Results 161 - 180 of 801
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
161 | An interesting discussion/question | Romans | jlhetrick | 205191 | ||
Was that you that stepped on my toe? | ||||||
162 | Does God want us to belong to one church | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 205188 | ||
Clarifying Note (I hope) In my above note where I reference 1Cor. 11:13 I was mistaken. I intended to reference 1Cor. 11:3 Thank you to Tamara for brining attention to my post so that I could clarify it. God bless and sorry for any confusion, Jeff |
||||||
163 | Does God want us to belong to one church | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 205187 | ||
Tamara- disregard my last post to your last post. I should have gone back and been more careful to read my own post before responding to you. Now I'm confused :-) In the post you responded to I had a typo. I pointed to 1Cor 11:13 but meant 1Cor 11:3. Hope this clears it up; but if not please ask further so I can make my position clear. thanks for pointing out my folly, Jeff |
||||||
164 | Does God want us to belong to one church | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 205184 | ||
Nope, not at all what you are to understand. Not even sure how you arrived at that conclusion from my post. If you are more specific as to what part of what I said lead you so far off I will do my best to rearrange my words for better clarification. I don't mean for her to do anything other than arrive at an answer from the Scripture I pointed to. Hope I didn't confuse her as well. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
165 | An interesting discussion/question | Romans | jlhetrick | 205182 | ||
Friend- maybe this will make a point and maybe not. You wrote: "If Joe Shmo said the sky is blue but Joe was a sinner would that mean the sky is not blue?" Actually, the sky is not blue, bear with me; it simply appears blue because of how malecules scatter the light. And so it appears orange or red at sunset because we are at a different angle and the light is scattered differently (or something scientific like that). My point in this post is that God's word is truth but some have a wrong interpretation of it. Far worse than that are those who have added false teachings to it. Understanding color as we see it is scientifically discerned. Understanding God's word is Spiritually discerned. Your "sharing the footsteps" of jamison as you declared, might be putting the horse before the cart. He mentioned the Book of Morman and that Mormans believe the "exact same thing" regarding justification and salvation. Well, jamison is simply wrong. They do not at all believe the "exact same thing". Study this for yourself. I work with a practicing Morman of a very famous family from the Morman church. She assures me that what the Holy Bible teaches about justification and salvation is not "exactly" what they believe. They add what a certain man who liked to play with Earth Stones added. But study that for yourself if you care to. Besides, that's only half of the issue. The teachings of a lost cult might have an agreement on some point with Christianity. Not an issue. The issue is with the many (although there need only be one) contradictions their teachings have with essential doctrine, specifically regarding who God is, who man is in relation, and the nature of justification, sanctification, and salvation as taught in Scripture. You'd do better not to align yourself with others so quickly if I may suggest. In all honesty, just looking out for you. Jeff God Bless, Jeff |
||||||
166 | Just out of curiosity. | Phil 1:23 | jlhetrick | 205154 | ||
Val, having observed you on the forum for some time I know you to be a disciplined student, able to evaluate verses related to their immediate and wider, biblical context. Becuase we know that paul never tired of teaching, speaking of the beginning, "elementary teaching about the Christ" and we have the language there of "milk" and "meat" I believe we're dealing with a lecture form of 2Timothy 2:15. The babe grows into a child by the milk and then must consume the protein of the meat to grow into maturity. Otherwise there will be a failure to thrive leading to a premature death. We build on a foundation (milk) and finish the house (meat). Interesting (to me) analogy: At a place not too far from where I live and work someone began to build a fairly large, multiple unit storage facility. They completed the foundation and even had part of the framing up. Rumor has it that they ran out of money and could not finish the work. In time, the strong, New Mexico winds toppled the unattended structure. Today, you can not see the foundation that has been covered by the blowing sands. Had they been in possession of, or known where to access the needed money (meat) the structure would have been finished and serving it's purpose today (assumable). Praise God that He has saved us and furthermore, gave us some capacity to know Him even beyond that through the teaching of His word as the Spirit leads us. Hope this is a helpful starting piont. Jeff |
||||||
167 | Spices and the Sabbath | Luke 1:2 | jlhetrick | 205148 | ||
Bravo brother Tim- Thank you sir for clearing that up. Jeff |
||||||
168 | Define wine, please? | Rev 17:2 | jlhetrick | 204335 | ||
Thanks for the response Tamara. It took me a while to get used to using the search button to read topics that have been discussed here in-depth. Even still it doesn't seem as personal as I like since I'm reading things that were sometimes written and posted years ago. Still, that's one of the beauties of the SBF. It is a lengthy and growing record of the topic discussions and studies. It's not against the rules by the way to ask a question that's been asked before, but, it is a standard many of us here try to keep in trying to steer clear of devisive, debatable topics so that their not rehashed over and over again. For the new person coming on board I think it sometimes feels to them (perhaps true for you) that they are being personally attacked. Perhaps the way some of us approach it could be done more delicately so as not to cause offense or the need for defense. Again, I appologize if I've done that. I'm guessing by your participation so far that you are going to be one of the more beneficial participants as your sincerety and obvious love of God's word is so apparent. That is if you stick around and I for one hope you do. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
169 | Define wine, please? | Rev 17:2 | jlhetrick | 204318 | ||
Tamara- quite sorry to have ruffled your feathers and ruffle them quite severely I did apparently. To begin with, I didn't ask a question, I simply pointed to the short-sighted assumptions and/or conclusions you had drawn in the post I was responding to. I take that as a responsibility as a forum participant. As for "curtailing" the discussion I was simply pointing to the fact that the issue has been discussed AND debated ad nauseam (in more forums than the internet and here). When all is said and done we are left with a lot of speculations (some more supported than others). It's not that I'm not interested in a rebuttal as you accuse, I only wanted to steer clear of repeating what's been repeated over and over again. As for your response to me I felt it unecessarily sarcastic and, should I say, almost volatile. And if I may say so ma'am, a "free discourse about Biblical concepts, doctrines and so on..." is something far different than engaging unecessarily in age old debates that those much more shcolarly than you and I can't even disagree on (especially when Scripture just doesn't finally, in the end, tell us). So again, I'm truly sorry to have offended you to the degree that you felt it necessary to respond in the way you did. Perhaps in our next interaction we will come closer together in a responsible, caring, and loving approach to bible study. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
170 | Define wine, please? | Rev 17:2 | jlhetrick | 204311 | ||
Dear Tamara- the passage in 1Cor 11 is not promoting Christian's getting drunk (not that I believe your saying that) but rather speaks OF it while speaking to inappropriate behavior. Also, on what basis do you say "Contrary to modern belief the wine at the Lord's supper was not watered down..."? If referring to 1 Cor. 11 then I've addressed that above. If you are referring to the time where our Lord actually instituted the "Lord's Supper" (as in Matthew 26:26) there is no reason to assume the "cup" contained an alcoholic wine, especially if basing the assumption on 1Cor. 11. We can assume a lot of things, but, Scirpture doesn't tell us that Jesus was drinking the wine at the wedding feast, so an assumption here wouldn't be recommended. I have heard some use John 2:10 as a license to drink alcohol (again, I'm not inferring that you are saying this- just point it out). A careful study doesn't even conclude that those at the feast were drunk or even drinking alcoholic wine, doesn't suggest in anyway that the water turned to wine was alcoholic, and again, gives no indication at all that Christ was consuming the wine, alcoholic or not. Hope this is helpful. Also, for everyone reading, type in the post number 2473 in the search box (upper right). I believe our brother Hank gave as good an answer that can be given on this whole topic way back in 2001. 2001- Hank, if your reading, you are old.... I mean, as a forum member. It's my opinion that further discussion on this issue would likely be redundant and unfruitful. God bless sister, Jeff |
||||||
171 | KJV question | Gen 34:19 | jlhetrick | 203576 | ||
Hank- thanks for putting it in perspective in a way I obviously could not. Even on things I know, reading your posts helps me to know them better. :) Jeff |
||||||
172 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | jlhetrick | 203341 | ||
Thank you for the response Quvmoh- I wasn't overly concerned about your coming across as offensive to Tim just wanted to add some thought on the discussion. Also, I don't want to come across as offensive to you, nor do I want to "play" on your words but I'm a bit concerned about how I am interpreting your position and would like to call attention to it. In one post you stated you were: "merely using the passages you quoted to better strengthen my own claims." Again, please don't feel that I am nit-picking and/or playing on your words because that is not at all my intent. My intent is to call attention to what might be some degree of wrong approach to doctrine, more specifically, how one's doctrine should be established. My biggest concern is with your statement that you were "merely using the passages you quoted to better strengthen my own claims." If I am understanding you I should advise that this does not seem an appropriate approach to establishing bible doctrine. Scripture should never be USED to support OUR CLAIMS (caps not used for yelling but emphasis). Rather, we should only claim what Scripture undeniably declares. So herin may lie the problem with these recent exchanges. If we "claim" a position on any issue and then set out to support that position with Scripture we are most likely to ignor or denie other positions that might have just as much or more support from Scripture. In the end, we end up believing something that may in fact not be true. That is why it is important, as Tim Moran pointed out, that we don't make any claims at all that we can not absolutely find declared by God Himself in His Word. In your recent post (the one I am responding to) you wrote that you are "convicted to ensure that Context is not taken lightly and that my own claims are within context and well founded". That statement might suggest that my interpretation of your approach to doctrine may be wrong but I did want to clarify. So with the issue at hand, considering the opposing views, I believe that we are left with the fact that either side can be argued with Scripture but neither is necessarily "well founded". In other words, we just don't know. Thanks for your time and God bless, Jeff |
||||||
173 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | jlhetrick | 203312 | ||
Quvmoh- welcome to the forum brother or sister (couldn't tell from your profile so no offense). In following this thread I didn't see where brother Tim Moran mentioned this (nor did any other unless I have missed it). While I consider brother Tim a teacher to me I don't intend to speak for him. With that said, it may be a clearer position in warning against a dogmantic view of either of the considered "possibilities" to include that both views (angels vs. saved humans) are widely held by Christian people to include theologians with greater study and understanding than many of us here. By the way, you did a fine job of searching the Scriptures and digging for the information and a good job in your presenting it here. Finally, I refer to brother Tim as one I consdier a teacher because I have learned enough about him here to know that he not only has searched and studied God's word and proven himself one who accurately handles the word in keeping with 2 Timothy 2:15. I also know him as one who has explored and studied what other, more learned men have said and written about much of the bible. This issue is what many refer to as a "non-essential". That is, it's not essential for salvation and so the debate can only be taken so far safely without possibly causing devisiveness. Hope my input is a bit helpful and again welcome to the forum. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
174 | More harm then good? | Eph 4:16 | jlhetrick | 203144 | ||
Steve- You wrote.. "I don't know if "knowing our spiritual gifts" quite fits into Christianity 101 though. If it were this basic then I doubt there would be so much confusion and I doubt there would be so many Christians without a clue as to what their spiritual gift(s) were. I personally have seen many writings by mankind on how to identify your spiritual gift. But to my knowledge I don't recall any of them ever pointing to scripture to validate their claims :-(" I too do not know if knowing our spiritual gifts quite fits into Christianity 101. I do have an opinion, however, about why there is so much confusion about it all, especially in these times (and also like you I don't hang my hat on my opinion). I believe it's already been spoken of here, and I believe the biggest cause for confusion might be that SO MANY, for SO LONG, have plugged themselves into TO MANY ministries that they weren't called to. This has been going on for SO LONG that an accurate picture of a functioning local church that is fully seeking God and following His lead has likely never been observed by most. This is exacerbated by centuries of ignoring spiritual gifts, denying spiritual gifts, or inappropriate emphasis on spiritual gifts (or certain gifts). Finally, many of us are guilty of not honoring those gifts even when we have been convinced that He has given them. Finally, in speaking of Christianity 101 I'm of the "opinion" that the topic might fit for the simple reason that Scripture seems to speak of the gifts as a normal, expected part of the Christian experience. The lack of deep involvement in Scripture spelling out determining features may suggest that we take a complicated approach to what God intended as basic. Someone above talked about "natural gifts" (think it was lionheart but not sure) and appropriately so I believe. Most of us accurately realize when we are gifted in "natural" areas such as singing, sports, etc., whether we ever acknowledge God's grace to us or not. It may be that some Christians spend a lot of time debating with God when He is calling because they don't believe they "have the gift". If He's calling, He will provide the gift, that much we can all be sure of. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
175 | Retribution? | Gal 6:7 | jlhetrick | 201836 | ||
Hi Val! No I don't. Retribution/vengeance speaks to act of rewarding (and where it applies to God the rewarding is always just). Reaping speaks to the receivers receiving of the reward (good or bad). Sowing speaks to the behavior of the receiver/reaper that earns the reward. Is this helping???? God bless, Jeff |
||||||
176 | Retribution? | Gal 6:7 | jlhetrick | 201831 | ||
Val- sorry for the late response. I don't get a chance to check my email or the forum daily and even then can't respond to everything. To your question - yes absolutely. This might be helpful: Vengeance - "punishment inflicted in retaliation for an injury or offense, retribution" retribution- retribuere to pay back, fr. retribuere to pay — more at tribute] 14c 1 : recompense, reward 2 : the dispensing or receiving of reward or punishment esp. in the hereafter 3 : something given or exacted in recompense esp : punishment Both definitions taken from Merriam-Webster (2003). Hope this is helpful. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
177 | Retribution? | Gal 6:7 | jlhetrick | 201732 | ||
Brother- thanks for the comments. Exactly why I posted the question; the note at work put my thinking to work. My wife and I also had a bit of discussion about it. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
178 | Retribution? | Gal 6:7 | jlhetrick | 201723 | ||
WOS- got it, thanks and good points. It is a process isn't it..... | ||||||
179 | Retribution? | Gal 6:7 | jlhetrick | 201721 | ||
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I was just about to complete a rather lengthy response back when my computer bugged out on me and shut down leaving me to start from scratch. I will keep this one short as it is getting late. I'm going to tag on here since it's currently the last post. I'm sorry that my question lead to some apparent conflict and also that the thread has taken on a different focus than I had intended (but that is sometimes unavoidable on the forum). Keeping it short, and hopefully simple, let me start by agreeing with you Val. Thanks for encouraging me to do my own in-depth study. Sometimes that is an appropriate response. In this case, yes, I have done the study and have a sound, biblical understanding regarding the answer to my question (before I posted it). With that said, let me respectfully encourage you to respond with more than a single verse that in and of itself does not answer the question. I can’t speak for WOS but I believe that he was at least in part trying to make that point and not to offend. It wasn't a trick question by any means, but instead, one asked to encourage thought on the subject. When I read the note at work I instantly knew the statement was not based on biblical principal. My problem was that I was not expediently prepared to answer from which philosophical persuasion the idea originated. Interestingly enough Doc (if your reading along) your response to me was very close to word for word how I responded in my own typed response to the poster at work. So the purpose of my posting the question was to call attention to how these seemingly right statements infiltrate even the thinking and theology of Christians (consider the whole “eye for an eye” misconstruction); and to encourage thought on how we as Christians might handle them when confronted with them in our day to day business (1Peter 3:15). Finally, to address my own original question I’ll just call attention to a couple of points. Vengeance belongs to the God (Deut. 32:35, Ro 12:19, Heb 10:30). God is just (Deut. 32:4). Thanks again to all who responded. Jeff |
||||||
180 | Example of the definition of insanity | Judg 8:23 | jlhetrick | 200998 | ||
phand- excellent and well put. How right you are; God's word will be relevant for every generation for as long as He tarries and forever after that(Matthew 24:35). It's to our fortune that we have the sins of others exposed in Scripture for our teaching as it is to our fortune to observe from those same folks how to be obedient. Acts 6:7 shows us that it is God's word that produces obedience. The greatest thing about it, in my opinion, is what it all tells us about God. He is sovereign. The only good thing that can come "from" us is that which God does through us. As a result, we have no judgment of others (God's word judges them and us) and we have not even a bit of justification for pride in ourselves when He produces good in and through us (though I and others struggle with pride). Without doubt we all were born with a sinful nature. For sure, none of us have the power, ability or even the will to obey Him in and of our own hearts and desires (Romans 3:12, Eph 2:8 for examples). Thanks for elaborating on your earlier statement. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ] Next > Last [41] >> |