Results 21 - 40 of 97
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: JibbyJee Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | What are your views of once saved always | Bible general Archive 1 | JibbyJee | 90276 | ||
NC If you understood the sermon by Spurgeon on Hebrews 6:4-6, you would realize there are no contradictions at all. Certainly there is a prolific use of metaphor and most of the text is tongue-in-cheek, but nowhere are there any contradictions revealed by what Spurgeon was saying. I suppose if you don't understand what his point is that you could assert there are contradictions but that would make your position a moot point. Here's an example of your usage of quotes, taken out of context, in order to spin according to your own theological slant: Hypothetical quote: "Some would argue, although the position has been proven to be heresy, that Christians can lose lose their salvation according to Hebrews 6:4-6. Thankfully, though, the context of these verses affirms the docrine of the assurance of salvation, especially in relation to verse 9." Now, imagine the above quote was by Spurgeon in the article you quoted. Here is what your quote would be to "defend" your position: "I think we can lose our salvation and to disagree with me shows you don't know anything about the Bible. Even Spurgeon taught you could lose your salvation. Here's proof: 'Christians can lose lose their salvation according to Hebrews 6:4-6.' You see? He said it and I agree with him on this point." That, Old Creature, is EXACTLY what you did to Spurgeons sermon in light of the entire context of it. I suggest you take off the theological glasses before you read any sermons or the Bible. For some reason, you are getting selective 'hearing' and selective 'seeing' and ignoring everything you disagree with. I think it's called "itching ears"? In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
22 | What are your views of once saved always | Bible general Archive 1 | JibbyJee | 90140 | ||
NC I think it's funny that you, of all people, are quoting Spurgeon. Not only because he's a Calvinist, but also because you chide everyone who quotes outside the Bible in support of beliefs. Moreover, your quotes of Spurgeon are grossly out of context. If you want to know what he was really saying, go to: http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0075.htm and understand that his sermon was entirely a SUPPOSITION on the issue of losing salvation, in order to make his point that CHRISTIANS CANNOT LOSE THEIR SALVATION. Read the last half of the sermon very carefully. In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
23 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89955 | ||
Hi Brad! I emailed you a few weeks ago but never got a response. (I almost forgot I even sent it!) Shame on me! But I was wondering if you got it or if maybe I mistook your email for junkmail and deleted it. I hope not. In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
24 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89954 | ||
Tim The word ELECT is used MANY times in the Bible, particularly in the NT to signify PEOPLE. Now, these people are not just one big collective group but also are each ELECT individuals. Elect individuals gathered together comprise an elect group. But the emphasis is on elect as a personal individual basis signifying a special relationship between specific men and God. Therefore, the "election of grace" argument is a moot point. Please be honest with Scripture. The Bible is not Webster's dictionary. There are many doctrinal issues we must interpret and define by consistent exegesis and inferrance. Just because it's not specifically defined doesn't mean it's not true. The trinity is a good example of this. My friend, you've deferred to the search thing before, and I must confess I've had no success digging anything up in the past with that method. So I'll just have to pass on that. I don't know how you can call election corporate in light of verses like the golden chain, Romans 8:28-30: Rom 8:28 And we know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose. Rom 8:29 For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren: Rom 8:30 and whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. Have a good weekend, Tim! JIBBS |
||||||
25 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89953 | ||
Hello again Tim! OK. I wish this was real time so we could ask the questions before the 20 rabbit trails develop. I know you're not doing it on purpose, but nevertheless, it happens and it seems like we're on two different pages. Regarding logic and the atonement. I CAN support my position very effectively with an abundance of Scripture, but that Scripture will be meaningless to you if we don't define a few things under common agreement. So for now, let's make defining ATONEMENT the main priority before we move on. Also, I agree with you 100 percent that we should never place logic alone above God or His revealed Word. But neither should we believe the ILLOGICAL can be supported by Scripture. I don't believe God is the author of confusion. Within confusion there are contradictions. So God is not the author of contradictions. Please explain to me the following your opinion in as much detail as possible: What was the purpose of the Atonement? What effect did the atonement have on the world? When does the atonement become effective? Was Christ's atonement vicarious or symbolic? Hopefully this will be a good starting place. Also, in future discussions on this topic, please keep in mind (but no need to answer now) this questions: Did He or didn't He?? Did Christ pay (atone) for all the sins of the world or didn't He? Did He satisfy the wrath of God or didn't He? Gentlemen, START YOUR ENGINES! In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
26 | What in the world was Paul thinking?!? | 2 Tim 4:18 | JibbyJee | 89952 | ||
Hi John! Good to hear from you again! That was great advice your youth minister gave you. Where you starting out in your daily reading? I recommend the Gospel of John. It's my favorite of the Gospels. Take care! In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
27 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89951 | ||
Greetings Mike! Those are great points. I also think John 8:47 speaks clearly about the necessity of regeneration prior to ability to "hear" the Good News! Just think of the infinite wisdom God has revealed to us!!! Good talking to you again, Mike! Thank you Lord, for your mercy! In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
28 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89950 | ||
Hank Officially, I have only been a "Calvinist" for about 7 months now. I had previously basically believed the "reformed" way (unknowingly), although I've never gone to a Calvinistic church in my life. Of the 3 churches I've called home, all were very Arminian. But about 7 months ago a friend of mine challenged me on the issue of the scope of the atonement, something I had not previously considered in much depth, and I realized I was grossly inconsistent in my understanding of the Biblical doctrine of the atonement. So I conceded after many, many sleepless nights trying to reconcile Scripture with fleshly instinct. Instinct tells me I'm in control of my life, the Bible tells another story. Perhaps you've missed it in my previous posts, but I have frequently qualified my opinions as being open to debate and scrutiny. I'm as prone to being wrong as anyone! All I ask is for honest, intelligent discussion of the issues. That's it. But for some reason it's tougher than boiled owl to keep any discussions from getting convoluted and sidetracked. Questions are constantly ignored and dodged (although I'm sure not always on purpose) and it seems like very little consideration is made of the Calvinist position. If you want to go play somewhere else, that's fine with me, but the invitation stands open indefinitely for you to come chat with me in the future. I care about properly dividing the Word because it is a Biblical mandate. If I come across what I find to be incorrect teaching, I will ask questions. Maybe I'll help to correct the issue, or maybe I'll be corrected. Either way, truth will prevail. I don't always agree with you, but for the most part I've enjoyed the fellowship with you. Honestly, I sometimes feel like you are very disrespectful to others (especially Calvinists) and tend to speak in a condescending and pedantic tone. Perhaps we all tend to do that in a way. I think sometimes the naked words on the screen do little to convey the full impact of the intended message. Other times, let's fact it, you and I get frustrated with each other and break out the morter and hand grenades. It's expected, although I hope in the future, if we have future contact, we can be more patient and gentle with each other. But I can understand the desire to simply shake hands and go our seperate ways (I get to walk off into the sunset!!). Best wishes in the future Hank. In Christ, JIBBS 1 Cor. 12:13 |
||||||
29 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89884 | ||
Greetings Tim! You said "Are all men elect? I don't know! Where in Scripture does it specify how many are elect? ;-)" I think you missed my point. If someone dies without believing on Christ, are they elect? I believe how we understand the word 'elect' has significant value to our interpretation of Scripture. Take care! In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
30 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89883 | ||
Hank Did I ever say I knew it all? Nope. I'm absolutely willing to be taught and corrected. Are you?? I'm not here to point out anything about anyone. That's not my place, but I DO believe in TRUTH and so I disagree with your notion that these issues are eternally insignificant. I believe how we understand the Scriptures is eternally VITAL, in fact. So your admonition toward ecumenicalism, while I'm sure is well-intentioned, falls far short of honoring God and His truth. If standing up for the Word of God as ABSOLUTE truth is offensive to anyone, then I guess I'm just gonna be offensive to be around. If you can thoughtfully and convincingly show me I'm in error, then by the grace of God, I will flee darkness and embrace the light. But don't tell me light and darkness NEED to coexist. God, by His grace, has made the Scriptures alive to me, and has given me reason to be convinced that what I believe is true. He is perfect and so is His Word. There is nothing wrong with being right. Properly understanding the Word doesn't make someone lose the ability to "grow in the faith"! How absurd! If that's true, then none of us should concretely believe anything!! I think the two of us are diametrically opposed to each other in the most fundamental ways. I beleive Scripture plainly says something--you say I'm twisting it. You say Scripture plainly says something--I say you're ignoring context to support a presupposition. Who's right? Both of us? Let's let the cat out of the bag. You absolute HATE Calvinism and therefore refuse to seriously consider what we believe. You said it well yourself in "I turn him off". Talk about unwilling to be corrected! I want you to know I always listen to your arguments and give them due consideration in light of Scripture. Had I not had an open mind to listening to someone else, I too would still be an Arminian. P.S. Straw men examples like your "puppet" analogy show me once again that you don't have any idea what we believe. Perhaps I should "turn you off"???? IN Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
31 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89698 | ||
Dear Tim You're right, please forgive me. That was stupid and utterly Calvinistic of me to look at what the words actually IMPLIED and respond to the implication instead of the statement itself. Put it this way Tim. I've tried and tried to get you to be honest with the text and CONTEXT, yet you want more than anything to hold on to your interpretations as absolute rule. But you don't give any solid explanations or definitive rebuttals of the reformed arguments. That's fine, I can't force you to see something you don't see. BUT, the Reformed view makes absolutely perfect sense to me and many others and I don't have to do anything more than keep the CONTEXT of Scripture in my heart and mind when attempting to understand it. I couldn't interpret the Bible and come to an Arminian view without being dishonest with myself. If there is sin in that, than so be it. I know in my heart that God has me seeking absolute truth so I have nothing to be afraid of when someone confronts my understanding of Scripture. In fact, I pray that He brings others into my life to help teach and correct me when I'm wrong. I pray that He always gives me a mind ready to learn and a heart willing to be taught. I see the Bible as a beautifully adorned landscape. On the surface, it boasts the most amazing array of wonders and majesty. Yet below the surface their lies even more--treasures of gold and diamonds and pearls. Sometimes you gotta dig to find the loot. In Christ, JIBBS PS Regarding the silly statement about God electing all men (which you obvious believe, in spite of reality) please read and ponder this: Mat 24:31 And he shall send forth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now tell me Tim: ARE ALL MEN ELECT? OHHHH...which reminds me..you wanted verses showing that Jesus only died for the elect...HERE ONE IS AGAIN: Joh 10:14 I am the good shepherd; and I know MINE OWN, and MINE OWN know me, Joh 10:15 even as the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father; and I lay down my life FOR THE SHEEP. Let me guess...you'll quote "we all like sheep have gone astray"...therefore, ALL are sheep, right? Ok, Tim, if you say so ol' buddy. If I'm getting too sarcastic, let me know. I promise you it's in good fun. No hard feelings. |
||||||
32 | What guides our interpretations? | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89697 | ||
"WHOSOEVER WILL"? Greetings Hank! Have you ever thought about the difference between "PRESCRIPTION" and "DESCRIPTION" and the influence each has on Biblical interpretation?? Does the distinction have any value to the context of John 3? Or any of the Bible? In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
33 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89696 | ||
Dear Brad Thanks for the reply. I hope Tim knows that I was not being "hard" on him at all. It's not personal. My last post to him was hastily put together since I was very short on time, hence the slightly to-the-point tone I took. Now, the point of this whole discussion is that Tim will only go as far into the discussion as his traditions allow. But as soon as LOGIC shows the absurdity of the universal atonement position based on Scripture, the head goes in the sand. I'll discuss the issue with anyone, as long as they consider for a few seconds that the interpretation they've had for 30 years just may not be the Law of the Land. THerefore, my challenge stands as is: Show me on what basis anyone is judged for their sin if Christ paid for every sin of every person on the Cross. Right there the Arminian has some serious logical problems in his position. Yet not one word has been said in any attempt to offer a Biblical explanation. I can explain it, but then again, you have to be a big bad Calvinist for the Atonement (THE CORNERSTONE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS!) to be a logical aspect of the faith. Regarding presuppositional philosophy, I respectfully submit to you that it IS the Reformed position that attempts to honestly interpret Scripture using proper hermaneutical methods. If there is anything consistent in Arminian theology, it would be consistent misuse of Scripture context to support--you got it--their own unBiblical presuppositions. Tim thinks that by offering a verse that says Christ died for all without interpreting it in it's own context somehow counts as exegesis and the verse becomes the ABSOLUTE standard by which we should view the atonement. Here's how I see it--I have no problem with someone being in disagreement with me, but at least take the time to explain yourself beyond the quoting of a few proof-texts. These issues are eternally vital! If I'm in error, then please take the time to show me why in an intellectually honest way and--ABOVE ALL--we should ALL keep our minds open and be willing to be taught. Have a good night. In Christ, JIBBS PS You mentioned presuppostional philosophy. Are you into reading Van Til or Bahnsen? |
||||||
34 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89653 | ||
Dear Tim You said that only the Arminian can produce verses to support their views. What an outrageous statement. When it comes down to exegesis, the Reformed position is the only one that stands SOLA SCRIPTURA, while the Arminian view must, by sheer necessity, import something into the text that is either outside Scripture or a blatant misuse of CONTEXT. You certainly do have your traditions, (emphasis on traditions) of which I used to hold as well until I was challenged to truly THINK about the issues at hand in light of ALL of Scripture. You all have your "Pet" proof-texts that have been consistently shown to be illogical or irrevelent given their own context (i.e. John 12:32), yet the heart of the issues never seem to be touched upon. Some of the questions you ask indicate that even though you say you know what Calvinist believe, one is left to wonder if that's really true. For example, "If God can draw some, why can't He draw all"? Now, don't you understand that it's not a matter of "CAN GOD" but rather "WILL GOD". I believe the DRAWING is directly related to SALVATION and you have shown me absolutely NOTHING for me to consider to the contrary. If you won't deal with John 6:35-45 within it's own context, and instead choose to quote John 12:32 from the hip, then please take the time to reconcile the FACT that those who are drawn are given eternal life (John 6:44). You see, there is nothing in John 12:32 to suggest that it is referring to salvation. In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
35 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89499 | ||
Dear Hank: My point would be exactly that--that you infer. If my post was meant to say anything at all, which it really wasn't (other than a little joking between Tim and I) it's this--BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER! That's it! There are Arminians that are elect, just as there are Calvinists that are elect. But neither have exclusivity within them. Both contain tares and both contain wheat. I just happen to believed the reformed view is the correct one on most issues. In Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
36 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89496 | ||
Tim My friend. :) Why don't you let us know what you think? I would say WHY Adam and Eve sinned is a mystery. They did not have sin natures, however they were not perfect either. They had both the ability to sin and the inclination to sin based upon their human nature. God, by His very nature, knew of and ordained sins to happen. It doesn't make him the author of ADAM'S (or anyone's) sins, contrary to Arminian tradition. Jesus Christ, the REDEEMER, is an ETERNAL being, which to me, says God had redemption purposed BEFORE Creation! Having such a purpose in His very identity and nature, how could sin NOT have entered into the world? Endless speculation about WHY Adam sinned is irrevelant. It has nothing to do with OUR fallen condition today in which we are literally SLAVES TO SIN. Tell me, Tim, what is it in us, if not our will, that is "Enslaved to sin"?? Please read Romans 6:5-23 In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
37 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89447 | ||
Dear Tim: Well, my FRIEND, I do think I've referred to you as my friend several times during our conversations, and of course I do consider you one of my forum pals. But now-----for what I know you don't like------ I have a "special" love for my like-minded friends and brothers of the faith. It's kinda like the "special" love God has for His OWN ELECT SHEEP. Of course, I suppose I could limit myself to a vanilla-flavored love for everyone, (my wife, daughter, friends, etc.) like Arminians do with God, but ya'know, I'm just a Neapolitan kind of guy!! IN Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
38 | What in the world was Paul thinking?!? | 2 Tim 4:18 | JibbyJee | 89444 | ||
Greetings John! Welcome to the Forum and thanks for your reply! It's wonderful to see a 14 yearold in here standing up for Jesus! Bring all your friends! I'm ONLY 27, by the way, (to make all the old folks like Hank feel even OLDER (just kiddin' Hank!)). Now, a parody is something, like a skit or a play, or even something written like this that uses sarcasm to make a point (sometimes used to make fun of an opposing view by using metaphorical language). In the case of the post you've responded to, I was using it to use sarcasm to make the point that the Apostle Paul KNEW he was saved AND going to Heaven. Now, there are a lot of misinformed people out there who will tell you that you can lose your salvation, but that is pure nonsense and heresy. If you are saved now, you will be saved when you die. If you say you're saved now and have turned away from the Gospel of Jesus Christ and never return before you die, then you were never truly saved to begin with (1 John 2:19). I invite you to read my post again, now that you know that I, just like you do, believe wholeheartedly in the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints (once-saved-always-saved), and was using sarcasm to make my point. Soli Deo Gloria! JIBBS PS What's your favorite verse or passage of the Bible? Mine is all of Romans 9 or John 6. |
||||||
39 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 89383 | ||
Greetings Micko! And welcome to the Forum! I believe we are living in some incredible times...much like the Reformation days! I have some friends that post in here also...NE14POOL, Joseph3, nivlac5. Also Reformer Joe and John Reformed are solid regulars from the traditional reformed faith. Hope to have more fellowship in the future! God Bless! Soli Deo Gloria! JibbyJee ps. Brother TimMoran, I promise to reply asap, but haven't time due to an unexpected stay in the hospital over the weekend (appendix). But hopefully things will get back to normal in the next few days. --Jibbs |
||||||
40 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 89149 | ||
Greetings NC! How else would we know we are saved if there weren't teachers like John or Paul to include warnings to the church? Are such warnings the prescription for salvation? No. The warnings describe the actions of those who are TRULY born again by the spirit of God, and being born-again and God's workmanship (Eph. 2:10) they will not fail to obey. What you advocate is "Keep up with the Checklist--and be saved", effectively putting the cart before the horse. If we are saved, THEN the checklist will follow. Works follow salvation. The only ones who will obey are those who have been justified and are being sanctified. I find your usage of Hebrews 6:4-6 to be most curious. Have you ever fallen away? In Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |