Results 141 - 160 of 192
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Scribe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85961 | ||
Maybe I should debate this man on the air? | ||||||
142 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85966 | ||
Ok I am bored now, in my opinion Joyce won the debate. :) | ||||||
143 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85975 | ||
I am saying... That if we post all the scriptures on what Paul, Peter, Jude, John described as what a false teacher we should avoid teaches, we see that the number one pattern is that a christian could sin or indulge in the flesh and be blameless. You can apply that to anyone you want and see if that sounds like what they are teaching, then be a berean or be biblical, and from such turn away. |
||||||
144 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85978 | ||
Part 1 of 2 Posted below you will find some error from the Lutherans. It is as much error as the posts that have been given from Joyce or Kenneth Copeland. But I do not call the Lutheran Pastor who teaches this error a false teacher or a false prophet unless... He teaches that the baby goes to hell without this baptism. Then I would say it is false doctrine because then he preaches salvation through something other than faith in Christ alone, which is one of the other marks of a false teacher, one that denies Christ. If the redemption of Christ is extended toward this baby who cannot reason by virtue of baptism in the Luthern Church, then this redemption of Christ is extended to this baby who cannot reason without the baptism in water also or otherwise it is not the redemption of the supstitutionary sacrifice of Christ of which they are having faith in, because that reality stands whether the baby is baptized or not, so it either extends to babies or it does not. If on the other hand the Lutheran pastor believes this is biblical, but does not go so far as to say he thinks the baby goes to hell without it then I do not label him as a false prophet, only wrong, as he should label Joyce and Kenneth as wrong and not false prophets or teachers. WHY DO LUTHERANS BAPTIZE INFANTS? To begin with it should be noted that infant baptism has been practiced in the Christian Church as far back as we can trace. There appears to be no time in the history of the Church when infants were not baptized. In addition to this there is no trace in either the New Testament or the early Church of the Baptism of the children of Christian parents who had been brought up in the faith. It appears then that they were either baptized as babies or they were never baptized. What this means is that Lutherans really do not have to defend the Biblical, Holy, Christian and Apostolic practice of infant baptism, it stands on its own. The burden of proof lies with those who would abandon it. Presently we find a segment of Christianity which practices believers baptism. This group does not practice infant baptism but usually has some sort of consecration of the child to God. Lutherans baptize infants because: 1) It is biblical. While it is true that there is no command to baptize infants (babies) in the bible, it is also true that there is no command to baptize adults. The biblical command is to baptize people (all nations.) Our Lord Jesus clearly considered infants (babies) and children to be people. One of the few times that our Lord grew angry was when His disciples tried to keep the children away from Him. "When Jesus saw this, he was indignant (angry). He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." Mark 10:14 (NIV) Our Lord tells us to baptize all nations. Matthew 28:19 He never tells us to baptize just reasoning adults. All nations clearly included the children of those nations. "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" Matthew 28:19 (NIV) Those who have a problem with infant baptism usually assume that saving faith must involve reason. The line of thought seems to be that since a very young child cannot reason - a child cannot have such faith. Most who follow this line of reasoning believe that baptism is a work of man which demonstrates, or flows from, faith. This is a sharp contrast with the Biblical position that Baptism is a gracious gift of God that bestows saving faith. What we need to remember here is the fact that the Bible teaches that salvation comes through faith and that faith itself is God's gift. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast." Ephesians 2:8-9 (NIV) "Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ." Romans 10:17 (NIV) God's Word cannot be bound. A child can be given a gift of a million dollars even though that child cannot appreciate it at the time. So a child can be given the gift of faith through the water and Word of Holy Baptism even if that child cannot appreciate it at the time. A related problem is that by involving man (reason) in the process of salvation one turns God's action into something in which sinful man has a part (making a decision for Christ). In so doing one destroys the heart of the gospel message. (The fact that God saves us by grace, through faith!) Think about it for a moment, if I am involved in my salvation, did I do it right? Was I sincere . . . Faith is turned from a gift of God into a work of man. And since we often make mistakes . . . Thus it is that the assurance of salvation is often lost. (continued on next post) |
||||||
145 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85979 | ||
Part 2 of 2 In Colossians 2:11-12 St. Paul refers to Christian baptism as a circumcision. Since throughout the Old Testament God required circumcision of infants on the eight day after birth (Genesis 17:10-14 - except when one converted as a youth or adult) then clearly the baptism of infants shortly after birth is also a biblical practice. Babies are sinners held accountable before God for their sin. (Original sin) This is clearly seen in the fact that children die. The wages of sin is death. The theory that a child is not held accountable by God for his/her sins until they reach some 'age of accountability' cannot be supported from the pages of Holy Scripture. A related problem here is that this age of accountability cannot easily be determined. This also has the effect of eroding ones confidence in God's gift of salvation. (Was I old enough to make the decision to be baptized . . .) Finally, in the New Testament we find examples of entire households being baptized. (1 Corinthians 1:16; Acts 11:14, 16:15,33; 18:8) Since almost every household in that day included children, some infants were almost certainly baptized. 2) It has been the practice of the Church from the time of the Holy Apostles on. This can be established in three ways: First, some of the early Christian writers were not in favour of it. This shows that it was certainly practiced! Secondly, we are told by the early Church Father Origen (240 A.D.) that infant baptism was the normal practice. He writes: "The church received a tradition from the apostles to give baptism to infants too." Thirdly, as already mentioned we find no trace of the children of practicing Christians being baptized as older children or adults. Clearly, infant baptism has been, and still is for the vast majority of Christians the normal means of entrance into God's family, the Holy Christian Church. 3) We also baptize infants because, quite simply, it works! Millions upon millions of fine upstanding Christians have become part of God's family through Holy Baptism. Baptism of infants is a great witness to the fact that is God and God alone who saves us. That tiny child can do nothing for himself/herself. God, and God alone gives that child the gift of salvation. To learn more about Holy Baptism please turn to Luther's Large and Small Catechism. Mark R. Danielson Now I have not taken the time to explain why this explanation does follow scripture because most readers are going to see through it without my help, my point is not to start a thread refuting infant Baptism but to demonstrate that the Lutheran Writer that calls Joyce a false teacher holds to doctrines that most protestant evangelicals today would vehemently disagree with. Should we call him a false prophet too? If Joyce taught that Jesus descended into hell but she does not say you have to believe that to be saved, that is a slander of her to say she says that, yet the Lutheran says the baby goes to hell without this baptism.. which one would you say is closer to false doctrine? You judge. |
||||||
146 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85981 | ||
Oops correction to this post above.. Now I have not taken the time to explain why this explanation does NOT follow scripture | ||||||
147 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 86013 | ||
If that is the case then that would indeed be a false doctrine that is opposite the true grace of God. Titus 2:11-12 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; |
||||||
148 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 86014 | ||
I hope my posts have been helpful in making us truly look to see what the scripture says. It is not my purpose to condemn any group,we all have need of more light. I am certainly in need of more light and I pray that my heart will be humble before the Lord that I may recieve it. May God Bless Us as We Study His Word. | ||||||
149 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 86022 | ||
Radioman2 states "From your own words, it appears that your concept of bad doctrine is narrowly limited and your concept of heresy is nonexistent. It sounds as if you're saying it doesn't matter what you teach about Christ, His atonement or anything else, as long as you don't teach that it's OK for a Christian to sin. If so, then Joyce Meyer is not the only one who fails to understand essential Christian teaching." narrowly limited to only what the scriptures states is false doctrine is safer foundation to stand on than what you think is false teaching otherwise we accuse others of teaching false doctrine if their doctrine does not agree with us. I differ massively on the interpretation of how the Atonement of Christ applies to infants than the Lutheran Matzat, and therefore does that make me a false teacher or him? Oh and by the way.. where is the scripture that says.. you have to have the necessary theological training to preach? Sounds like a wrong teaching to me, but I will extend grace and not call him a false teacher :) |
||||||
150 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 86023 | ||
The writer says " She has no grasp of historic systematic theology. Basically what she’s doing is, she’s going back to Rome with her understanding of sin...She has rejected the basic Reformational truth of justification. She’s a heretic!”" I say.. This writer is probably mad because Joyce preaches better than him and she is a woman. :) |
||||||
151 | Pt.1 Female Overseer | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 86245 | ||
LOL. Well I am not concerned about it myself, I even listen to women teach the Word. I was just adding some good logic as to why we might be applying legalism to New Testament instructions and trying to put women back under the law, and that would be a very bad thing in the AUTHOR'S eyes wouldn't it? I think we have to be careful and make sure we are knowing the AUTHOR then we will interpret the Word according to the SPIRIT of the AUTHOR and not a legalistic interpretation He never intended. The more I look at this subject the more I see women as being quite oppressed by christian men and it was never meant to be that way. If there is one thing Jesus brought that was liberty for all man and woman. I am leaning toward the USURP being key to understanding this. Also I lean toward the idea of women teaching in the church as not prohibited by this statement but that of teaching men as in a fleshly way, teaching them to do what the woman wants. Kind of like what wives have a problem with. LOL. If he had said I suffer a woman not to teach the word in the church I could see the point, but it says I suffer not a woman to teach or usurp authority over the man which sounds more like what I witness often among couples who don't believe in women teaching in the church. In other words, they don't believe in women teaching in the church and yet the woman keeps teaching and usurping authority over the man by nagging and scolding him. | ||||||
152 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | 2 Tim 3:16 | Scribe | 42846 | ||
Yes the book of Enoch. The writer was not Enoch and no serious scholar ever believed it was. It was not written until about 200Ad and it was an attempt by the writer to make it sound like Peter was quoting the book of Enoch. The writer probably made up an idea that he was possessed by the spirit of Enoch. This kind of thing is still with us in the cults that teach similar doctrines of the gnostics. The book of Hebrews was written by Paul and it is obvious if you compare it to Pauls writings. I don't much care for scholars that squabble over who wrote what. It is pretty obvious to the reader even if they aren't a Greek and Hebrew Scholar. God had been Gracious to keep His Word available to us, and will do so until we go to be with Him. I think writer of the The Apocalypse of Adam and the writer of the book of Enoch had similar demons. The book of Mormon and the Quran follow the same pattern of men trying to sound spiritual, but because they do not know God never pull it off to the discerning christian. The born again Christian is the only spiritual man that is in communion with the Holy Spirit and has the divine light that these imposters were trying to pretend. Thus the born again Christian can always recognize these imposters becuase the born again christiant that walks intimatly with Christ is so familiar with the truth and the light that the darkness and the false is manifest, or obviouse when the holy saint hears it or reads it. There is not much value in studying all the details of a cult teaching. All you really need, in order to expose them, is to be familiar with the truth. May God Bless you in Your Study of His Word. |
||||||
153 | Hebrews 6:6 explained | Hebrews | Scribe | 42095 | ||
In Context.... Heb 6:1 ¶ Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God: But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned. But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. The subject matter.... going on beyond constant wranglings over certain... fundamental doctrines. Think about it like this.. "If a person who has known the Lord and then turns from the holy commandments to teach a false doctrine that you can sin with the body but still be innocent in the spirit and other such gnosticism, there is no use trying to convince that person of how the cross of Christ is suficient to remove their sins, for they are preaching the cross of Christ but using it as an excuse for sin. Saying that they can keep sinning and still go to heaven. This is treating the Cross of Christ as liscense to sin rather than a victory over sin. What can you do with this kind of teaching and person other than let them know they are not going to heaven. It is impossible to renew them to repentance by preaching the cross , they are polluting the message of the cross. They cannot be brought to repentance as other sinners because they are using the very answer for sin and that which produces godly sorrow as an excuse to sin. "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame" so they propagate that the cross grants them forgiveness while they continue in their sin. Heb 6:7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God: Heb 6:8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned. They are bringing forth the wrong fruit. They are living lives that declare they are bad trees. Heb 6:9 ¶ But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. So from this verse we see that the saints do not have to fear this condition because sound doctrine will keep them from such a hineous act as willful sinful living while claiming freedom in the cross. Were these false brethren ever christian? .....and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, I find it too far of a stretch to say a person was made a partaker of the Holy Ghost and then claim he was never a christian. I will have to conclude that based on this text they are backslidden and they are in danger of hell fire. Now Can they be saved? Yes It does not say they can never be saved, It does not say they will never repent it says... It is impossible for you through doctrine listed in Verse 1 to to renew them again unto repentance;.. you have to shake off the dust and move on they are contradicting and blaspheming themselves claiming the crucifixtion of Christ as a liscense to be able to sin. You should give them over to satan for the destruction of the flesh. If in times of misery they come back to the Lord and renounce their false doctrine that they can sin willfully in this life and only lose a few rewards in the next then they can be saved and they can repent. But you are not going to be able to convince them with words and doctrine (verse 1) You will have to turn them over to satan. That is my opinion. I have been wrong before :) |
||||||
154 | Hebrews 6:6 explained | Hebrews | Scribe | 42590 | ||
Thank you John. I did read the sermon. I thought it was very good. Spurgeon seems to follow the spirit of the context in his explanation. I am almost convinced of his application, however I think the context about the ground not bearing fruit might indicate that Paul is not only saying that "if a person falls away completetly he would have not hope of eternal life" but that there may have been some that have. There may have been those that were once in the household of faith, who after falling away continually do not repent but instead invent doctrines to give them peace while they hold on to their addictions of fornication , pornography, alcoholism etc. I do not see this as far fetched because I have known and do know them. I know these men knew the Lord, but for many years now they have been bringing forth thorns and will have nothing to do with the church or with God. Will they still be saved? It would be impossible for them to be saved in that condition. Spurgeon sees it as impossible that a man that has known the Lord could fall to that degree. I wonder why he says that since in other articles he has made it known that he has met them. And I dare say you know a few as well. Now if we want to say they never knew the Lord at all, then I think we have entered into the domain of the secrets of men's hearts of which only Jesus Christ has been ordained judge. But if we want to say they do not know the Lord now in their continual state of many years of wicked living then we are on solid ground of our God given scriptural duty to known them by their fruits. I would rather say that they knew the Lord and now they have rejected him as Paul has stated in other passages than to say they never knew the Lord which I have no right to say. But then I do not have a "doctrine to uphold" but follow that which makes more common sense as I read and pray for light. May God bless you in your study of His Word. |
||||||
155 | Hebrews 6:6 explained | Hebrews | Scribe | 42673 | ||
Good point. And well taken. | ||||||
156 | Dreans, and Angels? | Heb 1:14 | Scribe | 55189 | ||
continued from previous post..... One thing that these dreams do is to help guide you in those specific ways that help you in your own personnal battle against the strategies of satan that are being launched against you and your ministry. We are all different and one persons battle differs from another. God knows what you are facing and will face, where your weaknesses are and what you need to be working to strengthen. So everything you need for life and godliness are contained in the Word, God will use a dream to drive home a specific promise or truth from His word that you need. Consider these God given dreams as sermon from God to you always using the written word truths to instruct you but specifically something that is urgent in your life to get a grasp on. Sometimes these dreams will have to do with more people and speak of a bigger picture than your life only. God will and does give dreams that relate to world events and prophecy and these type of dreams are more common among leadership whose lives effect more people and whos decisions effect more people. There is much to say about dreams than what is usually said. I have gone to long to comment on angels. :) |
||||||
157 | does the Holy spirit lead us to certain | Heb 4:12 | Scribe | 84993 | ||
I will start a new post on this verse Rev 12:11 because what I am going to post I would like others to find by searching on the verse. Please take a look at it when you get a chance. | ||||||
158 | made partakers | Heb 6:4 | Scribe | 63514 | ||
It is a good warning, and Peter was careful to remind the saints to be sober and vigilant. I am much encouraged by the clear instructions Peter gives on how we can be 100 perecent sure we will not fall. 2 Peter 1:5-11 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. |
||||||
159 | How can God let us go through pain? | 1 Pet 2:24 | Scribe | 42802 | ||
I have seen cancer patients healed by faith in Jesus Christ and through prayer for healing. The Doctors might call it by names such as remission but if it does not come back it would be the same as a healing and so not worth arguing over. I remember when we prayed for a lady who is now healed. She had others around her that were planning her funeral. These people said they were Christians, and they did pray for her, but they never prayed for her to be healed, because they thought that would be too hard for God. OK, honestly I am sure they never said those words, but that is why Christians do not believe that God heals today, they simply find it hard to believe that God can heal. Oh yes they believe it happened in the NT. But then that was 2000 years ago and to acknowledge you believe that it happened then does not require any faith. I know that is a strange sounding statement but it is true nevertheless. It takes no faith at all to say thay you believe the story about Lazuras is true, or of the blind man Bartimaeus. But ask them to pray for this dear sister that was suffering from cancer to be healed like in the stories of the Bible and they quickly try to fish up an doctrine about how God turned in his healing card around 90 AD. I will tell you that many suffer and die becuase no one will pray for healing. Now that being said many might die and not be healed. I will not say it is always about not having faith. Sometimes if a person is ready to go to heaven (they are born again and fellowship with Christ in holiness) they may be healed by dieing. For the death of the saint is precious in the eyes of the Lord. Someone has called it the 'ultimate healing.' But if a person does not know the Lord and has sown to the flesh all their lives is God culpable if the sinner suffers in agony and disease? God forbid. The warning has been sounded for these many centuries, that if a man sows to the flesh of the flesh they shall reap corruption. But who are we to judge? you ask. Whether we judge the reason for human suffering or silently look on, the laws of reaping and sowing continue,. seed time and harvest.. cold and heat.. And whether we are honest and recognize that we are always more to blame for human suffering .. or we decide to belligerently blame God in the light of all the warnings issued for these thousands of years.. either way, God's voice will be heard, and in the end God will be justified, and found True, and righteous, and Just, and man found to be the blame. About the woman that was healed cancer... I was there when believers in the Word of God came to the prayer meeting and laid hands on her and spoke an abundance of scriptures on healing until faith arose in her heart and she was healed. I remember when some who were there kept trying to cast doubt saying .. "god does not always heal... and it may not be his will to heal.." and these saints were rebuked in love and asked to only pray scripture. After that the prayer changed and she was healed. In the bible there is more than one example when doubters are made to leave a room. I cannot explain why God has set it up that way. But He has. Often we receive not because we ask not. You think God would withhold blessing from someone because they did not ask? I think we withhold it from ourselves when we do not ask. Faith pleases God, not passive indifference. And the more fervent the faith, the greater the results. If when you pray for sick people you ask those that are there to only pray healing scriptures, then what happens is that the prayers turn to positive faith prayers. May God bless you in your study of His Word. |
||||||
160 | When I accepted Christ as my Lord. | 1 Pet 5:7 | Scribe | 55555 | ||
Yes Amen | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [10] >> |