Results 41 - 60 of 76
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Ancient Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127138 | ||
EdB, I disagree with your interpretation of this passage, but thank you for responding with your input. I gave it fair consideration, but do not see a commandment there so much as I see advice. We'll have to agree to disagree. With love, Ancient |
||||||
42 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127119 | ||
Country Girl, Remember sister, I'm not contradicting you. I think going to church is a good thing. I'm just cognizant of the fact that making it a commandment when it isn't a commandment creates an occasion of sin and stumbling for those that believe it to be a commandment and for one reason or another are unable to keep it. [Romans 7:9-11 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the law; for I would not have known about coveting if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the law sin was dead. I was once alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me."] By all means ... let us go to church. But let us always remember WHY we go to church. It is not because we are commanded to, as you pointed out that no such passage exists, but because we want to. Those that don't want to go ... they don't have their heart in it anyway. So their worship would be false. Always remember that the commandment of the New Testament is to Love one another as he loved us. All others amount to this, are derived from this, and cannot exist or function without this. Blessing to you sister, Ancient |
||||||
43 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127098 | ||
In relation to Sunday worship, I would like to add my two cents as well, Lord willing that I should be of profit to someone else. The scriptures tell us in Romans, "Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind." It is also written in Colossians, "Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a holy day or a new moon or a Sabbath day--things which are a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." Paul tells us in Romans that there is no command we have that is not summed up by the statement, "Love your neighbor as yourself." Going to church, while certainly a fine thing, is not a commandment. Hebrews 10:25 is often considered a commandment: "not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some ..." I find, however, that the preceeding verse adheres to Paul's teaching, and puts the statement into perspective: "and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near." The early church, as recorded in the writings of Pliny the Younger, met on the first day of the week before dawn. The earliest church, according to Acts 2:46, met every day in the temple, not just on Sunday. When all is said and done, going to church is little more than a "work of the flesh" and is of no profit for righteousness. As it is written in Galatians, "I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly." To summarize what I am saying: We are not commanded to go to church. Let every man be fully pursuaded in his own mind. The one that does not esteem one day above another, God will make him stand, and we should not judge another's servant, for no man should be your judged regarding Sabbaths, or other related holy days. Those that choose to go to church, you do a fine thing. Those that choose not to go to church, it would be better if you did, but it is not required. If you are weak, you could use the instruction. If you are strong, you could instruct others. So either way it is a good thing, and we don't want to forsake the assembling of ourselves because it is our opportunity to provoke one another to love. What day you go is not relevent. It's the spirit behind it; that you are going because you want to, wish to help others, wish to be an active member of a congregation, etc. Love and blessings, Ancient |
||||||
44 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127093 | ||
Country Girl wrote: "The true authority in this dispensation as blessed by God Himself was given to His Son as stated in Matt 28:18. Thus, the whole NT is epitimized with the Supreme Perfect Example and High Priest of our Lord. Only His Words and those of His appointed representatives should be heeded, and NOT those of the OT prophets including Moses himself. Don't get me wrong, those men in the OT were good men. They tried their best but they didn't have 3 and half years of living and being with the Savior like the Apostles did. Those OT prophets didn't have the benefit and full empowerment of the Holy Spirit with Its Gift of Salvation in Its Full and Powerful measure." Fantastic Country Girl. That was an impressive and powerful statement. I am blessed to have read it. Ancient |
||||||
45 | Lucifer kicked out of heaven | Bible general Archive 2 | Ancient | 127090 | ||
Hi Norm, This is what I think regarding Luke 10:18: I think, based on the contextual circumstances, that it's not out of the question that it was not a literal statement, but a jesting statement. Let me demonstrate what I mean if I am able and if God be willing to allow to me to do so adequately. Looking at the circumstances, Jesus had sent the disciples out ahead of him into all the cities where he was going to go and minister. [Luke 10:1-16] After doing as instructed, the disciples "returned with joy." They exclaim to him how all went well (paraphrased by the circumstances), and how that even the demons were subject to them. Jesus then, amidst their joy and excitement (for surely they were excited after doing what a man simply cannot do naturally) suddenly and stoically states a historical happening completely irrelevent to the situation, "I beeeehellld Saaatan fallllling like liiightninnng." Then he proceeds to spoil their mood by rebuking them for being joyful at their sucess, exclaiming that they should instead be happy that their names are written in the book of life. After this, HE rejoices greatly in the Holy Spirit. Personally, the 10:18 passage always seemed out of place to me when viewing it in this traditional way. What I see is that He is cutting up with them. They are joyful and excited, and so too is He joyful and excited for them. Imagine, if you will, a child and his bike. The father sends him outside to ride the bike, assuring him he will not fall. The child, being faithful, goes outside and rides, and upon coming back inside, excited and happy at having ridden the bike on his own for the first time, he says to his father, "I rode the bike! And I didn't even fall down!" The father then says to him, "The kid down the street fell off his bike. Do not be happy that you rode your bike. Be happy that you have a bike not to fall off of." No father would behave this way. He would instead be happy with the child and encourage him. "Good job! You did well! I have taught you how to ride a bike, and now you will never fall again. But be mindful that you don't go into the street. Knowing how to ride a bike doesn't protect you from the cars." So to look at 10:18 another way, by situation: The disciples return, joyful and excited, exclaiming, "Lord, even the demons were subject to us! It was amazing! You should have seen it!" Jesus, appreciating their joy, and joyful with them for their excitement as a father would be joyful for his excited child that just rode his bike, he says to them, "That's fantastic guys! You did good! You gave Satan a real boot in the jewels! Now you can SEE that I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and that nothing will injure you! But be mindful...! Although the spirits are subject you, and I'm greatly excited for you in that, the thing you should really be excited about is that your names are recorded in heaven. Nevertheless, you did well. Just focus on the things that matter." In other words, I see the statement of 10:18 as a circumstantial exclamation of praise for their accomplishment, not as a stoic statement of historical happening that has no real relevence to the situation. The traditional way of interpreting what's going on there sticks out like a sore thumb to me, and it doesn't fit the chronological factors of the fall. In regard to the fall, I think the issue is that we are all assuming there had to be one. The Bible doesn't actually say that. The serpent was cursed, but still stood before the throne, accusing us day and night, and it is plain that he was not bound in Hell, nor his angels. Besides Satan, there are lying spirits, spirits of calamity, and evil spirits of the Lord recorded in Samuel, Kings, Job, Zechariah, etc. If they were bound in Hell, what were they doing running amuck? Unless they had not fallen from heaven at all, and were being used to God's divine purpose, reserved to be punished at the coming of the Great Day of the Lord. I hear your thought, but it seems ambiguous to me. He fell from heaven, but hasn't been cast out. Did God only kick him out for the evening for coming home drunk? Know what I mean? I DO understand where you're going with it, but it doesn't seem logical. If he fell, but he can come back in, then he didn't really fall. As for the angels of Jude and 2nd Peter that are reserved under chains of darkness ... while the book is not cannon, this description is almost a direct quotation from the psuedopigraphic book of 1st Enoch, and referred to those angels that took the daughters of men to wife, creating the race of giants in the days before the flood. 1st Enoch describes them being bound for seventy generations until the time of their judgment. These are my thoughts on the matter of Luke 10:18. I'd love to discuss the theory in general more. Let us sharpen and edify one another. All my love, Ancient |
||||||
46 | Lucifer, Satan, Devil? | Is 14:12 | Ancient | 126998 | ||
EdB, I took time to look over your information and consider it. I also double-checked my references in case I was mistaken. You were right. The King James was written by 7(?) groups of Hebrew/Greek scholars of the time, commissioned by King James. The one I mistaken referred to was the Catholic bible translated to English only a few years earlier (1603ish) from the Latin Vulgate. Now, I was of the impression that the Strong's dictionary with the best of Vines included was a good lexicon. If you say it is not, I will take your word for it and ask if you can recommend a good Hebrew/Greek lexicon that will be both reliable and easy to use so I can do more accurate word studies? (ISBN number included in the recommendation would be a fantastic help). Now, the "shining one" versus "morning star" is a confusing issue. If it translates in its most literal sense as "shining one," why is it being rendered as "morning star" in all of the major translations? I do see what you are saying and why. This is why I am confused. Should it not be translated as "Shining One" if that is what the word truly translates to? Or is this "Shining One" a word/phrase that was used perhaps as an epithet for the planet Venus, much like lucifer is used for the planet Venus while it retains the literal definition of "Light Bearer?" Hope to hear from you soon. Ancient |
||||||
47 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Ancient | 126993 | ||
lastday, you wrote: [Ancient, Thank you for the encouragement. Mel Miller] Any time brother. We should uphold one another, and I don't believe that this only refers to upholding in weakness, but in strength as well. Love to you, Ancient |
||||||
48 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 126992 | ||
Country Girl, I am in agreement with you. As opposed to the Old Testament being a valid covenant, the New Testament scripture clearly states time and again that we are not under the Law (Law of Moses/Old Covenant). Do we all continue to go to school once we've received the sought after degree? The Law, by comparison, was the professor of Righteousness and Redeption 101. Christ came and gave us our degree. [Galatians 3:24-25] Now we are professors of Perfection and Purity 201. Use math as an example of how the law works and where it falls into our current usage. In practical life, we take basic math, moved up to advanced math, and eventually undertake the difficult tasks of geometry, trigonometry, and calculus. While learning basic math, we struggle to grasp the concepts. We are young, and our minds have trouble wrapping around the idea. In time, though, we learn what our teachers were trying to impart. When our studies lead us as far as trigonometry and calculus, we still use basic math! But basic math is not a thing we think about. It is something that is deeply ingrained, and something we just understand. Half the time I don't even think about why 12 plus 12 is 24 anymore. It just is. I understand why it is, but could no more explain it to a child than I could explain the complexities of why the sky is blue. I just understand it and apply it to the practical application of calculus. It is the calculus I am trying to understand instead of the basic math, in other words. Basic math still has its place, but it is not something I need to focus on in light of the far superior methods of higher calculation. The irony of the Law and the New Covenant of Jesus Christ is that it all worked in the reverse order of my above example. It started with calculus and ended with basic math. We had laws for everything under the sun, including not muzzling the ox, not tripping the blind, not going back for every grape, etc. There were also variables, like "just in case" sacrifices for those that think they "might" have sinned. Defining the full extent of the law was in all ways an impossible task. This is the reason we all failed, just as a first grader would have failed at calculus. Then came Jesus, the amazing mathematician, who looked at the whole thing, knew the pattern inherently, and said, "you know what people, this calculation, when fully solved, equates to 1 plus 1 equals 2." The equation of the Law, represented by the Old Covenant, is equivelent to 1 plus 1 equals 2. Love God with all your mind, heart, soul, and strength plus Love your neighbor as yourself equals the fulfillment of the Law which is the solution to the equation. Now that we have been reduced to basic math, we no longer need to fear error. In all the equations of life, 1 plus 1 is going to equal 2. "This person is doing this to me. What is the solution? I will look to God and love this person as myself, and this is the correct solution to my problem." "Is this thing I am inclined to do a sin? Since I don't know, let me break out my equation breaker. Does this thing go against loving God? Does this thing go against loving my neighbor? Okay then ... Love plus Love equals fulfilled. Problem solved." The Old Testament, in short, has not really gone away, but it is no longer relevent. We couldn't grasp the lessons of the complicated math, so we were given the simple solution to summarize it. Now that we have the answer, this solution is all encompassing, and we have no real need to go back to complicated math, except as a matter of higher learning to better understand the simple but absolute solution to the complicated equation. All scripture is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. [2 Tim 3:16-17] If you put yourself back under the law (i.e. try to solve the equation yourself instead of accepting the simple solution given), you are doomed to failure. They couldn't figure out the solution, and neither can we. Jesus gave us the solution, so let us trust in his math skills. These are my casual thoughts on the subject. If you wish deeper discussion, I'll gladly oblige. There is a great deal more I can say to further support this scriptural truth. Love to you sister, Ancient |
||||||
49 | Skeletons of evolution? False? | Genesis | Ancient | 126990 | ||
Hi Angel. I'm glad I was able to give some good edification. There is a little joke/story I heard, and I found it amusing. Perhaps some of you might also find it so. "It is said that scientists spend their whole lives searching for the answers. They search the stars, cross the seas, and delve to the bottoms of the oceans. In all things, they refuse to accept God as a constant parameter in their equations and regard Him instead as a floating variable, assigned the wrong value time and again. But when all their research is done, they finally confront the tallest mountain, and having searched high and low, they know that the answer lies just on the other side. To both their shock and dismay, as they crest the peak and view the valley beyond, behold, it is the city of the theologians that had been there for a thousand years, waiting with open arms." I heard that story and got a laugh. Love to you, Ancient |
||||||
50 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Ancient | 126949 | ||
I'm sorry lastday, I don't want to converse with you on this. Like you, many over the years believed they had it all figured out in regard to the Revelation. I am not God to say beyond all doubt that you have not figured it out, but I have my reservations about theories suspect of speculation. There isn't a generation gone by that didn't think they were living in the end times, and this goes all the way back to the Apostles themselves who told everyone that the hour was at hand. I don't know the answer, and I don't care to speculate about it if you are fanatical. I'm sorry to offend. I just wanted to give you a little praise for your hard work. We all need a pat on the back now and then. Thank you for responding. May God keep you well. Ancient |
||||||
51 | Loud Mouthed Christian: Help! | 1 Cor 13:1 | Ancient | 126916 | ||
Let's not forget that while we are preserving our holy meat and holding back our pearls, we are also supposed to go into all the world and make disciples of all men. You are absolutely right in saying that we should shake the dust off our sandals if they won't hear us, but we have a duty to try. Ezekiel 3:17-19 "Son of man (by context speaking to Ezekiel here), I have appointed you a watchman to the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from My mouth, warn them from Me. When I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to warn the wicked from his wicked way that he may live, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. Yet if you have warned the wicked and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered yourself." Ancient |
||||||
52 | Loud Mouthed Christian: Help! | 1 Cor 13:1 | Ancient | 126915 | ||
Let's not forget that while we are preserving our holy meat and holding back our pearls, we are also supposed to go into all the world and make disciples of all men. You are absolutely right in saying that we should shake the dust off our sandals if they won't hear us, but we have a duty to try. Ezekiel 3:17-19 "Son of man (by context speaking to Ezekiel here), I have appointed you a watchman to the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from My mouth, warn them from Me. When I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to warn the wicked from his wicked way that he may live, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. Yet if you have warned the wicked and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered yourself." Ancient |
||||||
53 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Ancient | 126909 | ||
Wow, Lastday! That's a great theory. You've spent a lot of time on this, it would seem. Commendable effort. I am of a different opinion, but I see you are working hard to understand the mysteries. Myself, I am of a preterist view. I reckon the seven-headed beast to the Roman Emperors, the woman to Israel, and her child as being the Christ, or some representation of Him. I see the number of the name as Nero Caesar, while also recognizing him as the king that was currently in power. There are a lot of interesting thoughts to the preterist view, and it is worth investigating. Premillenialist advocates view Preterism as impossible because of their interpretations, and Preterists view Premillenialism as impossible for the same reason. Neither side has ever been able to convincingly argue their view. The debate has raged for at least 1500 years. Whichever way you look at it, you are still doing well in that you are seeking knowledge and mystery. Just remember, fear of the end is not the way to bring people to Christ. Many fire and brimstone preachers like to scare people into being Christians, but God is love. Perfect love casts out all fear, because fear is torment. Again, good job on the work you've put into your studies, but I would humbly advise that you keep this sort of information amongst believers. Love is the best way to win new souls. This was the message of Christ, and it drew multitudes. Ancient |
||||||
54 | Please stop laying blame -Marylin Manson | 1 Cor 13:1 | Ancient | 126905 | ||
You know, after considering this, I'm wondering, should we not be loving Marylin Manson? I know we should separate ourselves from the world, but this is more a matter of association. We should love our enemies, bless those that curse us, render good for evil, etc. Should we, as the Christian community in general, not be treating such a man as described in the Sermon on the Mount, that perhaps he will hear us and find the truth? Love suffers all things, hopes all things. Love is patient, and does not act unbecomingly. Love bears all things and endures all things. Should this not be our attitude toward him? "He causes His sun to rise on the the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." [Matt 5:44-48] Ancient |
||||||
55 | Please stop laying blame -Marylin Manson | 1 Cor 13:1 | Ancient | 126903 | ||
Out of curiosity, am I missing something here in regard to Marylin Manson? Has he converted, but suffering rejection regardless? Or is this just a simple matter of "why are Christians persecuting a heathen?" Ancient |
||||||
56 | Lucifer, Satan, Devil? | Is 14:12 | Ancient | 126902 | ||
Hey EdB. I will have to take some time to look over what you wrote. I don't like to be hasty in what I say, so I want to give your information the time it deserves. Then I can make some educated, wise decisions regarding which direction to continue in as far the information available to me. Thank you so much for the hard work you put into your post, and I want you to know that your efforts are appreciated and will not be ignored. Ancient |
||||||
57 | Why do we not keep the 7th day Sabbath | Col 2:16 | Ancient | 126892 | ||
You're right, brother. It is by grace through faith, and no other way. If I might point out something, though, not to contradict, but in order to fill out your explanation a bit, we must still keep the intent of the law. While we are in no wise under the law, the intent of the law, as Jesus explains in Matthew 7:12, is to do to others as we would have them do to us (i.e. love your neighbor as yourself). This intent we must keep, for we know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death. [1st John 3:14] To love your neighbor as yourself fulfills the law (i.e. keeps it to the fullest extent by default in that all the laws are derived from it. See Romans 13:8-10), but failing to love is akin to murder: Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. [1st John 3:15] Always remember that Jesus commanded the adulterous woman to "go and sin no more." [John 8:11] This applies to us as well. If we love him, we will keep his commandments. [John 14:15] I am not contradicting you. Again, I'm expanding on what you said. You have to be careful when you make statements about "not being required to maintain all of the old laws." It is written that until heaven and earth pass, not one jot or tittle will pass from the law until all be fulfilled. Things have passed from the law, like sacrifices, cleanliness ceremonies, traditions, selection of the High Priest, etc. So we can assume that all has been fulfilled. But in the fulfillment, the law was moved from paper to the heart, and we are still subject insomuch that, as I stated before, we must keep the intent, which is to love one another as Jesus loved us. By this will all men know that we are his disciples. Just be careful to be clear when you make statements like that. I understand it, but some won't, and others will plainly defy you and think you are trying to say that because we aren't under the law we have a license to sin, which thing is still identified by the heart and conscience. Ancient |
||||||
58 | Lucifer, Satan, Devil? | Is 14:12 | Ancient | 126890 | ||
Good afternoon, brother. If I am mistaken on the history of Bible translations, then so be it. The material I have read says what I have stated, but because they said it does not attest to any legitimacy. By all means educate me. I'd like to learn. As I understand it, the other versions you mentioned, while legitimate, were not considered authorized translations. The Vulgate, according to what I have read, was the standardized, authorized version in the Catholic Church (which was by far the most dominant in its day), and it is because of the Latin orientation of the Bible that King James commissioned the English translation to be made (in spite of the Catholic Church). Again, if the information I read is incorrect, then it is incorrect. I am, admittedly, not an expert in that particular field of study. I read enough to be educated in it so I will not be completely ignorant. On the subject of Lucifer, the lexicon I use is Strong's, derived from Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, and Girdlestone's Synonyms of the Old Testament. And the Hebrew dictionary also cross references the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. According to these, the word being used in Isaiah 14:12 is heylel (hay-lale), rooted in halal (haw-lal) in the sense of brightness. halal (haw-lal) is not the word being used according to the references I have. The literal translation proposed by this lexicon is "morning-star" from the word heylel (hay-lale). The translations of the New American Standard (star of the morning), New International Version (morning star), and the New Revised Standard Version (Day Star), all concur that this is the best translation of the Hebrew word present in the text. I do not criticize your credentials or your comments. I don't know what your credentials might be, and I certainly value your input. But these three, barring the widely popular King James Version, are the three leading translations accepted for their literal and accurate renderings. In this particular case, I am going to trust in their expertise and accept the translation as "morning star." I appreciate your input on the subject regardless, and I have given your statement fair consideration. There are other versions that translate it as you say. But as those other translations are not as commonly accepted, and are not always done by the spectrum of scholars that gave their efforts to render the type of accuracy we have in the New American Standard, I must decline the veracity of your proposed translation of "Shining One." Now, in case I am confused in your post, if it is the word "lucifer" you are saying translates as "a shining one," I find that a common dictionary addresses this issue. [Middle English Lucifer, Old English Lucifer, from Latin: Lucifer, "light-bearer" : lux (stem luc-), light and -fer.] This word was commonly used for the planet Venus, recognized by epithet as the morning star. Additionally, the Greek word used in the Septuagint is heos-foros, which also means to "bear light." This is consistent with the Latin word lucifer. And in 2nd Peter 1:19, the Greek word is foce-foros, which means virtually the same thing, "light-bearer," and which the New American Standard, New Revised Standard, and the New International Version all once again agree accordingly, that the best rendition of the word is "morning star." Lucifer is used in Isaiah 14:12 and 2nd Peter 1:19. Heos-foros and foce-foros, which are variants of each other, are also used in both places, and morning star, an accepted scholarly rendition, is used in both places. While there might have been English translations, I would have to submit that lucifer, being a Latin word, came from the Latin, not from Greek, Hebrew, or English. Now, did the King James Version come from the Latin? I'll say I honestly do not know if you have information that differs from mine. I thought I knew, but it appears there are sources to express various hypotheses. I greatly appreciate your input. If you have more to add, by all means. I'm interested in learning. Correct me if I am mistaken about something. All my love, Ancient |
||||||
59 | Some verses don't stand alone well | Is 3:21 | Ancient | 126880 | ||
Good morning to you, sister. Those that are intolerant are just lacking a little bit in understanding. I'm sure they mean well. They just need to learn how to bridle the tongue a little bit. Love does not seek its own, is not puffed up, does not act in pride, is kind, is gentle, is patient. Not everyone understands what love is all about, and there was a time when I didn't understand either. The stepping stones of growth attest to the necessity to overcome this phase. Add to your faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge temperance ... Such as respond as they did are at this step. They have the faith, they strive for virtue, they have diligently sought knowledge, but they have not yet learned how to temper themselves. Again, I was there once. I look back and can't understand how I behaved that way, but when I was there, I felt absolutely correct and justified in everything I said. If someone contradicted me, they were wrong. Nothing they said or showed me was going to change my mind. Now my bride is wisdom, and I listen to her call. I listen first, consider second, and respond third. I try to esteem everyone as greater than myself whenever possible (though the unfortunate time does occasionally present itself that someone must be rebuked). As a younger Christian, I heard first, but didn't actually listen; responded second, and that with fervor; and I never considered at all unless what they said agreed with me. Needless to say, I didn't learn much in my younger Christian years. I was too busy listening to myself and my own voice to begin to hear the voice of wisdom. I am neither angry or condemning of people like that. They truly do not know better. I don't even sypathize. I empathize, because I was there. But I recognize also that any true Christian will eventually grow out of this phase. Let us move on to the phase beyond even that, and let us add to our temperance patience, that we might have the meekness and humility to guide people to love with our example. This is the goal of the New Testament teaching. "The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart, clear conscience, and sincere faith." [1 Tim 1:5] To Isaiah 3, I agree, this sounds a great deal like the historical account of the destruction of Jerusalem. Josephus writes that during the slaughter within the walls, the number of the dead were so great that the flow of blood running down the street was actually putting out the fires of burning houses. I can't imagine. Ancient |
||||||
60 | Lucifer, Satan, Devil? | Is 14:12 | Ancient | 126871 | ||
doctrinsograce, I'm so terribly sorry if you thought I was arguing. I didn't mean that at all. I was concurring with you and adding to it so we could talk about it. I feel terrible. That's not what I meant to impart to you at all. I value your input, and I hope you will give me more. Ancient |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |