Results 321 - 340 of 402
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Reighnskye Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
321 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135645 | ||
Doc, I'm not aware of any moral "law" that exists within our universe, beyond what people write down in law books. I believe that there are divine universal "principles" which are above any of our man-made moral law systems, but these "principles" are not the same thing as "law". I am not a believer that there are any moral laws existent within the higher spiritual realms. I believe that moral laws are only existent in the lower mortal (earthly) or possibly hellish realms. I believe that when divine love and truth are cognized in the higher spiritual realms, that the lesser carnal consciousness, dominated by moral laws pertaining to sins, will fade away. Law consciousness brings sin consciousness, which plummets the soul into death. But Christ came to wash away the consciousness of sin, which acts as a destroyer of the soul. I suggest that there is no moral law in the spiritual realm. Moral law is only fit for sinners and fallen angels. - Heb 10:2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
322 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135663 | ||
Doc, Prohibitions are laws. Laws restrict and condemn, no? Laws concerning lying, murder, stealing, coveting and such. All these make reference to sin. Indeed, the moral law (as demonstrated in the Law of Moses and partially represented in secular government) demonstrates the justice of God upon a sinful and fallen humanity. But moral prohibitions (laws) such as lying, murder, stealing and coveting are not remotely necessary in a spiritual place where there are no sinners. The God of Law (whether it be the Law of Moses, "moral law" or secular law systems) only manifests to a fallen humanity, who live in a morally corrupt society. Conversely, the God of Love is everywhere. PS. I'm not saying that there are multiple "Gods" here. Rather, I'm saying that God appears differently in different realms. God can appear rather ugly to sinners, but sinners cannot see God's truest form. The God of justice and moral law is merely a shadow of the God of love. This veil is removed in Christ. Although legal prohibitions (moral law, secular law, Law of Moses) are necessary to keep the sinful soul in check, no such laws ever apply to a regenerate spirit. From what source shall we find our truest identity? - 1 John 4 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
323 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135670 | ||
Doc, And....? I don't quite get your point. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
324 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135712 | ||
Doc, Well, thank you for expounding this time at least. I hope you're not just attempting to amass a large quantity of posts with your overly brief answers. Some people here are focused on actual discussion. And I'm not aware that you've ever mentioned antinomianism to me before. Are you suggesting that I am secretly an antinomianist? Why don't you enlighten me? But please do so with a bit of scripture this time, if you would. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
325 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135718 | ||
Doc, You stated: "I've advised you before, and will continue to do so: You need to familiarize yourself with antinomianism. That is the theological position you are taking, although you haven't yet articulated its strongest arguments." Are you suggesting that I am a heretic? That is what the term antinomian asserts. I'm sorry if your religious schooling maybe taught you to categorize people, who believe differently from yourself, into small concise boxes. I don't believe that such befits such an intelligent person as yourself, however. Here is the definition of antinomianism. This belief system is not consistent with my own. Please don't project. - "Antinomianism in Christian theology is a pejorative term for a heresy that teaches that Christians are under no obligation to obey the laws of ethics or morality. Antinomianism is the polar opposite of legalism, the notion that obedience to a code of religious law is necessary for salvation. It comes from the Greek word nomos, which means law. No Christian or pseudo-Christian group calls itself "antinomian," though some Christian groups level this charge against others. Often those accused of being antinomian level the counter-charge of legalism against their accusers. The controversy arises out of the Christian doctrine of grace, the forgiveness of sins and atonement by faith in Jesus Christ. If God forgives sins, what exactly is the disadvantage in sinning, or the reward of obedience? St. Paul of Tarsus, in his Epistles, mentions several times that we are saved by the unearned grace of God, not by our own good works, "lest anyone should boast." Paul also said that Christ set us free from the Law of Moses, the Torah. He invariably goes on to say that sins remain sins, and condemns by several examples the kind of behaviour that the church should not tolerate. St. James, by contrast, states that our good works are in fact necessary for salvation. There are several issues that are addressed by the charge of antinomianism. The charge may represent the fear that a given theological position does not lead to the edification of the believer or assist him in leading a regenerate life. Doctrines that tend to erode the authority of the church and its right to prescribe religious practices for the faithful are often condemned as antinomian. The charge is also brought against those whose teachings are perceived as hostile to government and established authority. The first people accused of antinomianism were found, apparently, in Gnosticism; various aberrant and licentious acts were ascribed to these by their orthodox enemies; we have few independent records of their actual teachings. In the Book of Revelation 2:6-15, the New Testament speaks of Nicolaitans, who are traditionally identified with a Gnostic sect, in terms that suggest the charge of antinomianism might be appropriate. Roman Catholicism tends to charge Protestantism with antinomianism, based in part on the distinctively Protestant doctrine of sola fide, salvation by faith alone, and the typical Protestant rejection of the elaborate sacramental liturgy of the Roman church, and its body of canon law. Within Roman Catholicism itself, Blaise Pascal accused the Jesuits of antinomianism in his Lettres provinciales, charging that Jesuit casuistry undermined moral principles. Charges of antinomianism have also been bandied about within the Protestant camp as well; Martin Luther accused Johannes Agricola of antinomianism and rejecting the notion of a moral law; other Protestant groups that have been so accused include the Anabaptists and Mennonites. Calvinistss have also drawn charges of antinomianism. In the history of American Puritanism, Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson were accused of antinomian teachings by the Puritan leadership of New England. Theological charges of antinomianism typically imply that the opponent's doctrine leads to various sorts of licentiousness, and imply that the antinomian chooses his theology in order to further a career of dissipation. The conspicuous austerity of life among surviving groups of Anabaptists or Calvinists suggests that these accusations are mostly for rhetorical effect. - Fact-index.com financially supports the Wikimedia Foundation. Displaying this page does not burden Wikipedia hardware resources. This article is from Wikipedia. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License." |
||||||
326 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135719 | ||
Colin, You stated: "how is God's greatest attribute not love, but holiness?" Exactly. Sounds quite a bit like personal conjecture. - 1 John 4 7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 16 We have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. 17 By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. 19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also. (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
327 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135740 | ||
Colin, Thanks for your response. Actually, I'd like to hear him answer your question too, insofar as he was attempting to respond to my original question at the beginning of this thread. I appreciate your question, due to it's brevity and conciseness. It's a simple yet practical question. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
328 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135748 | ||
Doc, Thank you for the clarification. I wasn't aware before of where you were getting your sources. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
329 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135754 | ||
Doc, Again, thank you. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
330 | Am I under Jewish Law? | Rom 8:4 | Reighnskye | 135757 | ||
Colin, Thank you for your concise biblical basis. This is what I was hoping for at the beginning of this thread. Very succinct. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
331 | Is it wrong to go to Atlantic City? | Rom 14:14 | Reighnskye | 130418 | ||
What is the likelihood that you might be tempted in that environment? | ||||||
332 | Is it wrong to go to Atlantic City? | Rom 14:14 | Reighnskye | 130420 | ||
What is the likelihood that you might be tempted in that environment? | ||||||
333 | Romans 2:14-15 commonly mutilated? | 1 Cor 2:14 | Reighnskye | 133413 | ||
I have many times heard a common mutilation of scripture within the organized religion, which is perhaps solely based upon a misapplication of the following scripture text out of Romans 2:12-16. Romans 2 12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus. (NAS95) - The common mutilation/misapplication of this particular text conveys the idea that those who never hear the Gospel of Jesus (in their own native language) will be saved solely through the state of their own conscience, apart from the Gospel message. (For example, the aborigine in Africa, where they don't have cars, indoor plumbing, lightbulbs, or bibles.) Romans 2:12-16 (verses 14 and 15 particularly) is often said to refer to people who have never heard the Gospel message of Jesus. However, I suggest that this is the farthest thing from the truth. I suggest that the text rather conveys that the Gentile believer lacks a knowledge of the Old Testement Law of Moses (the Ten Commandments and such), and therefore can yet be saved without a knowledge of Jusaism that was typically only had by the Jews. However, the text does not say that Gentiles don't need to hear the Gospel of Jesus in order to be saved. It rather simply says that exposure to the Law of Moses is not necessary. Please reread the text and notice the many references to the Old Testament Law of Moses as opposed to the New Testament Gospel of Christ. In other words, the Gentile need only hear the Gospel of Jesus, without reference to the Old Testament Law of Moses and the Ten Commandments, in order to be saved. A knowledge of Old Testament Judaism is unnecessary for purposes of salvation, as Gentiles were not commonly afforded that knowledge, as the Jews were. Paul later seems to reinforce the necessity of the Gospel message for Gentiles in Romans 10:14-17: Romans 10 14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!" 16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?" 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. (NAS95) Although God's voice through the Law of Moses (and even the creation itself) be wholly resisted and denied, nonetheless the word of Christ is yet capable of inspiring faith in darkened and ignorant unbelievers. - Comments? True? False? - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
334 | Romans 2:14-15 commonly mutilated? | 1 Cor 2:14 | Reighnskye | 133425 | ||
Doc, When you say that you've never heard of the interpretation that I'm suggesting, what specifically in my statements are you referring to? I do agree with you that Paul makes it extremely clear, throughout the book of Romans, that we are all condemned. It just doesn't require a knowledge of the Law of Moses, to come to this conclusion, as per the verse reference below. - Romans 2 12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; - Here we see that Gentiles sin apart from a knowledge of the Law, and that Jews sin under a knowledge of the Law. Yet every conscience stands condemned with or without the Law of Moses (consisting of the Ten Commandments and such.) I have never anywhere personally suggested that anyone has a clear conscience, but rather I have heard such a thing suggested in various church circles that I've encountered. Churches with 5000 to 20,000 plus members in Illinois. I view their doctrine as well nigh heretical. Nonetheless, the doctrine is taught by the largest Protestant congregation in the entire United States, as located in Illinois. Many other churches here have followed suit. Conversely, I am myself suggesting that Paul teaches that a knowledge of the Law of Moses is not necessary to be saved, insofar as the Gentiles of Paul's time are ignorant of the teachings of Moses anyway. What is indispensable for salvation, however, is the recieving of the Gospel of Christ. Although knowledge of the Law of Moses may have been integral for the spiritual conversion of the Jews, it was wholly unnecessary for the conversion of ignorant Gentiles. The ignorance of the Gentile is not in regards to their blemished conscience, but rather in regards to the written Ten Commandments issued by Moses. - John 1 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
335 | Romans 2:14-15 commonly mutilated? | 1 Cor 2:14 | Reighnskye | 133449 | ||
Steve, Tim and Hank: Blessings - Steve, I have to fully agree with your statements. You said: "Sadly, I have heard the same type of thing starting to come from my own faith tradition. To quote what is being said: "God will not condemn those who have not rejected the witness of Himself in creation." This was written by Dave Hunt in his book "Calvinism Debated". The same type of thing has been written by Dr. Tony Evans. It grieves me that these brothers are straying from the clear teaching of Scripture." - Tim, Since you ask, I sat myself at Willow Creek Community Church, in a large room of a hundred people, wherein the doctrine was taught to singles small group leaders, as per a regular series of answering tough theological questions. The teachings were pre-scheduled and authorized through Willow Creek authority, and delivered through paid ministry staff who were church-ordained. It was part of a four-week series addressing other tough theological questions as well, with the particular doctrine comprising one session. The crux of these messages was purposed to educate laypeople how to reach objectioning unbelievers with the Gospel, so they could invite them to church. The proof text that was utilized was Romans 2:14-15. I was instructed these things myself as a small group leader there. I've since heard the doctrine in a half dozen other mainstream megachurches in Illinois, directly through the pulpit. - Hank, I would have to agree that the doctrine is a blasphemous heresy. The doctrine is often used as a religious disclaimer concerning the aborigine in remote parts of Africa, which says that those who never hear the gospel, in their own native language, can still be saved with a clear enough conscience. Basically the idea is that sinners who never hear the Gospel are off the hook, and have a free ticket to heaven, because God or the church failed to reach them with the Gospel anyhow, and therefore they don't deserve to go to hell. Although the doctrine is not biblically based, it goes along the reasoning that God would never condemn people who didn't have an opportunity to hear the Gospel in this life. This doctrine likely originates from the identical notion that aborigines in remote Africa (where the New Testament hasn't yet been translated into their own native language) are accounted equal with unborn aborted babies who never get to choose Christ in this life. Also, we may include severely mentally-challenged people who can't discern right from wrong nor understand a verbally communicated Gospel message. (A few will even stretch this to religionists of non-Christian faiths.) Now, it is my personal view that all of these individuals (aborted babies, mentally-challenged people and distant aborigines) do not get an automatic free ticket into heaven, pending a clear enough conscience in this life. This is because I believe that all human beings (aborted babies included) are born as sinners, and are each eternally scheduled for hell, simply by way of default. Rather, I tend to go in the direction, that there will likely be opportunity, during Christ's millennial reign on earth, for these people to knowingly accept or reject the Gospel, from a clearer vantage point. Perhaps a common lack of eschatological fluency, amongst many of the larger megachurches, has led to extra-biblical notions on salvation, causing religious disclaimers to be made, when the church doesn't feel it's reached everyone with it's vital Gospel message. End-time eschatology has largely been scrapped among the larger megachurches (5000 plus members), insofar as it tends to confuse newer mass converts. - Mark 16 15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. (NAS95) Matthew 28 19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, (NAS95) John 14 16 "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; (NAS95) - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
336 | Romans 2:14-15 commonly mutilated? | 1 Cor 2:14 | Reighnskye | 133512 | ||
Doc, I fully agree. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
||||||
337 | Homosexuality, sin or not? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Reighnskye | 132783 | ||
LibertyBelle, Here is your exact verse reference in 2nd Peter that ties the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah directly to homosexuality. Please particularly notice verse 7 and the term "sensual conduct". This of course does not preclude other sins of these two cities, but it does nonetheless include homosexuality as a direct reason for the fiery desctruction which ensued. - 2 Peter 2 6 and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; 7 and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men 8 (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds), (NAS95) - Reighnskye |
||||||
338 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | Reighnskye | 132721 | ||
Are miracles for today? - Reighnskye |
||||||
339 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | Reighnskye | 132728 | ||
AlienResident, Why not? As per your verse reference, you are perhaps suggesting that prophecy, tongues and knowledge have passed away. But this verse reference seems to mention nothing about the passing away of the physical manifestation of miracles. I'm not sure how you're interpreting this scripture unit. Would you possibly care to elaborate? - 1 Corinthians 13 8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. (NAS95) - Reighnskye |
||||||
340 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | Reighnskye | 132733 | ||
AlienResident, Maybe what? - Reighnskye |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Next > Last [21] >> |