiority of Christ's sacrifice, why would you suppose that an apostle would bother with a sacrifice of the old covenant? Especially the apostle who probably wrote these preceding words, as well as the following words: O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain? Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law (Galatians 3:1-5a ESV) To have offered up a Sacrifice would have repudiated to one and all the gospel that Paul preached. In Him, Doc |
||||||
127 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203445 | ||
Dear Cheri, You wrote, "I don't know of anywhere where it un-says it." The question is whether the observation of the Sabbath is binding on believers, as Judaizers claim. The verses indicating that it is not binding are as follows: Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2; Colossians 2:16-17; Revelation 1:10. Barnabas (one of the apostles mentioned in Acts 14:14) wrote -- in keeping with the teachings of Paul already cited today (post #203440) -- "[The Lord] says to them, 'Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure.' [Isaiah 1:13; cf Lamentations 2:6] Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but [rather] that which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day [Sunday] with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens." (cf Hebrews 4:7-10) In Him, Doc |
||||||
128 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203449 | ||
Dear Cheri, In answer: posts 202150, 203420, and 203428. Contending for the truth is not "arguing" (Jude 3). The Scripture is about truth (John 17:17). We are to be good stewards of that truth (Matthew 13:51-52), especially when we are speaking publicly (Matthew 12:36; James 3:1; Titus 1:13-15). God forbid that we lead anyone astray by a casual approach to our choice of words (Luke 17:1-2; 1 Corinthians 8:11-12). Our love is demonstrated by holding one another accountable to the truth (1 Corinthians 13:6; 2 Timothy 4:2), for that it is not only commanded, but it is also modeled by our Lord (Revelation 3:19). Now, please read posts 182013 and 203448 closely. You have brethren who are earnestly seeking to honor the Lord in keeping of the Christian Sabbath. They have a great deal of Scripture, tradition, and scholarship behind their efforts. In Him, Doc |
||||||
129 | Deceived or not? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203473 | ||
Did I say something contrary to those sentiments? | ||||||
130 | Acts 13:1 | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203835 | ||
Dear Jamison, You wrote, "I don't like to put that much trust in mere men, so why not hear what a Mormon says to see if it is true?" It might be good to point out that Mormon's are "mere men" too. But they are mere men standing outside scriptural, creedal, gospel, and ecclesiastical consensus! Talk about being "mere!" According to the Word, the apostles, pastors, and scholars of the church were given by Christ to the church, specifically for the purpose of avoiding false teachings (Ephesians 4:11:16). Mormon teaching fails on every point of sound doctrine as taught by twenty centuries of the consistent teaching by the Holy Spirit in the church. (See post #182013 for good direction in uncovering false teaching.) In Him, Doc "I cannot endure false doctrine, however neatly it may be put before me. Would you have me eat poisoned meat because the dish is of the choicest ware? It makes me indignant when I hear another gospel put before the people with enticing words by man who would fair make merchandise of souls; and I marvel at those who have soft words for such deceivers. 'That is your bigotry,' says one. Call it so if you like; but it is the bigotry of the loving John, who wrote, 'If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed; for he that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil deeds.' I would to God we all had more of such decision, for the lack of it is depriving our religious life of its backbone and substituting for honest manliness a mass of tremulous jelly of mutual flattery. He who does not hate the false does not love the true; and he to whom it is all the same, whether it be God's word or man's, is himself unrenewed at heart. Oh, if some of you were like your fathers, you would not have tolerated in this age the wagon loads of trash under which the gospel has been of late buried by ministers of your own choosing. The apostle spake by inspiration when he said, 'If we or an angel from heaven preach to you any other gospel than that ye have received, let him be accursed.' According to modem effeminacy he ought to have said, 'Let him be kindly spoken with in private, but pray make no stir. No doubt the good brother has his own original modes of thought and we must not question his liberty. Doubtless he believes the same as we do, only there is some little difference as to terms.' This is treason to Christ and treachery to truth and cruelty to souls. If we love our Lord, we shall keep His words and stand fast in the faith, coming out from among the false teachers. Nor is this inconsistent with charity; for the truest love to those who err is not to fraternize with them in their error, but to be faithful to Jesus Christ in all things." --Charles H. Spurgeon |
||||||
131 | Acts 13:1 | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203841 | ||
Well, Jamison, for all of that, it would be much less than prudent to listen to the Mormons while ignoring all the rest! Furthermore, based on your line of reasoning, I might as well ask, why depend on what the Lord says about Satan's doctrines when you can hear them from Devil himself? Sounds silly, doesn't it? You see, Jesus himself had Scriptural, creedal, prophetic, historic, and divine validation. There is only one certain, infallible, inerrant, necessary, and sufficient source of sound doctrine, and that is the Scriptures themselves. Anyone denying that -- as do the Mormons -- is not likely to have anything to say to us that will be edifying (Jude 8-12). In Him, Doc |
||||||
132 | Acts 13:1 | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203858 | ||
Dear Jamison, The argument is precisely the same. If Jesus says, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true" (John 5:31). Given the precedent, and the clear instruction of Scripture, we should never believe the assertions of someone simply on the merit of their own word. I'm quite sufficiently familiar with the teachings Joseph Smith, Ellen G. White, and Charles Taze Russell. Study church history and you'll find that what they teach starts out wrong from the very foundations. These heresies get repeated and repeated because people don't know enough to use God's provision. The false teachers gain a hearing because they aren't tossed out on their ear at the beginning. Son, if a man can't add 2 and 2 and get 4, I'll not be very inclined to evaluate what he has to say about Calculus. God carefully and providentially grants us absolutely everything we need "so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes" (Ephesians 4:14). "If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain." (1 Timothy 6:3-5) Simply amazing how we never seem to learn, but still give the yahoos a platform. Well, at least here in the Study Bible Forum, we have the proper foundation of sola Scriptura. In Him, Doc PS Here's a quote by Joseph Smith: "First, God himself, who sits enthroned in yonder heavens, is a man like unto one of yourselves if you were to see him today, you would see him in all the person, image and very form as a man. ...Here, then, is eternal life -- to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power." Yeah... right... sheesh! |
||||||
133 | Did I miss something in the text? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203891 | ||
Hi, Tamara... When Scripture doesn't give us the authority for a type, then we lack the authority to make those connections. Here are some valid examples: we know that the brass serpent of Numbers 21:9 is a type of Christ because we have the authority of John 3:14 to see it as a type; we know that Adam of Genesis 2 was a anti-type of Christ because we have the authority of 1 Corinthians 15:47 to see Adam as a anti-type; we know that Melchizedek of Genesis 14 was a type of Christ because we have the authority of Hebrews 7 to see Melchizedek as a type; Noah's preservation in the flood prefigured baptism per 1 Peter 3:20-21; etc. On the other hand, we can't, for example, consider Joshua a type of Jesus. Scripture gives us no such authority. The fact that they had the same name is not sufficient reason for us to make a typological connection. Certainly man's sinfulness and God's sovereign, righteous judgment can be seen in the narrative of the Tower of Babel. But we do not have Scriptural authority to read into it an allegory. That would be a serious violation of sound, grammatico-historical exegesis. In Him, Doc |
||||||
134 | Cultural, Evangelistic, Dominion Mandate | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203893 | ||
Hmmm... sounds like that fella has some serious doctrinal issues! I'm glad you're seeing through it! | ||||||
135 | Did I miss something in the text? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203909 | ||
Hi, Carlos... This sounds familiar... "The love of allegory in the epistle which is often claimed to be a decisively 'Alexandrian' trait is not really such: allegory means for Barnabas searching for types of Christ and the Christian dispensation, and never, as Philo and Clement do, does he find eternal truths or philosophical commonplaces lurking in the concrete details of Scripture." --Irenaeus As the SBF is founded on the doctrine of sola Scriptura, let us use great caution to label speculation as speculation. (See posts #156918 and #158836). In Him, Doc |
||||||
136 | Cultural, Evangelistic, Dominion Mandate | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203943 | ||
Hi, Tamara... That causal connection sounds as though this fellow doesn't hold to the orthodox Christian doctrines of the ordo salutis. I've a large number of posts on the topic, with attending Scripture. In Him, Doc |
||||||
137 | Did I miss something in the text? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 203945 | ||
Isn't the analogy of faith (Scripture explains Scripture) cool? (See post #156917.) | ||||||
138 | Acts 13:1 | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 204185 | ||
So, you're trivializing Tamara's beliefs? :-) You know Jamison, holding to some teaching or other despite all reason, may, in one sense, represent an admirable persistence. But, God has gone to great lengths to show us the importance of doctrine. Now, the world teaches that whole plurality thing. But as Christians, we know that two contradicting assertions can't both be right. We understand that doctrine divides. It divides light from darkness, sheep from goats, wheat from tares, children of the Lord from children of the devil, etc. Remember, a high estimation of sound doctrine, doesn't necessarily correspond with a high estimation of the people who hold to such. On the other hand, a low estimation of heresy, error, or fantasy, does not necessarily correspond with a low estimation of the people who hold to those ideas. We have no direction from Scripture to respect folly in ourselves or in others. Don't confuse people with ideas. Your post reminded me of something written by Professor D. A. Carson: "In a relatively free and open society, the best forms of tolerance are those that are open to and tolerant of people, even when there are strong disagreements with their ideas. This robust toleration for people, if not always for their ideas, engenders a measure of civility in public discourse while still fostering spirited debate over the relative merits of this or that idea. Today, however, tolerance in many Western societies increasingly focuses on ideas, not on people. The result of adopting this new brand of tolerance is less discussion of the merits of competing ideas -- and less civility. There is less discussion because toleration of diverse ideas demands that we avoid criticizing the opinions of others… Exclusiveness is the one religious idea that cannot be tolerated. Correspondingly, proselytism is a dirty word. One cannot fail to observe a crushing irony: the gospel of relativistic tolerance is perhaps the most 'evangelistic' movement in Western culture at the moment, demanding assent and brooking no rivals." |
||||||
139 | How do these accounts reconcile? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 204205 | ||
Sorry... I have to triage things... If I read everything everyone sent me immediately after I received it, I'd be doing nothing else! Ah well... (Luke 17:9-10). By the way, Tamara, not everyone should be given answers to their "accusations and observations." Christ speaks of dogs (heretics/apostates) and pigs (sensual) people in Matthew 7:6. Dogs and pigs aren't making accusations and observations because they lack information. Their fundamental problem is a moral one (Romans 1:21-22). In Him, Doc |
||||||
140 | How do these accounts reconcile? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 204226 | ||
Hi, Tamara... The Luke reference was an attempt at humor for my failure to promptly read your tract. Success is measured by our living uncompromising lives in obedience to God. Neither Ezekiel or Jeremiah had a single convert. We'd not consider them "unsuccessful." In Him, Doc |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Next > Last [302] >> |