Results 241 - 260 of 1806
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: stjohn Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | By What Law | Rom 3:23 | stjohn | 217334 | ||
Dear Vintage, Though not all Scripture is written to us, and words spokin are not all spoken to us, it is all still for us. 2 Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" Vintage, are you sure you don't want that free book offer from Doc? Brother, you sure could use it! John |
||||||
242 | Why is the Christian Church so divided? | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 217298 | ||
Hi Hoppy, Thank you, sir! And I'm very glad to see your ears are still working fine. John 10:27 :-) John |
||||||
243 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217297 | ||
Hi MJH, Peace and grace to you, my friend. I'd like to say again that I very much appreciate your grace and respectfulness. In it is a lesson and an honorable example to follow for all of us here at SBF. I take my hat off to you, sir. Lets first clarify once again that, when we are speaking of the 'law', in regard to this discussion, we are speaking of that part of the Mosaic Law that is 'temporal', and not, spiritual. In other words, the ceremonial law, (i.e. dietary restrictions, Feast Days, New Moons, ‘temporal’ Sabbath keeping, etc.) and not at all speaking of the ‘moral law’ given to Israel, by God, through Moses, (i.e. Mosaic Law) which part is the unchanging eternal law of God. Moses, ‘in no way’ established this part of the law, (i.e. moral law) by giving it to Israel. This part of the law (i.e. moral law) has been part of God's 'unchanging' character throughout eternity, i.e. 'do' love God, love thy neighbor, 'do not' murder, bear false witness, cheat, take things you have no right to, commit adultery, covetousness, etc. You wrote: -“Therefore, since you were called to live a special kind of life within God’s Kingdom, stop judging one another on disputable matters.”- I couldn’t agree more! Just imagine if we as Christians just kept all of the moral law! What kind of a witness would that be? Instead of the kind of debauchery and lawlessness we see coming from individuals in the Church today. You also wrote: -“One follows the Sabbath and one does not. Live in unity and remain in Jesus, but by all means stay away from those empty teachings based on human dogma.”- Again I couldn’t agree more! And that brings us to your questions. You wrote: -“That at least holds God’s teaching found in Deuteronomy with respect, while still providing an option that God’s Law can be divided up into parts, some we follow, and some we do not.”- Well said and I very much appreciate your thoughts and admire the fact you are respecting that part of the law; of course from my/our point of view, also respecting that that part of the law is no longer required for righteousness, justification or sanctification. (Acts 15:1-29, Eph. 2:15) And to say that it is still 'commanded' for us to do, goes against that we should not judge each other in regard to these things. Our words are very important and should be considered very carefully when we teach about the law (i.e. the whole law) and how it effects us today This then takes us back to your first question; you wrote: -“Okay, fine. We stop following those commands. But, (and this is my point), would God ever have His Spirit speak through Paul and say, “That part of the law is based on human tradition and empty philosophies of this world?” Would he ever declare that these parts of the law are “against you?” Or, the same as “the elemental spirits of this world?””- Yes, I believe He would. You see, that part of the law is temporal, not spiritual, and temporal things are indeed “the same as” and in regard to “the elemental spirits of the world” and those who insisted that new believers follow these teachings, were basing there teachings on “human tradition and empty philosophies of this world.” not on that which is spiritual, but temporal and worldly. And have no ‘corporate’ (i.e. the body of Christ as a whole) effect on our eternal soul, eternal security, or spiritual well-being. John |
||||||
244 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217261 | ||
Hi MJH, I do appreciate the time you spent in your response, and always appreciate the fact you're gracious and polite in your responses to everyone. I thought it was understood that those from our camp are never ever saying that God's law concerning the moral law(s) is/are absolutely still in effect and always will be. That was never nailed to the Cross. We are not forcing the moral law into the text at all. you are reading that into what we are saying. We are always speaking of the ceremonial law when discussing this subject. Never do we say that we should live like heathens, living in lawlessness, or that Paul taught that, as I believe your explanation implies we are saying. I hope that clarifies my/our position a bit. John |
||||||
245 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217256 | ||
Hi MJH, That's exactly my point. When someone looks long and hard enough for something, that doesn't exist, they can find an argument that will favor the theory being promulgated. The text clearly and plainly says, "kill and eat" and God's word repeats this three times, so there would be no mistaking what was being said. There is nothing whatsoever ambiguous about that. Peter would have found it quite objectionable to go to the gentiles and eat with them if he would have to share in the kind of foods they ate. That is without God showing him that it was okay to eat these things. You know, MJH, I'm convicted by the Holy Spirit most every day, and quite often several times a day, for not doing things in a godly way. I d have to say in my case it usually has something to do with pride. I know many, very Godly men and women, that can attest to the same thing. They can barley get through a day, without the Spirits conviction. But I nor they ever felt even a twinge of guilt, for eating a pork chop, or perhaps some sweet, succulent scampi. And even though that's not found in the Scriptures, so it really doesn't hold much water around here, nonetheless, I find it rather convincing. Thanks again for your time. John |
||||||
246 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217242 | ||
Hi MJH, Concerning Acts 10. Can you tell me why God, would tell Petter to, "kill and eat" if He didn't mean, "kill and eat"? Wouldn't you think God could or would say what He means, without being so ambiguous? If He only intended to let Petter know He was just talking about the Gentiles being made clean, then He is more then capable of doing so. Don't you think? I mean, if it takes as much explaining as those of your persuasion go through; and I really don't mean to be offensive, but, well, MJH, to be honest, it seems a little silly, really. I think if thats all that God intended to say, He would have been much more clear about it, instead of causing so much confusion. John |
||||||
247 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217241 | ||
Hi MJH, Yes, my mistake, you're correct. I see that Doc has answered for me. (Thanks Doc) The only thing I would add to his post is to read Acts 15, through to verse 29. John |
||||||
248 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217240 | ||
Hi MJH, Since most orthodox Christians believe the law concerning keeping of the Sabbath day and feast days and dietary restrictions, has been done away with and, nailed to the Cross, just like circumcision; option 4) all of the above. If you want to keep doing these things, thats fine, just don't try to tell others they should do it too. Because of course that would by implication be judging them. Thanks for your time. John |
||||||
249 | Define the true church. | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217197 | ||
Hi Rakpak, I'd just gone out to watch some fireworks. Didn't mean to run out on you but I remembered at the last minute our Church was putting on a show. So then we'd probably call the NAS, KJV, NKJV, HVS, ASV, NASB, NLT, ESV, YLT, RSV, etc. ect. all mistranslations. Is that right? Did William Tyndale, the translator and writer of the first printed English Bible, really translate and write the way he did for traditions sake, and or, Bible sales? I've read an abridged biography of Tyndale, and I don't remember seeing that in there. Do you suppose it's in the long version of his Biography? Why don't you just use the Hebrew Names Version? Why write a whole new translation? John p.s. I don't really hang a denominational name on myself, though I do belong to a Baptist congregation. |
||||||
250 | Define the true church. | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217194 | ||
Dear rakpak, Am I to presume that all the modern translations have words that have been added? Pray tell, what words have been added that the translators somehow all missed? Could they really all have been wrong? Did the Holy Spirit show you these, 'words' or did you figurer it out all on your own? John p.s. By the way, my name is John, you don't have to call me stjohn, you may, however, call me John the baptist, i.e. southern baptist. :-) |
||||||
251 | Define the true church. | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217187 | ||
That's incredible. Have you made other changes as well? Fill us in please. | ||||||
252 | Define the true church. | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217185 | ||
Would you please be a bit more clear? Are you saying that you have translated the Bible? | ||||||
253 | Are Catholic members consider Christian? | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217180 | ||
Dear Bother Doc, It never ceases to confound me how so many can erroneously think of truth as something subjective, that can be seen from conflicting winds of doctrine or independent from orthodoxy. That quote of Spurgeon is one of my favorite quotes too, and one in which we can surly see much truth. I don't understand how we can in certain areas of doctrine, almost completely discount what has been written by men who have been so overwhelmingly excepted as sound in there doctrine and who fear God, and show it, time and time again in reading the history of their lives and in their exposition of God's word. But instead they will search out what they want form every sources they can find, giving little regard to whether it's been scrutinized and excepted by orthodox Christians. Ex 18:21 Thank you for an excellent post! John |
||||||
254 | Define the true church. | Heb 12:23 | stjohn | 217179 | ||
rakpak, do you mind telling us what translation you're using? In Isa 1:18 you have substuted YHWH for the word, God. I have seen this translated as, God, Yahweh, and even, Jehovah, but never as YHWH. |
||||||
255 | Giving one's life | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 217176 | ||
Amen, Brother Doc! You make yourself very clear to me most all of the time. Though I'm a bit dense at times, that one didn't get past me either. I wasn't contradicting, or thinking in a different area. Keeping His prepossess in mind, I was simply reasoning in my way, taking a different road and -I'm not talking about the 'narrow road' but metaphorically- coming to the same place. Then just expanding a bit. I guess I didn't make myself very clear. Sorry, I was rambling a bit, and sometimes I think people know what I'm thinking without completely explaining myself. This line of thinking makes me wonder though, just how much we sometimes think we can further His purpose, when He, ultimately, is sovereign. I'm not saying of course, we shouldn't do anything, on the contrary, we should do all we can, and then some. Some things about His mysteries will always just amaze me. John |
||||||
256 | Giving one's life | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 217174 | ||
Dear Doc, Well said, sir, Romans 12:1 at first glance got me to thinking though; that it might not really fit well because it says to offer our bodies as a 'living' sacrifice, and our organs can hardly be physically donated while we are still alive. But on further reflection -if we consider that, by our living promise to donate an organ we extend the life of another, then- it is reasonable. This seems very reasonable indeed. After all, we couldn't make the decision to donate an organ, after we are dead. Which brings me around once again to reflection, and a memory of an old Bible teacher who once said he especially liked the King James version of this verse, because he always thought of God as being so very reasonable. "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, [which is] your reasonable service." Romans 12:1 KJV John |
||||||
257 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217161 | ||
So, you are saying that, circumcision, feast days, sabbath days and dietary restrictions, are 'tagged on' by man? Because thats what Paul is talking about. I don't know what you think the law was given for, but according to Scripture, the law was given as a tutor, a teacher, to show the Israelites, and us, that we are sinners; because no one ever kept the whole law, except our Lord Jesus Christ; and according to Scripture, any part of the law that was, or is not kept, means you are guilty of breaking the whole thing. If you're going to keep it, you cant pick and chose; every line, every dot, every title, every thread and every stitch; nothing must be overlooked. How you doin with that? You'll have to show in Scripture (sola Scriptura) where it says that those commandments and doctrines of men spoken about by Paul, are the extra oral portions of the law. | ||||||
258 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217126 | ||
Hi grafted in, The only thing wrong with is that the Colossians where not attempting to supplant the law of Moses with laws of pagan religions, Paul makes it clear in this chapter that he is referring to those of the circumcision of which could only mean the Jewish believers that were attempting to bring them back under the ceremonial law. There were no pagan man made religions that were keeping the sabbath, requiring circumcision, nor did they have decries that would forbid the Colossians from partaking in food or drink. Which Paul refers to in verse 20-21 "If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,"Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" I rather like Matthew Henry's summation of this chapter: "True wisdom is, to keep close to the appointments of the gospel; in entire subjection to Christ, who is the only Head of his church. Self-imposed sufferings and fastings, might have a show of uncommon spirituality and willingness for suffering, but this was not "in any honour" to God. The whole tended, in a wrong manner, to satisfy the carnal mind, by gratifying self-will, self-wisdom, self-righteousness, and contempt of others. The things being such as carry not with them so much as the show of wisdom; or so faint a show that they do the soul no good, and provide not for the satisfying of the flesh. What the Lord has left indifferent, let us regard as such, and leave others to the like freedom; and remembering the passing nature of earthly things, let us seek to glorify God in the use of them." Matthew Henry John |
||||||
259 | abide | 1 John 2:3 | stjohn | 217121 | ||
MJH, At least you understand you are in the minority. Just a couple of questions I have that no one from your camp has even begun to answer other then to say you cant build a doctrine on one verse. Just what does Paul mean by Peter's hypocrisy? And what does he mean by saying not to judge in regard to food or new moons or sabbath days? Can you please explain those two small things to me? It should be pretty easy. It sure is from our perspective. |
||||||
260 | Are Jewish people assured salvation? | Gal 3:16 | stjohn | 217111 | ||
You know, rakpak, I can't tell you how many times I listened to some winner of a contest being interviewed and the interviewer will say: "Well you had a bad start, but you persevered and pulled off the win! Or the consistent will say: "I had a bad start, but didn't quit, and here I am in the winners circle holding the trophy!" I think one of the most famous quotes from a commencement speech at a university graduation ceremony, was given by Winston Churchill. Arguably one of the greatest orators of all time and it was expected he would give a great speech that day. He stood there for quite some time before he began to speak. When all was very quite, and all were becoming a little uncomfortable waiting for him to speak, he simply said: "Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never.... give up!" And then, he turned around and slowly walked off the stage.... There have been probably thousands of speeches given at those kind of events that are soon forgotten, but, No one there that day, ever forgot that speech. John |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [91] >> |