Results 421 - 440 of 464
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
421 | Could we get to know Peches better? | Ps 35:1 | Sir Pent | 16320 | ||
Dear Peches, Thank you for sharing a little more about yourself. I hope that some of this information will help people on this forum to be able to understand more where you are coming from. For instance, I think it is important that you do not claim to be a Christian. I think that some of the forum members assumed that you were. They responded to some of your posts as if you should know and believe certaing things, that is probably not the case. Hopefully, there will be more patience in the future. I have not heard of the Georgia Medical Institute. What exactly is that? As for being "not educated enough", I personally don't think that it is very important to God. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to be a Christian. The only problem that arises is that sometimes your posts are a little bit hard to understand. That is why I wondered if perhaps your native language was not English, and that you were having to translate. Lastly, I would like to say that I truly appreciate your spirit being "on fire" for God. I hope that you will use that motivation to really get to know who God is, and develop a stronger relationship with Him. I am concerned that you are not going to a church though. Of course, a person doesn't HAVE to go to church to get to know God, but in my opinion it is one of the very best places to do it. What do you think? |
||||||
422 | For Joe. | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 16223 | ||
Peches, I think you are at the right forum. I think that there are many people here who would be glad to help you learn about the Bible, and about God. It would help if we knew a little more about you though. I have a question posted for you about that. Would you mind answering it? |
||||||
423 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | Sir Pent | 16213 | ||
I appreciate your courage in being willing to state your belief although we are in the minority. However, I think that the "risk of being flamed" is minimal. If you look through this thread, I think you will find that both sides have conducted themselves with great self-control and patience. With the possible exception of only one person, the posts have stayed focused on the issue instead of personally attacking any individuals. In fact, I would like to compliment all forum members for how well this very difficult, and potentially divisive subject, has been handled | ||||||
424 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | Sir Pent | 16212 | ||
Tim, While I, too, can respect your belief, I would have to disagree with your interpretation of the passage in 1 Peter, chapter 3. Verse 19 does not say Christ "preached to the righteous spirits", it just says He "preached to the spirits". That seems to be pretty all inclusive. Also if you look at the context of the next verse, it even seems to imply that Jesus specifically preached to the unrighteous, or those who were disobedient towards God. I would be surprised if most Christians would believe in the limited interpretation that you propose. It does not seem to match up at all with what the biblical context clearly seems to indicate. 1 Peter 3 18: For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; 19: in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20: who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. |
||||||
425 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | Sir Pent | 16191 | ||
My belief IS based on the Bible, Kalos, I understand that you think it is "absurd" to believe "that capital punishment is not the will of God". I also understand that you have a biblical basis for that belief (almost exclusively from the Old Testament). What I hope that you can begin to understand is that I too have a biblical basis (incorporating the Old and New Testaments) for my belief. The death penalty is not wrong because Sir Pent says it is. It is wrong because the Bible in it's entirety says that it is. I will attempt to (using many biblical passages) explain to you my reasoning for this belief. Let me begin by agreeing with you that in ancient Israel, it was right to kill people for certain reasons. For instance God specifically commanded stoning to death for certain sins (1 Samuel 15), and specifically commanded killing certain kings and enemy nations (Exodus 19:10-13). However, I the Bible also documents a fundamental change that occurred, which causes killing for any reason to no longer be an appropriate action. This fundamental change happended between Christ's death and resurrection. During that time, Jesus preached to all the people who had died before that time (1 Peter 3:19). Therefore, it seems that although the people in the OT were killed in the body, they still had a chance to later hear Christ's message to them. However, from that time on, people have had the opportunity to hear the message of salvation during this lifetime, so that when they die, their eternity is set (Hebrews 9:27). This is why I think that killing people now is so terrible. It not only kills their body, but also takes away any chance that they would later come to know Christ and be saved. I think that it is interesting and somewhat supportive that never in the NT is it presented as good for a human to kill someone. In fact the only times when death is seen as a good thing, it is done by God Himself or His angels. Some instances are Annanias and his wife Saphira (Acts 5:1-10), King Herrod (Acts 12:21-23). I want to close by just restating that the point I am making is that the system changed, not that God changed. (James 1:17) I think that the sacrificial system of the Old Testament is a good parallel. In the Old Testament it was not morally wrong to kill a sheep for the reason of cleansing of sin. However, there was a fundamental change in the system (Christ death once for all), which makes it now morally wrong for a Christian to go around killing sheep to cleanse themselves from sin. Of course, the change with regards to sacrifices is much more obvious in the Bible, and that's why we don't have modern Christians discussing it on internet forums. I believe it is because the change with regards to killing people is less obvious that there is such confusion today. |
||||||
426 | Is God still creating man in His image? | Gen 5:3 | Sir Pent | 16179 | ||
I thought this thread was about man's being created in the image of God. Now it seems to be getting onto the subject of the death penalty. There is another thread currently going, which is dealing with that issue, but I would like to just respond briefly to this post. People who are against the death penalty DO NOT BELIEVE that criminals "shouldn't be punished for their crimes". They just believe that this punishment should not be killing the criminal. |
||||||
427 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | Sir Pent | 16178 | ||
The terrorists who attacked two days ago were indeed extremely arrogant to believe that they had the right to end all of those lives. I completely agree with you that what they did was wrong, sinful, and will (barring true repentance) result in them spending eternity in hell. However, my point is that just because they sinned does not give us, as Christians, license to go against the will of God. I believe the death penalty to be wrong, and two wrongs don't make a right. You also point out that the freedoms which I enjoy today were bought by the deaths of the people who have in the past tried to take it away. On the one hand, I have a great appreciation for their sacrifice. On the other hand, I feel that the cost was greater than the reward. I realise that by not defending my freedom (to the point of killing), I could end up losing it. However, I can't justify ending another person's life (and chance for redemption), just so that I can have the freedoms in this life that I so enjoy. Finally, I'd like to respond to is your point that we don't live in Utopia, and therefore my ideas just won't work. You imply that I am irrationally idealistic and optimistic, and you would not at all be the first or the last person to see me that way:) However, I believe that just becuase the world is not perfect, does not mean that we shouldn't do our part to live that way (as much as possible). I also believe that our actions should be based on what is right, not what is effective. We should not refuse to kill our enemies because we believe that they will stop on their own, or because we know that God will stop them for us (although this might happen). Instead we should refuse to kill our enemies because it is right, and be willing to live with the consequences. Once again, I would like to say that I understand that this is an issue which Christians can be and are on both sides of. I hope that through this thread people from both perspectives will be able to see each others interpretation of scripture which leads to their conclusions. P.S. Charis, you consistently share excellent posts with this forum. Therefore, I was dissapointed at your last statement, characterizing the belief of "free will" as putting salvation in the hand of humans own "whim and fancy". This is not at all a fair or accurate portrayal of the beliefs of a very large number of committed Christians. |
||||||
428 | Is God still creating man in His image? | Gen 5:3 | Sir Pent | 16150 | ||
Kalos, I agree that we are not created by God in the same way that Adam and Eve were. Our physical bodies grow from the genetic blueprints of our parents, as opposed to Adam being formed out of dust. On the other hand, I believe that each person's soul (or spirit depending on which forum member you ask) is unique. I don' think that it is merely a product of former creations, but is a new creation of God. "Remember, O Lord, what the measure of life is, for what vanity thou hast created all the sons of men!" (Psalm 89:47) So do you think that that the image of God is more directly connected with our physical bodies or our spirit (soul)? |
||||||
429 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 16076 | ||
Dear Tim, Since Nolan (who started this post) has tried to wrap it up, and since the original intent of this post was to discuss "nonresistance" (mainly along the lines of war as opposed to the death penalty), I would recommend that we start a seperate thread to discuss this topic further. Would that be alright? |
||||||
430 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 16063 | ||
Dear EdB, There is a simple misunderstanding here. You believe that God's position is against abortion, and for the death penalty. Therefore, my statement that those positions are inconsistent implies to you that I believe God to be inconsistent. I can understand where you are coming from. The problem is that you don't seem to understand where I am coming from. I do not imply that God is inconsistent, because I do not believe that God is for the death penalty (at least to be carried out by humans) any more. Let me begin by granting that it is obviously scriptural that God supported the death penalty in the Old Testament (just like He supported the sacrifice system, and many dietary laws). We would all agree that after Christ the sacrifices of animals are no longer appropriate (not because God changed, but because the system changed). We would probably all agree that it is no longer a sin to eat pork (see Peter's vision of the sheet and animals in Acts). This also is not because God changed, but because the system changed. I tried to explain (in my post "death penalty in OT is good") that in a similar way, there has been a fundamental change in the system (not in God) that has caused the death penalty to no longer be appropriate for humans to commit. I think that this whole misunderstanding comes down to the fact that you are assuming (based on scripture of course) that God and you have the same view of capital punishment. What I am trying to communicate is that I believe this assumption to be incorrect, and I think that a good biblical case could be made that God is now against the death penalty. I have enjoyed many of your posts in the past (in fact I tried to keep your "using company computers" post alive). We seem to agree much more than we disagree (ie. the "who made God" thread and the "why is the word selah in the Bible" thread). I look forward to learning together with you on this forum in the future, with hopefully a greater understanding of each other. |
||||||
431 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 16051 | ||
Dear EdB, I am also enorously saddened by the tragic events of yesturday (9-11-01). I pray that this will be one of those cases where our enemies meant it for bad, but that God will bring about good as a result. I pray that the families of those who were killed will be comforted, and have a greater sense of their need for God. I also pray for the people who orchestrated this outrageous violence, that there hearts will be changed as a result of all of the pain that they have caused. For if their hearts do not turn to God, then they await a punishment for eternity that is worse than anything which they can even imagine. As for the post which you are responding to, it seems that I must have been unclear in my message, for which I apologize. I BELIEVE GOD IS COMPLETELY CONSISTENT. This is a belief, which is of great importance to me, and I want to make sure that it is not misunderstood. God is the same yesturday, today, and tommorrow. "Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change." (James 1:17) There is also a second important belief which seems to have been unclear. I BELIEVE THAT THE OLD TESTAMENT IS STILL TRUE. I know that Jesus did not abolish the Old Testament, and I am not trying to say that at all. Nor am I saying that I am the authority to determine what part of scripture is true (please go back and read my post "May I share a simple story to help out", it is the one about the farmer and his 10 fields). I must admit that at first I was a little hurt by this last post of yours. But as I went back and looked at all of your posts to me in the past, I noticed that there aren't very many. You disliked my user id, which you mentioned a couple times, and you did like the farmer story mentioned above. Other than that, I saw very little interaction. I can only assume that you and I have somewhat different interests in threads. I therefore, am guessing that perhaps you have not read enough of my posts to get a clear picture of my beliefs. I would encourage you to take a look at some of them, to get a better idea of what my theology truly is, instead of making very large and incorrect assumptions and then posting them. I would particularly direct you to my thread "How inspired is the NASB" to see my high respect for the authority of scripture. Finally, I would like to point out that my views on capital punishment are based primarily in scripture, and only augmented by my own logic and feelings. My previous post "death penalty in OT is good" explains why I believe that a fundamental change has occurred (not in God, but in the world itself). In that post I refer to much scripture including: Exodus 19:10-13, 1 Samuel 15, 1 Peter 3:19, Hebrews 9:27, Acts 5:1-10, Acts 12:21-23. P.S. I regret that I felt compelled to continue posting to this thread after you attempted to close it, Nolan, but I wanted to clear up the confusion that EdB seemed to have about my position. |
||||||
432 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 16035 | ||
Dear Nolan, I am sincerely both humbled and honored by your preceeding post. I too count it a great privaledge to be able to spend time together on this forum after so many years of seperation. I also am very encouraged that we are both of one heart and mind in regards to using this as an opportunity to advance the kingdom of God. You mention the different paths which people take. I want to let you know how thankful and proud I am of you for letting God direct the path that you have taken. As I think back, I remember several friends who have instead taken control of their own journey, and have gotten lost. Some of them were once strong Christians, and it is a source of deep sadness for me. And yet, it brings me incredible joy that you continue to run the race before you. I know that there has been hardship, and pain at times in your life, and this could have driven you away from your faith. However, I have observed that instead it has caused your relationship with God to grow and strengthen. Since we are on the subject of Star Trek, let me close by quoting a line said by Spock in the second movie. "You have been, and always will be, my friend." |
||||||
433 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15961 | ||
Correction, to that last post: I meant John Wesley. Charles Wesley was his brother the well-known hymn writer. I apologize for the confusion. |
||||||
434 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15960 | ||
The Bible determines truth, not experience. I completely agree with you Kalos. I do not share my experience as a proof (which I stated right off the bat), but rather so that others could have a better idea of where I'm comming from. The great theologian, Charles Wesley, had 4 ways to determine truth. It has become known as the Wesleyan quadrilateral. The four sides are: scripture, reason (logic), church tradition, and personal experience. However, of the four, the most important and critical side is scripture, and all other sides must be judged according to it. I have found this to be a balanced way of discovering truth. In my opinion, the idea that a Christian is able to deny Christ is supported by all of these sides. Let me take them one at a time. There are many scriptural passages (Tim Moran has done a good job of bringing up many of these on this forum) which at least imply, if not appear to clearly indicate that it is possible. Scripture also leads me to believe in "free will", and the ability of human beings to either choose to accept or reject God. Logic would lead me to believe that if a person had truly "free will", then they could reject and deny Christ at any time. I can see no rational reason why something would eliminate this abiltiy when a person became a Christian. There is definately an abundance of Church tradition which supports this idea. It is found in both the Catholic Church, the Methodist Churches, and many Pentecostal Churches. (On this point, I should add that there is also significant church tradition supporting the opposing perspective. This is particularly true of the Baptist and Presbyterian Churches.) And finally, I have shared already how my own personal experience is in line with this belief. Therefore, it is not for only one of these reasons, but rather for all of them, that I am convinced that it is indeed possible (although extremely tragic) for a Christian to deny Christ. |
||||||
435 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 15933 | ||
I must agree with Angie, I find it inconsistent to support the taking of human life for one reason (capital punishment), and oppose it for another (abortion). I also agree with Brian G. when he says, "When we begin accepting the destruction of life from one perspective, then it becomes easier to end life from other perspectives. The different acceptable reasons for destroying life begin to feed upon each other." Killing is desensitizing. In fact, a large part of military training is dedicated to that purpose. On the other hand, EdB makes the point there is no record of the martyred Christians using the argument that the death penalty is morally wrong to defend themselves. I would submit that none would be expected anyway. It is not logical that a person would use a defense, which is irrelevant to the authority over them. If the authorities were not Christians, then they would have no reason to care about what the Christian thing to do was. EdB also makes the point that there are many places where the "Bible clearly prescribes execution". I would submit that these are in the OT and that there has been a fundamental change since then (see "Death penalty in OT is good" post). There have also been people posting on both sides of whether the death penalty is an effective deterrant. That is to be expected, because there are experts on both sides of that as well. In fact, since that has not been conclusively shown either way, I don't think that it is a reasonable basis for deciding either direction. I understand where EdB and many others are comming from on this issue, but I believe that no matter how "right" our motivation is, it is still "wrong" to kill another human being whom God has created. |
||||||
436 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 15927 | ||
Could you make this a seperate thread? It seems to be veering off the original question, but it is of definate interest, and I think deserves its own thread. | ||||||
437 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Sir Pent | 15841 | ||
Death penalty in OT is good, death penalty in NT is bad. I agree with you that in ancient Israel, it was right to kill people for certain reasons. For instance God specifically commanded stoning to death for certain sins, and specifically commanded killing certain kings and enemy nations. However, I think that a fundamental change occurred, which causes killing for any reason to no longer be an appropriate action. This fundamental change happended between Christ's death and resurrection. During that time, Jesus preached to all the people who had died before that time. Therefore, it seems that although the people in the OT were killed in the body, they still had a chance to later hear Christ's message to them. However, from that time on, people have had the opportunity to hear the message of salvation during this lifetime, so that when they die, their eternity is set. This is why I think that killing people now is so terrible. It not only kills their body, but also takes away any chance that they would later come to know Christ and be saved. I think that it is interesting and somewhat supportive that never in the NT is it presented as good for a human to kill someone. In fact the only times when death is seen as a good thing, it is done by God Himself (Annanias and his wife Saphira, King Herrod). P.S. Joe, I know that you come from the reformed perspective and therefore probably believe that giving someone more time to choose whether to follow God is irrelevant, because they are predestined one way or the other. This has of course been thoroughly discussed in other threads. But, I want to give everyone as much of an opportunity as possible to come to relationship with God. |
||||||
438 | So ALL who believe in Christ are saved? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15789 | ||
You combine many questions here, which probably each deserve their own thread. I will attempt to answer them briefly, but would recommend seperate threads if more detail is required. As for Peter's denial of Christ, that is already covered in a current thread. As for Satan and the fallen angels, yes they believe in Jesus' existence, but this is not enough. Imagine a cancer patient who visits their doctor. The doctor diagnoses the problem and prescribes some medicine to take, which will cure their disease. The patient may be completely convinced that this medicine is at the pharmacy and would be effective at curing their disease. However, if they don't choose to go pick up the medicine and take it, they will still die. Believing that Jesus exists is not sufficient for salvation. As for Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and Muslims, the problem there is that the "Jesus" that they believe in is not at all the Jesus which is in the Bible. For instance, Muslims and Mormons do not believe that Jesus was actually God. Therefore, they do not really believe in the real Jesus at all. I understand and appreciate that you are bringing up questions, which young Christians and non-believers would naturally ask. But I hope that they will be able to see that these appearant contradictions that you bring up are actually not contradictions at all. |
||||||
439 | Was Peter denied before the Father? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15786 | ||
I would agree that Peter's denial of Jesus was not one of belief, but instead one of aquaintance. Peter did not deny that Jesus was the Christ. Instead he denied that Peter was who Peter really was. Peter didn't lie about Jesus, he lied about himself by saying he didn't know Jesus. It was still a lie, and was still sin, and still required repentance and forgiveness. However, I think that this is different from the idea, which Jesus was trying to communicate when He said that those who deny Christ would be denied before the Father in Heaven. Whether or not a Christian could do that or not is another interesting question and is covered in the "Can a Christian disown Christ?" thread. |
||||||
440 | The bible is a work of fiction - discuss | Gen 1:1 | Sir Pent | 15512 | ||
What about the word "protein"? Just giving you a hard time Norrie at the expense of the English language :) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [24] >> |