Results 41 - 47 of 47
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: reformedreader Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Noah and his family | 1 Pet 3:20 | reformedreader | 6271 | ||
Reformer Joe, A very astute "theological" observation! Just think, the word "flesh", which refers to "humans", does not always refer to "all" flesh (humans). Sam Hughey |
||||||
42 | Noah and his family | 1 Pet 3:20 | reformedreader | 6275 | ||
Reformer Joe, It would have been a little short-sighted on God's part to have declared He would destroy all flesh while wanting to save all flesh. God saved exactly whom He wanted to be saved. It would also be senseless on the part of God to have Noah try to "convince" people to be saved (for 120 years) knowing He would destroy all of them, would it not? How would the backyard Bible club respond to such a question? Sam Hughey |
||||||
43 | The number one third? | Rev 8:7 | reformedreader | 3886 | ||
JVH0212, Thank you for your compliments and I will always try to live up to acceptable standards of both communication and proper Christian love when dealing with matters such as this, however, even the best intentions sometimes fall short of its goal. I am assuming by the use of the phrase "Since only one-third of the earth is destroyed" the reference is to population rather than geographical location since that is how I have seen it popularly interpreted. Perhaps my assumption is too broad but that is precisley why I asked why the word "earth" refers to people. If I have misunderstood the original intent, please forgive me. Perhaps I should have asked "if" the intent was to associate "earth" with "people". Sam Hughey |
||||||
44 | The number one third? | Rev 8:7 | reformedreader | 6269 | ||
Ray, I greatly appreciate your response to an old question that remained unanswered by those who raised the idea. However, I feel as though the question is still not answered. This cannot be resolved by just simply adjourning to a favorite translation for you must remember these translations did not exist prior to 1600. So, what would you have recommended had you lived prior to 1600? If taken literally, this event would leave absolutely no grass anywhere on the entire planet. And if we take this literally, we must also assume real hail, fire and "blood" will fall from the skies? I find great, great difficulty in believing all the fire departments in the world could put out a fire that consumed one third of all the trees and one third of the entire planet as well as all the grass on the entire planet. Sam Hughey |
||||||
45 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | reformedreader | 5451 | ||
JVH0212, I think you might have misunderstood me just a bit. My post was rhetorical. I wasn't implying that Rev. 17:8 could be wrong but, rather, rhetorically speaking "since it is true" we must conclude something from my question. I most definitely do believe every verse of holy scripture to be true. I presented my question as I did because some Christians believe all humans were written into the book of life and upon reaching an age of accountability, they rejected Christ and were thus erased from the book of life. There are others who deny anyone was written into the book of life before creation because they reject the doctrine of predestination of the elect to salvation. The point is that if (since) “some” humans were written into the book of life before creation, they were obviously predestined (predetermined) to become saved at some time in history, else how could they have been written into the book of life before creation. melchizedekau asked the question, “when” was a person written into the book of life and that is primarily the reason for me asking what I asked and how I asked it. When you responded with Rev. 17:8, I only intended to draw out those who hold either view presented above and discuss why they believe so. If we reject the doctrine of predestination, how then could anyone have been written into the book of life before creation just as Rev. 17:8 states to be a fact? If we accept the doctrine of predestination, then what does that say about those who were/are not written into the book of life before creation? 1) a) All humans are born under the condemnation of sin (Rom 3:10, 23). b) Where does the Bible SAY that *any* or *all* are "*predestined* to the lake of fire?" 2) Nowhere in the Bible, including Rev 17:8, does it SAY that all humans were written into the book of life. I completely agree that “all” are under the condemnation of sin because none are righteous apart from the righteousness of God according to Romans 3:10. However, since Rev. 17:8 clearly states that some are predestined to be saved by the fact they were written into the book of life before creation, and since we know some are already in the grave waiting to face eternity in the lake of fire, we can only conclude they were not written into the book of life prior to creation. Therefore, it is quite obvious that they were predestined to spend eternity in the lake of fire which means I agree with you that not all humans were written into the book of life prior to creation. Sam Hughey |
||||||
46 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | reformedreader | 5463 | ||
JVH, Thanks and no apology is necessary because I am not at all offended. Text only discussions often lead to misunderstanding because of its limited nature. Reply whenever you so desire and I greatly respect the man who takes time to reason his statements. Sam Hughey |
||||||
47 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | reformedreader | 5618 | ||
camainc, While I’ve nothing against the right use of logic, I’ve found that all too often Christians do not rightly use logic when it comes to interpreting scripture. One example of this is when we take a verse that is clear, precise, distinct and directly to the point and then assume it says something not even found in the text or is blatantly contradictory to the text. Perhaps it is because a particular verse does not agree with one’s preconceived idea of what they believe. Nevertheless, if we ignore verses that leave no other conclusion than precisely what it states, then we can create our own truth and force scripture to mean whatever we want it to mean. To your statement: “(2) those that do not believe in and accept the free gift of salvation offered by the Father through the Son are destined to perish in the lake of fire”, I would disagree slightly but probably because of an insufficient explanation which could lead to a misunderstanding of scripture. It is true that one must believe, however, believing alone does not save anyone. The unclean spirits believe but also tremble in fear for they know their eternal fate. Many humans believe but never come to salvation. I never had any problem believing what the bible stated many years before I was saved but I was still an unbeliever. I would also disagree with salvation being a gift offered to the unbeliever and left to their own logic as to whether they want to be saved or not. The unbeliever is blinded by Satan so that he cannot see (understand) the glorious gospel. Therefore, logically speaking, the unbeliever is unable to understand the gospel and this is further supported by 2 Cor. 2:14. His logic is rendered useless and since John 1:12,13 clearly state that the unbeliever’s will has nothing to do with his salvation, we must rest on the clear passages of scripture that rule out salvation being an offer made to the unbeliever to exercise his will logically to decide if he wants to be saved. To your statement: “(3) believers’ names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life from the foundation (I assume this means the creation) of the world, then one could presume that (4) unbelievers are destined for the Lake of Fire from the foundation of the world (Rev 20:15)” In the light of clear and unambiguous scripture, one can come to no other conclusion and I agree with you. Rev. 20:15 is clear, distinct, direct and to the point. Adding anything or changing anything this verse says only destroys the truth of what it says. To your statement: There is no verse that I know of that *explicitly* says that, but there are also no verses that *explicitly* say that God is triune. Perhaps not “explicitly” in word for word detail, however, the bible is replete with the doctrine of the trinity. One does not need a verse that literally states in word for word detail the trinity to be actual when there are hundreds of verses that very clearly lead a logically minded believer to be convinced of the trinity. To your statement: If one accepts the doctrine of predestination (and I don't know how you couldn't, with all of the verses that are very clear-cut on that), then you have to accept predestination to hell as well as to heaven. I agree but many do not. Many do not believe in what is called “double-predestination”. However, I have found they have trouble understanding it because of a faulty understanding of scripture. To your statement: How we reconcile predestination with John 3:16 is a mystery, and I don't think any of us will know how God in His infinite wisdom and grace works out the details of free-will vs. predestination (at least until we get into His Presence in our glorified state). Reconciling the two is not a mystery. With all due respect, NOT reconciling the two is a mystery, meaning I cannot understand why any believer would want the two to be contradictory when they are not. The basic problem with free-will theism is when it is placed at the wrong time and to the wrong person. The unbeliever has no free-will to decide if he wants to be saved according to the numerous verses mentioned above. However, many will completely ignore those verses and insist on the unbeliever being able to do what God says he cannot do. It is when the Holy Spirit circumcizes the heart, gives life, renews the will to become responsive to God’s calling that the believer’s will repents and believes. The will must be enabled to respond, repent and believe. Sam Hughey |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |