Results 21 - 24 of 24
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Spirit teaches, but are we good students | 2 Tim 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 32216 | ||
Risen: We still have the problem, however, when two Christians, both indwelt by the Holy Spirit, disagree on the meaning of a particular text. Being a believer in Jesus Christ does not guarantee doctrinal infallibility. So how do we determine who is listening to the Holy Spirit and who is not in such a situation? --Joe! |
||||||
22 | Works in the Christian experience? | Heb 6:4 | Reformer Joe | 17830 | ||
Peter was a believer in Jesus Christ and therefore saved, whether Pentecost had come or not. He may have not been indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but he certainly was a believer in Christ. He had faith in his Messiah and that is what made him Christ's, even before the atonement took place. Otherwise, we have the big question of how all those other people before Christ's atonement on the cross could possibly have been saved. Surely you don't insist that following the Old Testament Law saved them? "For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." --Hebrews 10:1-4 Impossible, it says. Bill, We are justified through faith. What role does works play? That is the theme of Hebrews, James, 1 John, 1 Peter and a whole host of other post-resurrection books? How do you explain the message of PERSEVERENCE in those books (and others, including those of Paul)? --Joe! |
||||||
23 | What qualifies as "heresy"? | 2 Pet 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 81358 | ||
"I have been told more than once that since I view Calvinism as totally heretical I have to be Arminianistic." How do you define the word "heresy"? Please define it in such a way that historically-held Reformation theology could be considered heresy. Then please explain how modern-day Pentecostalism and pretributlational dispensationalism could not fall into that category, using the same criteria. While I hold these two things to be wrong interpretations of Scripture, I would not consider them "heresy." So, what is your criteria for slapping the "heresy" label on a particular system of doctrine? "However I view Arminianism as equally aberrant." That's news. On what points? --Joe! |
||||||
24 | What constitutes "heresy"? | 2 Pet 3:9 | Reformer Joe | 81365 | ||
"This topic Has been discussed before ..." Could you point me to a specific post where my question was answered? Specifically, where has EdB clarified what he means by heresy in such a way that historic, Reformational, Protestant theology fits; but in a way that modern Pentacostalism and pretribulational dispensationalism does not? Thanks. "I think it is anything that is contrary to the Bible." Do you not think it possible that any of your beliefs (down to the tinest detail) might be actually contrary to Scripture? Assuming that you allow yourself even the slightest margin for error, do you consider yourself a heretic? "Both sides use the Bible to prove there point ... so is that heresy? I think it is more eisgesis (sp)." I agree, but "eisegesis" was not the term that was employed. "Heresy" was. So I continue to ask, what is the line between minor doctrinal error (or even significant disagreement within Christian orthodoxy) and heresy? --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 ] |