Results 41 - 60 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99930 | ||
"It is based on man's interpretation not what the Bible says therefore calling it not biblical is not reflecting a denominational bias. " Then the sermons at your church are not biblical either, and neither are your posts. ALL interpretations of Scripture are given by men. Therefore, let's shut the Forum down because all we have since the apostles wrote down the NT is "man's interpretation." --Joe! |
||||||
42 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99923 | ||
'There is a difference between innocence and purity. A baby is innocent. Purity is from nuturing and not a given but must be learned in innocence. Jesus saves to make innocence by virtue of the new birth. Purity happens when we abide and are nutured into "son-ship".' What Scriptures inform this perspective? --Joe! |
||||||
43 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99922 | ||
"I disagree Ken Hepting stated fact, the Westminster Confession is not Biblical nor scripture." I agree that it is not Scripture. However, the statement that the WCF is not biblical (i..e. that its contents are contrary to the Bible) is a reflection of denominational bias. Please refrain from it. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
44 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99875 | ||
'Didn't say that. I made reference to the children of "unregenerate", "unelect" parents. Since Jesus made no distinctions, why should we?' Who said we should, with regard to evangelism? And how do you know that the parents were unregenerate? They were bringing their children to Jesus, after all. Lastly, Jesus said: "Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these" The kingdom belongs to SUCH as these, not specifically to them (necessarily). By the way, this is one of the passages that some use to support the baptism of infants, since the kingdom of God belongs not only to those old enough to profess their faith yet. --Joe! |
||||||
45 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99849 | ||
"But that is Calvinism through and through and not Biblical at all. [see forum rules]" Yes, please see forum rules. A disposition against Calvinism is a denominational bias. Please refrain from it. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
46 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99848 | ||
"Salvation, for anyone, wasn't even made availabble for anyone at this point in time." So no one before the resurrection was saved?!? --Joe! |
||||||
47 | Are Reformed people lost souls? | 2 Pet 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 99569 | ||
Gee, I don't recall any battle going on between us. "Our salvation depends on our individual repentance and faith and not on the doctrine of the group to which we pay allegience." That itself is a doctrine of the group to which I pay allegiance (speaking of both my denomination and "the one holy catholic church"). Your statement that I quoted above IS doctrine. Lastly, although justification is an individual experience, the Bible speaks abundantly of community life in the church. I don't think it unbiblical to assert that in many respects, personal sanctification is a group effort. --Joe! |
||||||
48 | Are Reformed people lost souls? | 2 Pet 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 99527 | ||
"Does a Reformed person have personal assurance of salvation, and do they not care to be asked about it?" Yes, we have assurance of salvation. --Joe! |
||||||
49 | Are Reformed people lost souls? | 2 Pet 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 99526 | ||
"It was good to hear from you. When I logged in today and saw the notice, I was afraid we might have lost you." Naw, I am a veteran. Guess I can just say that Jesus died and rose again. Anything more would be promoting "denominational bias"! ;) "It do not feel the need to need to study it in depth any more than I feel the need to study Mormonism or Confucianism or any of the hundreds of other isms out there in depth." Of course, the difference is that Mormonism and Confucianism fall outside of Christian orthodoxy. "Again, I was really not aware that Luther and Bunyon and Spurgeon were Calvinists. Now I find out that the list is even longer. But it really does not matter. I would only note that I do not see Peter or Paul or James or John on that list." Well, I would put them on there, but that would just "cause a stink," as my dearly departed grandmother would say. I merely made a list of the indisputable cases. "I am surprised that Harold Camping is not on the list and I think he would be surprised as well." Well, I could call myself a fire engine, but that wouldn't make me one... :) "On the other hand I think John McArthur would be surprised to find himself on it." No, he wouldn't. He speaks at Sproul's conferences every year and is a frequent contributor to _Tabletalk_ Magazine. He and Phil Johnson at Grace to You are big fans of the Puritans. "My hope is that we would be followers, not of men or isms, but of Christ." As is my hope. So I should reject both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism? :) --Joe! |
||||||
50 | Are Reformed people lost souls? | 2 Pet 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 99497 | ||
Whoa. Harold Camping is a nut, a cultist, and not representative in the slightest of classical Reformed theology. If that is what you understand Reformed theology to be, no wonder it is so distasteful. Spurgeon and William Carey and Jhn Bunyan were Reformed. So were many of the writes of the hymns you sing every Sunday (Augustus Toplady, Isaac Watts, John Newton, etc.). Modern-day examples of Reformed teachers would include R.C. Sproul, Michael Horton, Alistair Begg, Sinclair Ferguson, John Armstrong, John Piper, John MacArthur, Al Mohler (the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary), and James R. White. Reformed theology also does not minimize the value of introspection regarding one's salvation. The Puritans (who were Reformed) were champions of "self-examination." Whether or not you ultimately agree with a particular perspective is one thing. I think it is in one's best interest to at least understand the different perspectives within the wide range of Christian orthodoxy. --Joe! |
||||||
51 | Is the Potter free to do as He pleases? | Eph 2:3 | Reformer Joe | 99320 | ||
Post #99232 | ||||||
52 | Apostles, Prophets? An Office for Today? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 99027 | ||
In any case, Mormon hell is pretty empty. Not the way Jesus described it at all. --Joe! |
||||||
53 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 98939 | ||
"I believe that if Spurgeon was alive today he would agree with me." I believe that this sentence wins the "Silliest Comment of the Week Award." "The knowledge we poses today gives us more inlightinment into prophecy, Even Isreal wasnt a nation, ww1, ww2, nuclear bombs, these are all in prophecy which we are aware of today." Who says these are all found in prophecy? This is the kind of foolishness that comes from reading the Bible through the lens of the newspaper rather than the other way around. "The Holy Spirit reviels knowledge to those who can understand,without these things being real people in the past couldnt understand." And you think that you have understanding? Please wake up: God's self-revelation is complete. If you think you have more insight into the things of God than Charles Spurgeon simply because you were born later than him, you neither know Spurgeon nor yourself. I suppose then that you are millennia wiser than Paul, that outdated ignoramus who didn't even know about steam-powered engines or the printing press... --Joe! |
||||||
54 | The Sacred Romance | Num 28:11 | Reformer Joe | 98851 | ||
It is a tough call when husbands do not follow the commands found in Ephesians 5. The bottom line is that disobedient husbands are walking lies about Christ and His church. God has not forgotten you, however, and remember His own commandments to you, and the be encouraged by the possible results of your obedience to them: "In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. Your adornment must not be merely external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands; just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear." --1 Peter 3:1-6 --Joe! |
||||||
55 | The Sacred Romance | Num 28:11 | Reformer Joe | 98836 | ||
"I find it hard living trying to figure things out by myself under his ridicule of me." Is your husband a believer? It will be hard for him to lead you spiritually if he is not a Christian himself. The two books I would recommend which give a biblical analysis of the woman's role in marriage and motherhood are _Praise Her in the Gates_ and _The Fruit of Her Hands_, both by Nancy Wilson. http://www.discerningreader.com/praisheringa1.html http://www.discerningreader.com/fruitofherha1.html Hope this helps! --Joe! |
||||||
56 | Apostles, Prophets? An Office for Today? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98834 | ||
"If the Father is, and the Son is God, and there is but one God, and they not the same, then what you're statement is saying is that there is one Title of God" God is one being, eternally existent in three persons. Jesus and the Father are two personages, but they are the same being. Difficult for the finite human being to grasp? Sure, but that is how God has revealed Himself to be. "How ever the Trinity does teach that the Father is the Son and also the Ghost, stating that they are all each other... this is contrary to what you just said..." The historic doctrine of the Trinity does NOT say that they are all each other. This is a heresy known as modalism or "oneness." Go read the Athanasian Creed: http://www.reformed.org/documents/athanasian.html "And Why back on the Mormons? Did I not say to leave them out of this?" Because you are promoting LDS theology, whether you label it as such or not. --Joe! |
||||||
57 | Apostles, Prophets? An Office for Today? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98832 | ||
"So when talking about an equally worth of a destination the LDS and the general Christians all agree... Faith alone will get you there..." Actually, Mormons teach that almost everyone will be going to one of the three heavens. Other than apostate Mormons and "anti's" like me, hell (the "outer darkness") is pretty empty. I am aware of the way cults like the LDS manipulate Christian terminology to mean something different. Most aberrant groups have their own jargon, "code" vocabulary, or altered definitions of theological terms that lexically isolates their members from having meaningful theological conversations outside the group. Defining terms is indeed important. The LDS has defined them incorrectly. --Joe! |
||||||
58 | who are the women of Genesis | Genesis | Reformer Joe | 98764 | ||
Heheheh...we could write a whole book on her using Forum material. --Joe! |
||||||
59 | Apostles, Prophets? An Office for Today? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98726 | ||
You wrote: "Now, my point, the Mormon definition of Salvation is equal to what the rest of the world calls Sanctification... and every church I've studied believes Sanctification can only be obtained through their Church... so where are the Mormons so wrong in their understanding of salvation?" Because biblically, sanctification (our being made righteous in practice) is subsequent to justification (being pardoned and declared righteous because of Christ's obedience and sacrifice for His people). I am going to heaven because of what Jesus did for me, not because of what I did for myself. My best actions are imperfectly good ones, and our infinitely holy God accepts nothing less than perfect obedience; that is, obedience like Christ provided on my behalf. Therefore, the LDS version of salvation is like sanctification, but according to the Bible our progressive sanctification is the EVIDENCE and FRUIT of being saved, not the BASIS of me being saved. --Joe! |
||||||
60 | Apostles, Prophets? An Office for Today? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98725 | ||
"And back to the origanal topic... Since when in the Bible was it taught that there are to be no more Apostles or Prophets, it doesn't..." And yet the LDS gets it backward, placing the Prophet (why only one?) on a higher authoritative ground than the Quorum of the Apostles. I think it is clear from the New Testament that the apostles were the leaders of the church, not the prophets. "I know you will quote those same verses, but then I quote Acts 7:55-56... but if the Bible does not contradict itself, how can Christ stand on the right hand of the Father if they are the same..." Because Christ and the Father are NOT the same. You misunderstand the church's doctrine of the Trinity. The Father is God; the Son is God; but the Father is not the Son. "So if we can do this, why should we not have Apostles and Prophets to settle these petty doctrinal issues?" Because they are not needed. We have the teachings of the apostles inscripturated in the New Testament. The church plays a role in interpreting the Scriptures (albeit imperfectly). The LDS errs in allegedly providing additional revelation above and beyond (and in contradiction to) what God has already revealed. We do not need "another testament" or any other supposed teaching from God; what he gave us in the Old and New Testaments is absolutely, 100 percent sufficient for the church and for the individual disciple of Christ. --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [97] >> |