Results 281 - 300 of 4325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
281 | Heb 6:4-6 | Matt 12:31 | Hank | 186888 | ||
God's-elect - The subject was brought up on the Forum recently whether new registrants have the right to reach back into the archives and dig up old posts to which to respond. The answer is yes, of course; it is not a seniority-based right, although in many instances you will be responding to someone who has long flown the coop. But that's hardly my point. At a time when there has been a great deal of discussion about the lack of wisdom of revisiting the freewill/election controversy, a topic that has been literally run into the ground on SBF, you reach back two years and respond to a post dealing with this very topic. ..... Look, we all know you, as well as others on the Forum, are an avid advocate of the doctrine of election. You have made that abundantly clear already, and one would have to be dull indeed not to be able to deduce it from your user screen name alone. So what's your aim in continuing to dwell on this one subject, the freewill/election issue, a subject than which few others engender so much controversy and heated debate? Friend, you have been advised to get off your monothematic hobby horse, and in this post I must tell you that the advisory becomes a warning. This Forum will simply not permit any registrant to persist to push a doctrinal bias, especially one that has an incontrovertible track record of being potentially explosive and highly divisive. This topic has been debated for centuries and is a subject of debate still. We are giving ourselves an enormous amount of undeserved credit if we are so egotistical to think that we are going to solve this centuries-old dilemma by making a few posts on this Forum. What we are far more likely to accomplish is something we should not aspire to at all: engendering divisiveness and ill will, and spreading confusion to disciples, young and old alike. That is one cental reason why this is neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian Forum. It is not a Forum that pushes freewill or election, or Methodism or Presbyterianism, or any other ism. It is not an internet soap box, a chat room, a dispensary of advice to the love-lorn or to readers with medical, marital or other domestic problems. It is not designed to be merely a discussion group either. It is from Alpha to Omega a Study Bible Forum. The guidelines are clearly spelled out. See the appropriate sections under "Resources" on the left column of the home page. ..... In summary, if you'd like to continue to post in accordance with established and compulsorary guidelines, full speed ahead. If you'd rather do things your way, you should by all means consider doing them elsewhere. The object of this post is not to be harsh or to demean in any way. But I've been on this Forum since its very early days and I'm putting a bug in your ear, brother. And that's simply, Follow the rules and pay attention to what your peers say to you in response to your questions and comments. --Hank | ||||||
282 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 186819 | ||
Psalm 25 - Greetings, and welcome, even though your voyage on SBF seems to have run swiftly into a mild tempest! Chances are you may have already discovered that it pays to test the waters before launching out full sail. :-) ...... For me the issue of the absolute sovereignty of God has been settled for decades, as apparently yours has, although I have no way of knowing whether for decades. My decades add up now to about six, during which time I've never felt constrained to kick against the goads by placing God's sovereignty into question. But I am slightly uncomfortable with your assessment of what you term "the free-will mentality" -- a characteristic you assign (and I believe somewhat arbitrarily) to that school of soteriology we commonly label "Arminian." ..... Specifically, you say, "The Arminian 'freewill' view is very damaging and destructive. God's honor and sovereignty are being destroyed by the freewill mentality." .... Now I have some Arminian friends who I think would be surprised to think that they had such magnificient power that they, little creatures of clay that they are, could, by the force of their beliefs, destroy the honor and sovereignty of Almighty God! And I'm stunned and numbed to hear this startling revelation from a stated Calvinist! ..... I've been a follower of Christ for 58 years and during that time I've assigned my mind to investigate these so-called schools of soteriology, Calvinism and Arminianism. That being true, your bold (I first thought of calling it brash) statement concerning these two systems arrested my attention and I would be happy if what you say rings true for me, but frankly it does not. Here is your quote to which I allude: "The freewill view will leave you many unanswered questions, many! The Calvinist view answers 'all of them.'" Peradventure it would be a happy day for so many of us if your utopian claims about Calvinism were true, but they are not true, not for me and not for anyone else that I know. They weren't true even for John Calvin who, to the best of my knowledge and belief, is not on record anywhere as ever having claimed that he had all the answers. ....... Well, you had your say. I've had mine. Now let's not expand this little meeting into a long-winded discussion or a debate. If you wish, you may access the forum archives to find enough material on these two systems of soteriology to keep you busy for hours on end. And you can follow my posts to get some idea of where I stand, just in case you'd feel better by pinning a label on me. :-) ...... P. S. I do hope that you will find the Forum a place to learn more about our Lord and grow in Him, as well as a place where you can help others likewise to learn and grown. Agape. 1 Corinthiansd 13. --Hank | ||||||
283 | Calvin or Armini | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 186722 | ||
Very well, GE. I see no earthly need to pursue this issue further with you. ..... One side note I would like to make, however. On March 27 in your Post 185733 you asked what soteriology meant and that same day in Post 185742 Doc told you. Now here you come on April 12 saying you don't know what soteriology is. It causes me to wonder whether you pay any attention to the answers you receive from the good people on this Forum. Pardon me please if I am wrong in my observation, GE, but it seems to me you derive some comfort in not being a scholar yourself and seeing no need for scholarship. Moreover, you express amazement at "how complicated and deep some people try to make the Scriptures." Friend, no one needs to exert any effort in trying to make the Scriptures deep. The Scriptures ARE deep. Did any rational person ever believe or assert that the Author is shallow? Even though God, as John Calvin aptly put it, talks to us in baby talk, His words still take the keenest of human minds to the end of their tethers very rapidly. We stand in absolute awe of the might and majesty of the transcendent God of all creation, with whom, said the psalmist, there is none to compare (Psalm 40:5). ...... "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, declares the Lord. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts" (Isaiah 55:8,9). ...... It is vain to try to put God in a box and unspeakably vain to try to re-image Him in our image, though some do. --Hank | ||||||
284 | Can one who commits suicide be saved? | Ex 20:13 | Hank | 186680 | ||
Dear Heir - It's good to hear from you after so long a time. You registered on this Forum in the early days of 2001, just days before I did. ..... You began this post with a disclaimer for your lack of revelation. Why? If you have a complete copy of the Bible, you have 66 divinely inspired books, the complete revelation of God to man, and that's all anyone has, friend. ...... You've been hanging around the Forum long enough to know that posts which are heavy on opinion and light on scriptural proof to back it up have a hard time of getting off the ground. So, if you still want to maintain that your views on suicide are correct, then it becomes your burden to furnish clear scriptural proof that they are. ...... But any discussion of suicide in connection with soteriology invariably involves a major Christian doctrine, that of the eternal security of the believer. One must ask whether the canopy of grace has boundaries and exceptions. One must ask what, if anything, he must DO in order to maintain his salvation. Must one try to master the art of repentance so that he can keep ahead of his sins by repenting of them swiftly and regularly? Finally, does not your position on suicide make it tantamount to the unpardonable sin? Yet suicide clearly was not what Jesus spoke about in Matthew 12:31. In fact, in this verse Jesus said, "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men" (KJV). Thus to posit that suicide cannot be forgiven makes Jesus' words of no effect. ..... Young friend, please rethink your position and consider amending your post by the issuance of a new one -- a new one that is based solidly on Scripture instead of opinion. --Hank | ||||||
285 | 2 Natures? | Phil 2:6 | Hank | 186669 | ||
Thank ye, John. Those Scripture portions are mighty hard to beat. John's preamble to his Gospel is so stately, so powerful, so lovely, so precious. It is one of my favorite passages in all Scripture. It's so strong on the preexistence and deity of Christ that a certain cult has felt compelled to change key wording in to force it to suit their whims and comply with their blatantly false teaching. ...... By the way, where did you get a fresh brain this morning? I'd like to order a case or two of them myself if they aren't too expensive, and brains as small as mine shouldn't be. :-) --Hank | ||||||
286 | 2 Natures? | Phil 2:6 | Hank | 186623 | ||
No fair! I asked you first :-) ..... Seriously, what I am driving at is that I'd like to see you expand on your answer, expounding, with scriptural references, on the "fully God, fully man" doctrine. This is a key doctrine of the Christian faith, yet one of the least understood. It is taught that the incarnate Jesus was man with divine attributes; or, that He was God with human attributes. Is either correct? What does the Bible teach? This is a big order, John, so take your time in responding; or, if you prefer, you may elect to pass. I'm not trying to trick you at all, or to scold you, but it is such a vital subject that I believe it deserves more than a quick answer. --Hank | ||||||
287 | 2 Natures? | Phil 2:6 | Hank | 186613 | ||
Hi, John - "that adds up to two." Two what, sir? --Hank | ||||||
288 | Existance of Jesus in the OT? | Dan 3:25 | Hank | 186481 | ||
Dear young Azure -- "old Hank"? You make me feel so decrepit. Why, I'm only 27 to those with dyslexia. ..... Thanks for giving me such a generous "grade" on the post. That makes me happy, but what makes me even happier still is to see you continue to grace the Forum with your delightful posts. I've had a love affair with language since I learned to say "da-da" (I accomplished this when I was about 19 I believe), and I was therefore held at attention when I read your observations about certain Chinese characters in a recent post. The study of Chinese must be absolutely fascinating. Everything I know about it could be contained easily inside a small fortune cookie. Agape. --Hank | ||||||
289 | Lot righteous? | Gen 19:8 | Hank | 186433 | ||
Hmmm...interesting. Just dropping in to dump a question or two on the unsuspecting weavers of this thread :-) ..... Righteous is a word we see bandied about quite a bit. What does it mean to be righteous? Does it mean something different now from what it did in Lot's time? And how does one become righteous? Is it something he does for himself or something that God does for him? We've all a handy tool box of opinions, of course, but let's put it aside and talk about what the Bible teaches on this thing called righteousness. --Hank | ||||||
290 | Translation / Transliteration | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 186275 | ||
Excellent answer, Tim! Clear and easy to follow. --Hank | ||||||
291 | is suicide a sin? | Ex 20:13 | Hank | 186274 | ||
Late-night greetings to you, duolos, and if you observe closely you just may be able to see a segment of the red welcome mat laid out to welcome you to SBF! ..... In your initial quartet of posts, you have responded to posts that are six years old. The registrant you responded to has not made a post to this forum in years, so you are most unlikely to hear from him. And all your posts are about suicide. Why of all the wide selection of topics did you choose this one? And, finally, if your screen name, duolos, is meant to be the Greek word for slave or bond-servant, the word is spelled doulos. --Hank | ||||||
292 | Teaching Bible Prophecy | Acts 1:7 | Hank | 186159 | ||
Hi, Tony - I agree with you that there are any number of avenues of approach and tools that can be used to get before people in order to bring them the message of the gospel of Christ. Payday comes when they, like the Philippian jailor, ask "What must I do to be saved?" and we can tell them with confidence and great joy, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved." (Cf. Acts 16:22ff.) --Hank | ||||||
293 | Avoid a Sugar Coated Gospel | Zech 12:3 | Hank | 186114 | ||
Doc, could we say without dishonor either to the Gospel or the Prince of Preachers that the gospel IS a little like MandM's? It melts in your heart and not in your hands. I stole this idea in a sneaky, round-about way from our brothers Searcher and jthetrick. :-) But if Spurgeon was moved to use the phrase "sugared gospel" in his time, what would he call the sickening mess that abounds in so much of Christendom today? Paul's solemn charge to Timothy holds today as much as it ever did: "Preach the word; be ready in season and out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." (2 Timothy 4:2-4, NASB). --Hank | ||||||
294 | Teaching Bible Prophecy | Acts 1:7 | Hank | 186070 | ||
Tony - Following your recitation of certain things already past, you conclude, "but that shouldn't deter us from preaching about events that are yet to be fulfilled." ...... True enough. But as I've striven to emphasize in previous posts, we should view and teach the Bible with the same emphasis in which the Holy Spirit inspired it, giving to each topic the balance and weight that divine inspiration laid upon it. ..... You use the phrase "there was an exact time" in connection with great biblical events. Let's borrow on that idea and postulate that the Bible also teaches there is a time to be saved. Look at Paul's second Corinthian Letter, 6:2. First he quotes Isaiah, and applying his words to the present situation in the age of grace under Christ Jesus, he states, "now is the day of salvation." There is, to use your phrase, an exact time when God listens to sinners and responds to the repentant ones. That time in Paul's day was "now," and in our time it still is "now." But that time will end. We don't know when, but in God's good time it surely will. See Genesis 6:3; Proverbs 1:24ff; John 9:4. That this day of salvation will come to an end is reason for Paul's timely and impassioned plea. ..... I submit, my friend, that the message of the gospel, which is God's power to save sinners (Romans 1:16), carried by human vessels to a lost world, has a pecking order in God's economy that far surpasses standing on the ground, peering into the sky, and musing and guessing about what may take place in the future of which no one has exact knowledge but God. Why should we not do what we can to carry out Christ's command that He clearly laid down in the Great Commission? And let God "worry about" the future! --Hank | ||||||
295 | Provision of God | Joel 2:23 | Hank | 185968 | ||
Hi, Doctor! For some time I've been of the opinion that there must be something fundamentally wrong with a Christian who finds no delight in Spurgeon. :-) I love the Spurgeon snippets you post from time to time. Keep 'em coming. --Hank | ||||||
296 | A church that does not practice tongues | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 185730 | ||
Thanks, elect, for your prompt response. I'm particularly appreciative of the tone of your post. Responding to your request for information, herewith are links to a trio of articles on Calvinism and Arminianism that may be of some help to you and serve as a brief introduction to these two systems of soteriology. The first discusses the five points of Calvinism, the second Arminianism, and the third seeks to compare the two systems. Let me know whether you found them useful. ..... http://www.gotquestions.org/calvinism.html ..... http://www.gotquestions.org/arminianism.html ..... http://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html ..... Every good wish, --Hank | ||||||
297 | A church that does not practice tongues | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 185723 | ||
Dear elect - The modern practice of speaking in tongues, known technically as glossolalia, possibly may in some instances be a contrivance for drawing attention toward the practitioners of the phenomenon. I have no proof that it is or is not, and would like to see you and everyone else who uses this Forum supply documentation to stand behind broad, sweeping statements of this sort. ..... Now I make no secret of being a Southern Baptist (see my user profile), and stand behind "The Baptist Faith and Message" statement of belief and practice. Consequently, I am distinctly not of the feather of Christians who profess to believe in and practice what is commonly called "speaking in tongues," the main characteristic of which, unless I'm badly mistaken, is the utterance of sounds that are incomprehensible -- an ecstatic babbling, if you will. But it is not my burden or my prerogative to condemn others whose beliefs and practices differ from mine solely on the basis that they do differ. What you or I happen to believe has no authority at all except to the degree that our beliefs are in line with Scripture. I cannot rightfully declare a practice wrong simply because I believe it to be so. My words carry no weight at all unless I am able to back them up with Scripture. Nor do yours. ...... Now, what I want to scold you a little about is this: In so many of your posts you do not hesitate in the least to make your beliefs known, even dogmatically so, but what we on Study Bible Forum are interested in -- what, in fact, this Forum is all about -- is not so much your beliefs but God's message: what does His word teach about the topics under discussion? I noticed your advice to the person who wanted to know how to find a solid church. I frankly thought it was one-sided and tinged with your (I guardedly and perhaps unwisely use the word) obession about election. ..... Surely you know that the kindred issues of free-will and election and of Calvinism and Arminianism are hot topics that have been debated for centuries and are without closure still. They are topics that are, in a word, controversial. They engender debate, interminable argumentation and ill-will that often sinks to vicious name-calling. Accordingly, the people who manage this Forum have imposed a proscription on divisive topics such as this one. You would therefore be well advised to lay off this subject, no matter how dearly you may love to talk about it. I'm no statistician, but I'd venture that there are literally hundreds of other topics within the pages of the Bible that are well worth one's time and effort without picking from among them the election/free-will matter about which even gifted theologians who are well above my pay grade are pondering still. ..... With all that behind me, and in view of the fact that this is the first correspondence I've had with you, welcome to Study Bible Forum. I pray that you will be a blessing to us and we to you. --Hank | ||||||
298 | Biblical views on castration | Matt 19:12 | Hank | 185309 | ||
MJH - "The New Testament replaces the Old Testament." ...... In a sweeping statement such as this one that you quoted from your correspondent, one needs to choose his words with a good deal more of precision. I submit that it is far better and much more accurate to say that the LAW of Sinai has no direct bearing upon the Christian, though it is a part of the Scripture given by inspiration of God and thus profitable for instruction in rightousness (2 Timothy 3:16). In Christ the LAW (and here again I emphasize the word "law") is "done away" (2 Corinthians 3:1-11). The promise is that "sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law, but under grace (Romans 6:14). The Law was a temporary covenant -- Israel's "schoolmaster unto Christ" that they "might be justified by faith." But after that faith is come, even Israel is "no longer under a schoolmaster" (See Galatians 3:19-25). Christians are under grace, not the Law, and are told to "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" (Galatians 5:1). ..... And it may also be appropriately observed that the 39 books comprising the Old Testament Canon contain much more than the Law. It is therefore not quite accurate to say that the New Testament REPLACES the book of Genesis, or Job, or Ruth, or the Psalms, to name as examples a quartet of well-known and beloved Old Testament books. --Hank | ||||||
299 | They are married,is it sin to have oral? | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 185161 | ||
"If something feels good, do it." .... If thou wrote these words, O Timothy, I declare unto thee that it is beyond the powers of observation granted unto me to find them. Yea, even reading betwixt the lines, the implication thereof faileth to appear. Wherefore it must needs be conluded that thou saith nought to be construed as, If unto thee it feeleth good, go ye therefore and doeth it. --Hank | ||||||
300 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | Hank | 184939 | ||
stjohn - You are wise to opt to "keep in your heart" personal feelings on the virgin birth of Christ or any other theological topic, for that matter; because, as you apparently have come to recognize, "personal feelings" don't carry much weight on Study Bible Forum. But God's word and sound expositions on it do. I've carried around a bushel of "personal feelings" all my life and haven't been offered anything for them yet. :-) ..... Sir, I'm having trouble following you on your declaration that the virgin birth is a sensitive issue. I've never thought of it as being such. Of course, the scoffers make sport of it, along with other mighty acts of God, but they walk in darkness anyway, so who pays any attention to them? They are the blind leading the blind. But I have never been ashamed to talk about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ nor do I deem it a sensitive issue. It's quite all right on this forum to talk about any issue under the sun so long as the Bible speaks on the issue, and we can back it up solidly with Scripture cited in context. Thanks, by the way, for your rapid response to my other post to you this evening. This is not to chide in any way, but it did strike me as curious why you think that the topic of the virgin birth is sensitive. In thinking of the virgin birth of Jesus, the adjective that readily comes to my mind is glorious. But never sensitive. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ] Next > Last [217] >> |