Results 221 - 240 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | special revelation vs general revelation | Ps 19:1 | Radioman2 | 89252 | ||
tj: Posting to the forum is not a right; it is a privilege. To abuse it is to lose it. I KID YOU NOT! Radioman2 |
||||||
222 | Is Satan ruler over the earth? | Ps 24:1 | Radioman2 | 83660 | ||
Is Satan ruler over the earth? - - - - - - - - - - - - - '...the popular conception that Satan took possession of the “title deed to the earth” is without biblical warrant.' - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'OVERSTATING SATAN’S AUTHORITY - - - - - - - - - - - - - "The Bible does not say - as Anderson represents - that Satan is ruler over the earth (Greek: ge), but rather over this world (Greek: kosmos) or age (Greek: aion)." - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'One of the reasons Satan looms so large in [Neil T.] Anderson’s worldview is his misunderstanding of biblical teaching that Satan is the “god” and “ruler” of this world. 'Anderson’s exposition . . . sounds close enough to what Christians commonly believe that it may not raise many eyebrows. Nonetheless, it contains several faulty interpretations that lead to an unbiblical view of both the authority of Satan and the authority of the believer: '1. Anderson states that Adam’s authority was transferred to Satan, but the popular conception that Satan took possession of the “title deed to the earth” is without biblical warrant. Adam’s rulership was over the natural world; Satan’s rulership is over the fallen angels and lost humanity. The Bible does not say — as Anderson represents — that Satan is ruler over the earth (Greek: ge [Strong's #1093]), but rather over this world (Greek: kosmos) or age (Greek: aion). As a theologian, Anderson should know that these terms, when used in relation to Satan, refer to the present dark spiritual system in which humanity blindly participates (e.g., 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:2; 6:12). If Satan’s offer to Jesus of the kingdoms of the world was genuine, it was because their rulers were under his behind-the-scenes direction (1 John 5:19). He could not, however, offer Him the physical earth, since that has always belonged to God (e.g., Exod. 19:5; Deut. 10:14; Ps. 24:1; 1 Cor. 10:26). '2. Anderson further equates the dominion given by God to Adam over the animals (Gen. 1:28) with the authority given by Christ to His disciples over evil spirits (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17-20), but there is no biblical reason to think they are the same authority. The “significant dominion Adam exercised before the fall” has not yet been restored to redeemed man (Heb. 2:8). '3. The idea that Satan has a legal claim to man is almost as difficult to prove biblically as the idea that he has a legal claim to the earth. It can be said that by inciting man to rebel against God’s authority, Satan tricked him into falling prisoner to the law of sin and death. Then, as man plunged into darkness, he became easily manipulated by the prince of darkness — but this would seem to be a rule by default. Although Scripture indicates that Satan’s authority over angels was once legitimate (Jude 8-9), it nowhere explicitly states that his rule over man is by legal right, and it is doubtful that it even implicitly does so.18 '4. Although Jesus does say in Matthew 28:18 that all authority has been handed over to Him, He does not hand that authority carte blanche over to believers. Rather, on the basis of that authority, He commissions them to go and make disciples of all the nations, and for that work He delegates to them the authority to do a limited number of things (e.g., remit sins — John 20:21-23). Furthermore, 1 John 3:8 (“The Son of God appeared...to destroy the devil’s work”) does not speak of believers, as Anderson suggests. The devil’s work was destroyed once-and-for-all on the cross (John 12:31; Col. 2:15).' ____________________ STATEMENT DA082 The Bondage Maker: Examining the Message and Method of Neil T. Anderson (Part Two: Spiritual Warfare And The “Truth Encounter”) by Elliot Miller To read more go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DA082.htm) |
||||||
223 | Is Satan ruler over the earth? | Ps 24:1 | Radioman2 | 83714 | ||
Is Satan ruler over the earth? - - - - - - - - - - - - - '...the popular conception that Satan took possession of the “title deed to the earth” is without biblical warrant.' - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'OVERSTATING SATAN’S AUTHORITY - - - - - - - - - - - - - "The Bible does not say - as Anderson represents - that Satan is ruler over the earth (Greek: ge), but rather over this world (Greek: kosmos) or age (Greek: aion)." - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'One of the reasons Satan looms so large in [Neil T.] Anderson’s worldview is his misunderstanding of biblical teaching that Satan is the “god” and “ruler” of this world. 'Anderson’s exposition . . . sounds close enough to what Christians commonly believe that it may not raise many eyebrows. Nonetheless, it contains several faulty interpretations that lead to an unbiblical view of both the authority of Satan and the authority of the believer: '1. Anderson states that Adam’s authority was transferred to Satan, but the popular conception that Satan took possession of the “title deed to the earth” is without biblical warrant. Adam’s rulership was over the natural world; Satan’s rulership is over the fallen angels and lost humanity. The Bible does not say — as Anderson represents — that Satan is ruler over the earth (Greek: ge [Strong's #1093]), but rather over this world (Greek: kosmos) or age (Greek: aion). As a theologian, Anderson should know that these terms, when used in relation to Satan, refer to the present dark spiritual system in which humanity blindly participates (e.g., 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:2; 6:12). If Satan’s offer to Jesus of the kingdoms of the world was genuine, it was because their rulers were under his behind-the-scenes direction (1 John 5:19). He could not, however, offer Him the physical earth, since that has always belonged to God (e.g., Exod. 19:5; Deut. 10:14; Ps. 24:1; 1 Cor. 10:26). '2. Anderson further equates the dominion given by God to Adam over the animals (Gen. 1:28) with the authority given by Christ to His disciples over evil spirits (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17-20), but there is no biblical reason to think they are the same authority. The “significant dominion Adam exercised before the fall” has not yet been restored to redeemed man (Heb. 2:8). '3. The idea that Satan has a legal claim to man is almost as difficult to prove biblically as the idea that he has a legal claim to the earth. It can be said that by inciting man to rebel against God’s authority, Satan tricked him into falling prisoner to the law of sin and death. Then, as man plunged into darkness, he became easily manipulated by the prince of darkness — but this would seem to be a rule by default. Although Scripture indicates that Satan’s authority over angels was once legitimate (Jude 8-9), it nowhere explicitly states that his rule over man is by legal right, and it is doubtful that it even implicitly does so.18 '4. Although Jesus does say in Matthew 28:18 that all authority has been handed over to Him, He does not hand that authority carte blanche over to believers. Rather, on the basis of that authority, He commissions them to go and make disciples of all the nations, and for that work He delegates to them the authority to do a limited number of things (e.g., remit sins — John 20:21-23). Furthermore, 1 John 3:8 (“The Son of God appeared...to destroy the devil’s work”) does not speak of believers, as Anderson suggests. The devil’s work was destroyed once-and-for-all on the cross (John 12:31; Col. 2:15).' ____________________ STATEMENT DA082 The Bondage Maker: Examining the Message and Method of Neil T. Anderson (Part Two: Spiritual Warfare And The “Truth Encounter”) by Elliot Miller To read more go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DA082.htm) |
||||||
224 | Is Satan ruler over the earth? | Ps 24:1 | Radioman2 | 83742 | ||
To read more go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DA082.htm) | ||||||
225 | Is Satan ruler over the earth? | Ps 24:1 | Radioman2 | 83743 | ||
To read more go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DA082.htm) | ||||||
226 | Is Satan ruler over the earth? | Ps 24:1 | Radioman2 | 83744 | ||
Deliverance Ministries 'DELIVER US FROM DELIVERANCE MINISTRIES' 'Some of the teaching on spiritual warfare proliferating today is biblically sound, but most is of decidedly mixed value.15 Sensationalistic teachings are replacing traditional evangelical doctrine regarding the Christian’s battle with the Devil. Such doctrine always emphasized the protection Christ brings into the life of a believer, the defeat of the Devil by the preaching of the gospel, and the believer’s victory through growth in sanctification. Evangelicals consistently taught that a Christian defeats Satan by submitting to God and resisting satanic temptation. Spiritual warfare was thought of as moral warfare — the armor of God consisting of those moral qualities that the Holy Spirit produces in a believer’s life. The Christian was understood to be “victorious” over Satan by remaining faithful to God despite all satanic oppression and temptation. 'There is a grave danger in the syndrome which sees a demon behind every problem in a believer’s life. This mindset obscures our moral responsibility to walk in righteousness, and to “mortify the deeds of the body” (Rom. 8:13). The Bible never identifies sins such as lust, anger, and pride as spirits16 but rather as “deeds of the flesh.” It instructs us to “put them all aside” (Col. 2:8), never to cast them out. If we “walk by the Spirit” we “will not carry out the desire of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16). 'Certainly, the demonic realm works in concert with our flesh and serves to exacerbate its desires in an attempt to provoke us to sin. But this is demonic temptation or oppression, not demonic possession. It is an assault from outside that the believer is well equipped to resist and overcome (Eph. 6:10-18). 'What about testimonials of Christian lives being made victorious through deliverance ministry? Even as Christians who believe in the erroneous “healing in the Atonement” doctrine might still be healed because they trusted Jesus for their healing, so Christians who learn to trust Jesus for victory over the Devil can experience victory, even if they erroneously believe they were delivered of demons. But we have often found such misinterpreted victory to be fleeting (as in the story of “Carl”), thus leading to a troubling dependence on deliverance ministry. 'The teaching that Christians can be demonized turns our attention from God to Satan. It can inspire fear in the believer where he or she should experience confidence in Christ As noted, it often makes believers dependent on those with deliverance ministries to protect them from demons. It fosters a spiritualistic superstition that distracts the believer from both proclaiming the gospel and from personal growth in sanctification. 'Perhaps the greatest danger lies in its methodology in determining truth. For, as we saw above, those who teach that a Christian can be inhabited by a demon place their experience above the teaching of Scripture and deny the sufficiency of Scripture in the process. Once the church allows subjective experience to replace the objective test of Scripture on one issue, a precedent will be set for future issues. A theological Pandora’s box will have been opened, leading to an epidemic of superstition and doctrinal deterioration. 'We have seen, however, that Scripture never teaches that a Christian can be inhabited by a demon. Nor does it teach that there is any spiritual problem for which a Christian should undergo an exorcism. Therefore, we can confidently rest in the victory Christ has won over the demonic forces and we can trust God’s resources in our battle against the world, the flesh, and the Devil. May God deliver us from this specious and divisive teaching, and may we use our spiritual resources in Christ and retain the sound teaching of our evangelical heritage.' ____________________ Excerpt from 'Can a Christian Be “Demonized”?' by Brent Grimsley and Elliot Miller (To read more go to: http://www.equip.org/free/DD075.htm) |
||||||
227 | Righteousness by faith NOT WORKS!!! | Ps 32:2 | Radioman2 | 88658 | ||
Duplicate post. | ||||||
228 | He has been here all the time! | Ps 46:2 | Radioman2 | 83717 | ||
God’s presence -- a simple awareness of it or an understanding of the reality of it? ------------- "not the consciousness of God's presence but the reality of it" ------------- 'When we are in an unhealthy condition either physically or emotionally, we always look for thrills in life. In our physical life this leads to our efforts to counterfeit the work of the Holy Spirit; in our emotional life it leads to obsessions and to the destruction of our morality; and in our spiritual life, if we insist on pursuing only thrills, on mounting up "with wings like eagles" ( Isaiah 40:31 ), it will result in the destruction of our spirituality. 'Having the reality of God’s presence is not dependent on our being in a particular circumstance or place, but is only dependent on our determination to keep the Lord before us continually. Our problems arise when we refuse to place our trust in the reality of His presence. The experience the psalmist speaks of—"We will not fear, even though . . ." ( Psalm 46:2 )— will be ours once we are grounded on the truth of the reality of God’s presence, not just a simple awareness of it, but an understanding of the reality of it. Then we will exclaim, "He has been here all the time!"' (www.gospelcom.net/rbc/utmost/devo/07-20.shtml) |
||||||
229 | He has been here all the time! | Ps 46:2 | Radioman2 | 84041 | ||
The Reality of the Presence of God ------------- "not the consciousness of God's presence but the reality of it" ------------- 'When we are in an unhealthy condition either physically or emotionally, we always look for thrills in life. In our physical life this leads to our efforts to counterfeit the work of the Holy Spirit; in our emotional life it leads to obsessions and to the destruction of our morality; and in our spiritual life, if we insist on pursuing only thrills, on mounting up "with wings like eagles" ( Isaiah 40:31 ), it will result in the destruction of our spirituality. 'Having the reality of God’s presence is not dependent on our being in a particular circumstance or place, but is only dependent on our determination to keep the Lord before us continually. Our problems arise when we refuse to place our trust in the reality of His presence. The experience the psalmist speaks of—"We will not fear, even though . . ." ( Psalm 46:2 )— will be ours once we are grounded on the truth of the reality of God’s presence, not just a simple awareness of it, but an understanding of the reality of it. Then we will exclaim, "He has been here all the time!"' (www.gospelcom.net/rbc/utmost/devo/07-20.shtml) |
||||||
230 | praise the Lord at all times | Ps 66:4 | Radioman2 | 79021 | ||
"They will sing praises to Your name." Amen. According to Psalm 66:4, they shall indeed sing praises to His name. 'People call on, pronounce blessings, minister, preach, speak, pray, believe, take oaths, and wage war in his Name. They may revere, fear, suffer for, blaspheme, misuse, be called by, be kept by, or build a temple for the Name.' (God, Name of, Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell Published by Baker Books, a division of Baker Book House Company.) |
||||||
231 | psalm 68:19 in kj compare nasv | Ps 68:19 | Radioman2 | 84400 | ||
Hank: Thanks for a good post and for explaining the difference between David and Goliath. However, forum experience has shown that your explanation may not be met with universal acceptance. I predict that some will try to refute your statement, some will try to capitalize and count the pronouns, and some will totally confuse the issue. Some will discuss who was predestined -- David or Goliath. Some will use your observation to prove water salvation or to deny the Trinity. Others will rhapsodize over the artistic potential of having 5 feet instead of 2. Others will tell us they hate David, deny the existence of Goliath, and that the entire account of D. and G. -- well, it aint necessarily so. And some will insist that it's a man-made doctrine . . . You get the idea. :-) Radioman2 |
||||||
232 | psalm 68:19 in kj compare nasv | Ps 68:19 | Radioman2 | 84408 | ||
Thanks be to the Lord, who daily carries our burdens for us. God is our salvation. Selah (GOD'S WORD Translation Psalms 68:19) Ray: Q: Why do you choose the God's Word translation? A: I sometimes use it because of its high degree of clarity and readability. Q: Because it has three pronouns; our, us, and our? A: The number of pronouns has nothing to do with my reason for using this translation. Q: Don't you think that the "us" is repetitious? A: No, I don't think it's particularly repetitious. The inclusion of the phrase "for us" does not alter the meaning; rather, it clarifies it. Grace and peace, Radioman2 :-) |
||||||
233 | WHERE TO FIND ALL THE NAMES OF GOD | Ps 83:18 | Radioman2 | 76144 | ||
STATEMENT DJ265 The New World Translation Dr. Julius R. Mantey was a first-rate scholar who studied Greek for more than 65 years. He was well known for A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, which he co-authored with Dr. H. E. Dana. The following is a discussion that took place between Dr. Martin and Dr. Mantey on the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation. (...) Dr. Martin: I don’t know whether you’re aware of it, but there is not a single Greek scholar in the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. I did everything I could to find out the names of the translating committee of the NWT, and the Watchtower wouldn’t tell me a thing. Finally, an ex-JW who knew the committee members personally told me who they were, and the men on that committee could not read New Testament Greek; nor could they read Hebrew; nor did they have any knowledge of systematic theology — except what they had learned from the Watchtower. Only one of them had been to college, and he had dropped out after a year. He briefly studied the biblical languages while there. Dr. Mantey: He was born in Greece, wasn’t he? Dr. Martin: Yes, he read modern Greek, and I met him when I visited the Watchtower. I asked him to read John 1:1 in the Greek and then said, “How would you translate it?” He said: “Well, ‘the word was a god.”’ I said: “What is the subject of the sentence?” He just looked at me. So I repeated. “What is the subject of the sentence?” He didn’t know. This was the only person in the Watchtower to read Greek and he didn’t know the subject of the sentence in John 1:1. And these were the people who wrote back to you and said their opinion was as good as yours. Dr. Mantey: That’s right. Dr. Martin: Often we find JW publications quoting scholars. Do they quote these people in context? Dr. Mantey: No. They use this device to fool people into thinking that scholars agree with the JWs. Out of all the Greek professors, grammarians, and commentators they have quoted, only one (a Unitarian) agreed that ‘The word was a god.” Dr. Martin: You have been quoted as saying that the translators of the NWT are “diabolical deceivers.” Dr. Mantey: Yes. The translation is deceptive, and I believe it’s a terrible thing for a person to be deceived and go into eternity lost, forever lost because somebody deliberately misled him by distorting the Scripture! Dr. Martin: What would you say to a JW who was looking for the truth? Dr. Mantey: I would advise him to get a translation other than the NWT, because ninety-nine percent of the scholars of the world who know Greek and who have helped translate the Bible are in disagreement with the JWs. People who are looking for the truth ought to know what the majority of the scholars really believe. They should not allow themselves to be misled by the JWs and end up in hell. (www.equip.org/search/) These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Mantey on the New World Translation" It is available from CRI. |
||||||
234 | WHERE TO FIND ALL THE NAMES OF GOD | Ps 83:18 | Radioman2 | 76145 | ||
'Examining Translations with Jehovah's Witnesses by Rachel D. Ramer' STATEMENT DJ511 '(Note: numbers that appear in in the following text are footnote numbers. To read the footnotes, see www.equip.org/free/DJ511.htm) ' Would you trust a medical doctor who, in the name of humility, refused to reveal where he or she went to medical school? Of course not. So why do Jehovah's Witnesses trust the "translators" of the New World Translation (NWT) who are so "humble" that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society won't reveal their names or credentials? In technical fields such as medicine, engineering, and translating, lack of training can cause physical - or spiritual - death. Displaying credentials is not pride, but accountability. ' Nevertheless, Jehovah's Witnesses read in the foreword of NWT (1984 edition) these seemingly comforting words: "It is a very responsible thing to translate the Holy Scriptures from their original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek into modern speech....The translators of this work, who fear and love the Divine Author of the Holy Scriptures, feel toward Him a special responsibility to transmit his thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible." ' With such a statement, why should Jehovah's Witnesses question their translation? Yet, observant Christians can help them do just that. ' Although it is essential for translators to know the languages they are translating, this doesn't mean we have to know Greek or Hebrew to catch the differences in translations. Simple observation can be powerful. 'Observing the Difference ' Jehovah's Witnesses will often refer to NWT's John 17:3, "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ" (emphasis added). In response, say to the Jehovah's Witnesses, "That sounds different to me." Then read the verse in a credible translation such as the King James Version (KJV), the New International Version (NIV), or the New American Standard Bible (NASB), all with a close variation of "that they may know You." Read all three if the Witnesses doubt the consistency. Mere agreement among translations bears weight. ' Discuss the difference between knowing a friend or taking in knowledge of someone, like studying Abraham Lincoln. Then read Jesus' words in John 5:39-40: "You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life" (NIV). ' In NWT's Matthew 10:32-33, Jesus says, "Everyone, then, that confesses union with me before men, I will also confess union with him before my Father," instead of "confesses me before men." This takes the emphasis off of Jesus and puts it on something Jesus represents. Witnesses will insist there is no difference. Ask them what it means to confess Jesus - what is its purpose? It is primarily to acknowledge who He is - not what He stands for - the very issue the Watchtower wishes to cloud! 'Only the Context Knows for Sure ' When two visiting Witnesses emphasized the importance of the name Jehovah, they brought to my attention the verse: "Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved" (Rom. 10:13, NWT). I responded, "I've read that the Old Testament word for Yahweh or Jehovah is never used in the New Testament1 Why would your translation say 'Jehovah'?" ' "It's only common sense," one answered, "to use the name Jehovah since this is a quote from the Old Testament referring to Jehovah" (see Joel 2:32). ' "Except," I countered, "in Romans, Paul was just referring to the 'Lord Jesus' specifically. When he used the term "Lord" in verse 13, he meant Jesus. He knew he was quoting the Old Testament. He was equating Jesus with Jehovah." ' Most Jehovah's Witnesses are fooled by their organization's use of Greek lexicons or expository dictionaries. William Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words was appealed to 52 times in their encyclopedia, Insights on the Scriptures, even though Vine strongly disagreed with their teachings.2 From sources such as these the Watchtower can sometimes obtain an altered wording for a critical passage and feel justified.' (To read the rest of the article, see www.equip.org/free/DJ511.htm) |
||||||
235 | Ricki Lake: Moral Moron | Ps 101:3 | Radioman2 | 89845 | ||
Ricki Lake: Moral Moron ____________________ "I frankly wish there was more clear thinking going on about moral issues, because then people wouldn't put up with moral morons like Ricki Lake. Oh, that's nasty; I'm calling her a name . No, I'm describing her. She is a moral moron. To put on a show that abuses people like this and take money for it is unconscionable. It's also unconscionable for people to watch it and enjoy it and to consider it entertainment." ____________________ 'Ricki Lake: Moral Moron 'by Gregory Koukl '. . .if you are one of the voyeurs who watches that show on a regular basis, shame on you. ____________________ 'I have pretty strong feelings about TV. I satisfy those feelings, for the most part, by ignoring it. ____________________ 'I wish most others would as well. I only watch TV once in a while. I watch videos. Occasionally, you'll catch me watching Biography on A and E because oftentimes, if I buy some food to bring home, that's what's on when I'm ready to sit down and eat. That's it. I'm not into network TV whatsoever. 'Every once in a while, though, for one reason or another, I stumble upon something. This first occasion of stumbling upon a particular show that I'm going to tell you about happened last week when I was at a friend's house. She's married and has kids and I just happened to catch a portion of this particular talk show. On the show, there was a reunion between two people. Two people who had been sweethearts in the past, had separated, and the gentleman was upset because he and his sweetheart had been apart for so long. He really wanted a reconciliation, so he arranged to meet his sweetheart on TV. The way the program works, is that the other person is invited to come to the show, yet they don't know what's going on. The first person sets it up for the audience, and then the whole thing is revolved around the sharing of something personal between two people. Everybody watches while the first one tells the audience what is going to happen, then they bring in the unsuspecting second party, the communication follows and the audience interacts with that. 'The problem is, in my view, the kind of communication that goes on here, because in this particular case, there was a young man explaining how his sweetheart was now estranged, he wanted his sweetheart back and on and on and on. They call his sweetheart in. His sweetheart, if you haven't guessed it already, is another man. An older man. The young man is 24, the older man is 33 or 35. The younger man pulls out a teddy bear and a bouquet of roses from underneath his chair, walks over, hands the teddy bear and the bouquet of roses to the other man--his lover--throws his arms around him and kisses him on the neck. They embrace. They come back and sit down and then the one basically proposes to the other in front of an admiring audience. This is called the Ricki Lake Show . 'If there are some of you out there who are listening and you say, "Oh, yeah, I know just what you're talking about," shame on you. Unless you know what I'm talking about because you also just happened to stumble upon that show. But if you are one of the voyeurs who watches that show on a regular basis, shame on you. I have never seen a more disgusting display of applause of immorality, or a more disgusting display of emotional rape of human beings as I saw that day. 'By the way, when I was at my friend's house, the mom was aware of what was going on, kind of in the background, that the kids were watching this show. I was disgusted, after I saw what happened on the show. I walked out of the room and I said "I can't take this. It's so disgusting to me." Mom said, "Yeah, it's really awful. I don't know how people can watch that." I turned around and said to Mom, "It's your TV." For some reason, she got the idea that she had no control over what her teenage children were watching. Everybody was turning up their noses, yet they were all watching and giving their point of view, instead of reaching over and just turning that blasted thing off. If you watch enough of that stuff, it starts to change the way you think. ( . . . ) 'I frankly wish there was more clear thinking going on about moral issues, because then people wouldn't put up with moral morons like Ricki Lake. Oh, that's nasty; I'm calling her a name . No, I'm describing her. She is a moral moron. To put on a show that abuses people like this and take money for it is unconscionable. It's also unconscionable for people to watch it and enjoy it and to consider it entertainment.' ____________________ To read more go to: (http://www.str.org/cgi-bin/daily_commentary.pl) |
||||||
236 | Ricki Lake: Moral Moron | Ps 101:3 | Radioman2 | 90105 | ||
Ricki Lake: Moral Moron ____________________ "I frankly wish there was more clear thinking going on about moral issues, because then people wouldn't put up with moral morons like Ricki Lake. Oh, that's nasty; I'm calling her a name . No, I'm describing her. She is a moral moron. To put on a show that abuses people like this and take money for it is unconscionable. It's also unconscionable for people to watch it and enjoy it and to consider it entertainment." ____________________ |
||||||
237 | Prophetic perfect tense in other verses? | Ps 102:16 | Radioman2 | 99816 | ||
Tara1: No one uses the NWT except the JW's. JW's on the other hand will use nothing else! Of the NWT you write: "I've yet to come across a better Bible version." Just off the top of my head, I can think of at least 30 Bible versions that are better than the NWT: KJV ASV RSV NASB ESV NIV NKJV TEV CEV GOD's WORD Translation HCSB NLT NAB The Message Amplified Bible The NET Bible (New English Translation) 21st Century King James Version Worldwide English (NT) Young's Literal Translation Darby Translation Wycliffe New Testament Third Millenium Bible NRSV Douay-Rheims Bible Jerusalem Bible New English Bible New Century Version World English Bible Young's Literal Translation Weymouth New Testament --Radioman2 |
||||||
238 | Prophetic perfect tense in other verses? | Ps 102:16 | Radioman2 | 103246 | ||
No one enjoys the NWT except the JW's. JW's on the other hand will enjoy nothing else! It has undergone many revisions. It is not a translation, but a corrupt sectarian paraphrase. --Radioman2 |
||||||
239 | To think clearly and Biblically | Ps 119:105 | Radioman2 | 85812 | ||
"I think I'm somewhat of an evangelical iconoclast because I'm always breaking up people's parties, so to speak. An iconoclast is an image breaker, someone who kind of attacks, to some degree, cherished notions. Sometimes that bothers people and I 'm sorry about that. I don't mean to cause trouble for the sake of trouble, but I do mean to force people to think clearly and Biblically, even about those ideas they cherish the most." -- Gregory Koukl To read more go to: (www.str.org/free/commentaries/theology/actsvoic.htm) |
||||||
240 | How does God speak to us? | Ps 119:105 | Radioman2 | 85813 | ||
How does God speak to us? 'I am a bit distressed even talking about this issue because my comments are meant to try to rein Christians in a little bit, to keep them off of the fringe... 'But whenever I have to rein Christians in a bit and talk about this kind of thing I feel badly because I realize that some people are straining at the bit for the best of reasons and with the best of intentions...They want to experience more of the working of the Holy Spirit in their life. And here is Koukl coming in, apparently throwing cold water on the whole operation. 'I feel bad about that because I have no intention of quenching the work of the Holy Spirit. My entire goal is to be very, very careful and look closely at the specifics of what's being held to be true to see if they do, in fact, line up with the directives given in the Scriptures. Or, are we drawing some wrong conclusions that cause us to go over the edge and maybe do some spiritual damage to ourselves and others?... 'I think I'm somewhat of an evangelical iconoclast because I'm always breaking up people's parties, so to speak. An iconoclast is an image breaker, someone who kind of attacks, to some degree, cherished notions. Sometimes that bothers people and I 'm sorry about that. I don't mean to cause trouble for the sake of trouble, but I do mean to force people to think clearly and Biblically, even about those ideas they cherish the most. And, to many of us, the thing that we cherish the most is this idea that we have a personal hotline to God and we ought to expect Him to speak to us about our decisions. 'I had a very stimulating conversation last week about this. I talked about it on Sunday in some detail, and then a friend of mine wrote me a note and offered me eighteen references from the book of Acts that seem to contradict my point of view. So what I want to do for just a few moments is to talk about these particular references and see if they do contradict what I was saying last weekend. 'I have to make clear what my point of view is so that it's not misunderstood. Let me capsulize it for you very quickly. My point of view is basically four quick points: 'First of all, learning to hear the voice of God is not taught as a Christian discipline that we must learn in order to live the optimal Christian life. This is the "hotline to God" view in which we get specialized and tailor-made instructions for our personal lives. That is not taught in Scripture. 'Secondly, God sometimes does give specialized instructions, so I'm not saying that God can't do that and I'm not putting God in a box. He does sometimes give specialized instructions. He did in Biblical times and He does in the present. But when we read in the Bible especially in the New Testament, which is what our discussion is about today when He has done it, such specialized instructions are clear first of all. They are not mumbled. They are not whispered. They are not nudged. And they are, almost without exception in the New Testament, a sovereign intrusion by God into the circumstances rather than something that is first sought by a Christian. 'Thirdly, God's intrusion in these cases is sometimes through special gifts in the body that I believe are in full operation today, but are by very nature individual. In other words, every person has his own gift and each person does not have every gift. So this working through gifts can't be a means of every Christian hearing from God. In other words, sometimes God intervenes with a prophetic word, but since prophetic words only come through those people who have the gift of prophecy, it's not the kind of thing we all have to cultivate, to learn to do. 'Finally, there are clearly workings of the Spirit in the area of teaching, conviction of sin and comforting of individual Christians. I admit that those workings are private, individual and tailored to individual people. Those kinds of things are not in question here. 'We're going to do a little Bible study. We're going to look at eighteen references suggested in the letter to me that was an attempt to offer contrary evidence from the Scriptures to the point of view that I just described for you. All of these references come from the book of Acts. We will see if these references actually undermine the basic point I have been making or not. In a sense, I hope the Bible study will go beyond just the meaning of the passages because what this will do, as we walk through it, is help us to learn how to be more precise and particular about our Bible study and not draw conclusions hastily or inappropriately from the Scriptures. But take a close, methodical look to get a clear idea of what is actually being averred here about Christian disciplines and God speaking.' ____________________ Acts and the Voice of God by Gregory Koukl To read more go to: (www.str.org/free/commentaries/theology/actsvoic.htm) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [40] >> |