Results 61 - 80 of 126
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: atdcross Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163739 | ||
Hi Sonlit, Maccarthur and Piper demonstrate that (1) their interpretation of scripture is open to error, and (2) what they teach in general is not necessarily Biblical truth. May I offer a few suggestions? Whenever you read a book, don't take the writer's word for it. Just read and glean what you believe is consistent with the Bible and the rest discard. Just because one is a theologian or a scholar does not mean he is either a good scholar or is correct in his theology. To briefly answer your two last questions: You can know, as far as possible, the correctness of one's interpretation by the plain speaking of Biblical revelation; Father does not hide truths necessary for his children to know. And truth is known by faith in the Spirit's guidance if we are intending to seek his glory and obey (John 7:17; 15:13). The Bible is read to seek God and deepening relationship with him, not doctrines. Of course, doctrines will necessarily be found but they are subservient to knowing God through faith. Which leads to the second suggestion, read the Bible through faith in God’s promises (cf. Hebrews 11:6; Jeremiah 29:13; John 7:17. Be as comfortable with not understanding as you are with understanding. What you know take firm hold of it and let it increase your faith. What you don’t understand just set it aside. You need not know without a doubt on a certain subject. Embrace as much as you can understand about what you don’t fully understand and the rest, allow God to bring wisdom in time. Direct your "faith without a doubt" on God's character and word, not on doctrines. Doctrine is important but doctrine tells us about God; doctrine is not God, at least, doctrine as we finite creatures are able to comprehend. Remember, we all know “in part” (1 Corinthians 13:12). Better than just knowing is the one who loves through what he knows (1 Corinthians 13:13; 3 John 4-5). Anyone who claims that their doctrinal teachings are either something like an “accurate reflection of Bible truths,” “the gospel,” or phrases like these, be very wary. More than likely they hold erroneous if not heretical notions of God. And remember, it is through faith in Christ that the full knowledge of God is received. Any form of knowledge that either ignores or sets him to the side is false. A good Bible to use for intimate studying with the Lord is the “Thompson Chain Reference” Bible and I believe it comes in the New American Standard, which is a translation I personally recommend (although, again, I am not a scholar). I suggest this study Bible because it has no explanatory notes but many cross references and topical studies; therefore, it helps to keep one as objective as possible in studying. I’m sure others can add, give better, and more helpful suggestions but these are some that have helped me |
||||||
62 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163870 | ||
I believe, Tim's provision of a "slightly different perspective," is valid and more in line with accessing the intended meaning of the Biblical writers. There are those who say Jesus died but for a few By a sovereign decree No man can view God made the choice Who was to win Who was to lose But I believe Jesus dies for all men The Word says what it means And it means just what it says Every man of Adam's fall Can come to the Cross And be restored The mystery is not For whom Christ died But that he died For us all They say "the world" means "The elect" and not "all men" And "all men" just means "The chosen" before the world began God made the choice To save a few And damn the rest But I believe Jesus Atoned for all men And no one is beyond The reaches of God's arm Every sinner can hear the call And believe for Jesus Shed his blood for all The mystery is not For whom Christ died But that he died For us all |
||||||
63 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163909 | ||
Hi Tim... You're welsome. The poem, actually a song, is mine. I am aware that it has no Bible references to support it but figured it would help stimulate some thought. |
||||||
64 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163927 | ||
Greetings Kalos, Relationship with God is the goal; doctrine is the means. We should not read the Bible for the purpose of formulating doctrine except to deepen our relationship with God. Notice, for one example, the apostle Paul encourages Timothy to "Hold fast the pattern of sound words" (i.e. doctrine)...in faith and love" (i.e. in relationship)...with Christ" (2 Tim 1:13). In v.14, Timothy is instructed to keep the things that we committed to him in relationship with the Holy Spirit. It seems there are patterns in Timothy, which show, in one way or another, that what one learns is for the purpose of maintaining relationship with God and not for learnings sakes or just to be doctrinally correct. I think I have clarified my position in a way that is agreeable to you. |
||||||
65 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | atdcross | 163952 | ||
Please read my note ID#163927. There was no suggestion that doctrine is not derived from the Bible; but, please note, that the fact of doctrine derived from the Bible does not necessarily mean one has it correct. False doctrine can also be extracted from the Bible (2 Peter 3:15-16). Also, there was no intention to devaluate the importance of doctrine but just to place it in a - and I believe, Biblical - proper perspective. Allow me to repeat, relationship with Father, not doctrine, is the goal when studying the Bible. |
||||||
66 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 164593 | ||
Hi Ebrain, 1. I would think whether being unable to do good is your problem or mine is not the issue. What is at issue is the question of whether or not the apostle Paul was describing his experience as a believer in Christ. With reference to vs.6, which shows the contrast Paul is making, that is, between the "newness of the Spirit" and the "oldness of the letter," I do not think Romans 7 is reflective of his personal experience. 2. Even sinners can act morally virtuous. I do not think that Jesus meant literally that one cannot do any good act apart from Him (Matt 7:11; Luke 11:13). What he does mean is that we cannot perform any act that is acceptable before God apart from Him, irrespective of how good, sincere, or loving the motive may be. I do not think there is any real difference between us on this issue, only a different perspective or way to look at it. |
||||||
67 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 164694 | ||
Hie Ebrain, I did not mean the apostle is describing his experience before his conversion. I said, “I do not think Romans 7 is reflective of his personal experience,” which includes both before and after conversion. My apologies if I did not make that clear. When you say, “the verses you quote refer to man's idea of what is good,” are you suggesting that Jesus has a wrong idea of what is good or that what he said is not divinely inspired? Mark 10:17-18 – Jesus is affirming God’s character as good in opposition to sinful man. Romans 3:10-12; Psalm 14:1-3 – These verses affirm all men are sinful. Psalm 53:1-3 – Again, man’s sinfulness is affirmed. However, although acknowledging man’s sinfulness, none of the verses above (except for Ps 53:3 as I read it from the NIV) deny that man can commit a morally good act. It is seen in experience that a sinner can perform a morally good act. The problem is that however morally good the act is, God does not accept it as good and, therefore, the good act is a bad act (Isa 64:6; Jer 2:22). Ps 53:3 must also affirm this since it cannot be denied that men can and do perform mrally good acts. The main point of all the verses cited show that man is sinful; that although he may do what is good and right, they are acts unacceptable before God because they are performed apart from faith and life in God. I am not denying man is sinful. I am saying that man as a siner is able to perform good acts, although they are unacceptable to God. |
||||||
68 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 164730 | ||
Romans 7 is, I believe, not descriptive of any personal experience before or after conversion. 1 John 1:8-10 is not intended as descriptive of anyone's personal problems in relation to sin. These verses seem to combat some heretical teachings at the time related to claims of being sinless or absolute perfection. Regarding your surprise at my suggestion, after stating there are no inherent contradictions in the Bible, you claim, “the verses you quote refer to man's idea of what is good.” The verses I quoted were the words of Jesus (Matt 7:11; Luke 11:13), therefore, making the implication that Jesus statements here are merely “man’s idea.” I assumed you did not realize it and I only sought clarity in your position. Luke 11:13 stress the point of my argument. Jesus is affirming that even evil people can do a good deed. In general we may not disagree, however, specifically I disagree that the interpretation of Romans 7 is descriptive of the apostle’s personal experience. (1) To the question, “No one acts good”? the answer is that evil people to commit acts that are in and of themselves morally good. (2) To the question, “Paul had problems?” (in relation to Romans 7), the answer is that the apostle claimed to have led a blameless life before and after conversion (Phil 3:4-6; Acts 24:16). The apostle had no such struggle with sin as described in Romans 7:14 or 8:8. "Paul's experience as a Christian is the last thing that could be considered as the topic here. 'I am carnal, sold under sin'...To refer these words to Paul's status as a Christian, or to the status of any other Christian, is to torture the word of God...Paul had just finished saying that Christians are 'dead to sin' and 'alive unto God' in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:11); and to apply these words to Christians is to contradict what had just been stated" (Coffman). |
||||||
69 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 164953 | ||
Hello Doc, Out of curiosity, where elsewhere other than in this forum have I expressed my views of Romans 7? No one’s experience in particular is being considered. Paul, as I see it, is just using the first person as a literary device to get his point across, which is the contrast between life under the law (which is not reflective at all of the apostle’s experience as a believer in Christ) and life under grace or “in the new way of the Spirit” (Rom 7:6). Please note that your reference to what I write is actually a quote Coffman’s Commentary as indicated. In any case, if Rom 7 demonstrates the apostle’s experience then as a Christian he is: 1. Dead in sin, v.9. 2. Deceived, v.11. 3. Unspiritual, v.14. 4. Enslaved to sin, v.14,25. 5. Without power to do the good, v.17f. 6. Continually does evil, v.19. 7. Imprisoned by “the law of sin”, v.23. Are these descriptive of a believer? Of Paul as he describes himself? As I mentioned before, unless the persons you mentioned interpreted the Bible for “2,000 years of accumulated understanding” under the inspiration of the Spirit, I am not obligated to agree with them. They certainly cannot be right in every point as they seem to disagree with each other in many. Nor, by the way, am I required to "measure up" to them. Without argument, they may hold the better place, nevertheless, however "better", my obligation is to have a clear conscience before God not men; I am to live according to that wisdom God grants to me, however faulty or lacking others perceive it to be (although, admittedly, any actual fault or lack is not due to God's giving but to my receiving). My apologies, but I do not understand what you are requiring I “elucidate”. |
||||||
70 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 164986 | ||
Quick note. Unfortunately, I may have not been clear, which resulted in your misunderstanding of what I meant by my statement regarding inspiration. The point I attempted to make was that, in agreement with you, "only the writers of the Bible itself were inspired by the Holy Spirit." Therefore, I seek the illumination that comes from the Spirit. Although, admittedly, others of greater knowledge may be of help, they are not necessarily correct (even if held for 2,000 years). Where I perceive that the Bible teaches differently from what they espouse, my obligation is to remain under what I believe the Spirit is teaching me. In any case, with all due respect and I hope you will not take offense, your comments to me here are irrelevant - at least to me - because it offers no further insight to what is specifically being discussed. |
||||||
71 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165038 | ||
Unfortunately, Doc,you do not correctly understand. | ||||||
72 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165039 | ||
As I stated, it seems to me that the apostle is using the first person in Romans 7 as a literary device to make the point that, as believers, we are not enslaved to sin through the Law. Sin need no longer be a problem. We have been given the grace (enablement) to overcome sin at every turn. True, there may be a struggle with the impulses of sin but we can gain and maintain the victory at every turn; we are not in the position where what we hate to do we do or where the good we want to do we don’t do. Such is a description of the sinner and not the saint, the unbeliever and not the believer. Luke 11:13 - As I read the passage, it does not seem to me that your interpretation is warranted. Jesus is not saying that the gifts others give are evil gifts while the gifts he gives are good. He is saying that in view of the fact, borne out by experience, that evil people can and do give good gifts to others, it is certain that God, who is not evil but absolutely good, will give good gifts to his children. An unbelieving father gives his daughter a gift certificate to Old Navy for her birthday to buy clothes she needs. Is that an evil gift, in and of itself, to God? “Sinful, fallen humans” are capable and actually do give good gifts and act in morally good ways towards others. The evil is not in the act of giving what is good but in it’s being an act done apart from relationship with God. Phil 3:4-6 - Yes, the apostle is referring to before his conversion and that is my point. With reference to himself he makes no assertions of having sinned against God or having a problem obeying the law as you contend he does in Romans 7. In the apostle’s self-analysis, he declares he is, with specific reference to the Torah, blameless; he does not see himself as one who had problems carrying out the letter of the law; Paul did not view himself as one who disobeyed Torah. Verses 7 and 8 emphasize the point I am trying to make. What did the apostle count as rubbish? “Every kind of covetous desire” (Rom 7:8)? No. It seems to me, as the context shows, that Paul counted as rubbish the righteousness he had established under Torah/Law. |
||||||
73 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165040 | ||
Although I may inadvertently have not fully quoted the words of Rom 6:11, the intent of the apostle’s meaning is clear: we are to consider ourselves dead to son because we are dead to sin. This is the point he stresses in Romans 6:1-14 and 7:1-6. My “misquote” did not misrepresent the apostle’s meaning. No denial of a “sin nature” has been suggested. What is admitted throughout Romans 6-8 is that we have the power to overcome the “sin nature” and not be defeated by it; it is not inevitable that we commit sin because of enabling grace. Again, my position is that Rom 7:25 is not descriptive of the apostle’s experience as a believer. To interpret it as such would contradict Paul’s emphatic and implicitly experiential summation that “sin shall not be your master” 6:11-14). It would also contradict his self-appraisal as one who is blameless and in possession of a clear conscience before God. One who is “a slave to sin” or in the habit of practicing “every kind of covetous desire” cannot rightly make such a claim. Note: If 7:25 is reflective of Paul’s experience, (1) it would blatantly contradict his experiential declaration in 8:9: “You, however, are not controlled by the sinful nature…”, and (2) Paul’s end would be only death since he asserts that those who are enslaved to sin – “live according to the sinful nature” – will die (8:13). I see no contradiction between 1 Jn 1:8-10 and 3:9.It seems to me that the apostle is declaring not a mere “overcoming [of] his reluctance” or a mere “laying hold of His willingness” but the actual and experiential overcoming of sin by means of our identification with the death of Christ In his death we died to sin, its guilt and power; in his life we live to righteousness by his cleansing of the conscience through forgiveness and the enablement of grace to obey the will of God. |
||||||
74 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165073 | ||
I'm sorry, Doc, but I do not understand your comment. | ||||||
75 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165154 | ||
I usually do not give out information as such on profiles since my experience has been that others make unwarranted assumtions and use it to argue for their position, although one's profile is totally irrelevant to any Biblical or theological discussion. However, understanding that others can appreciate one's background and better understand why certain positions are held, as per your request, please read my updated profile. |
||||||
76 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165166 | ||
Thanks, Hank. Have a great year in the Lord. | ||||||
77 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165236 | ||
Hi Doc, I have not noticed Paul using this sort of literary device in any other epistle. However, I am not convinced that its absence in any other of his epistles warrants dismissal of its use here. Briefly, my position is taken for the following reasons: 1. If Rom 7 is the apostle’s experience as a believer, chapter 8 seems to contradict it; the experience described in either one rules out the other. For example, one cannot simultaneously live in “of flesh” (7:14) and be “led by the Spirit” (8:14) or be “sold into bondage to sin” and be “free from the law of sin and death (8:2). 2. As far as before his conversion, Paul seems not to have been conscious of being a sinner against the Law but as one who followed it in all respects (Phil 3:6; cf. Rom 10:3), therefore, he would not describe himself as one who was covetous or unable to do the good that he desired to do (7:8,18-19). 3. As far as being a believer in Messiah, it does not seem feasible that Paul would admit, on the one hand, that he is absorbed in “every kind of coveting” or is “doing the very thing I hate” (7:8,15) and, on the other hand, boldly declare that when he returns to them, it will be “in the fullness of the blessing of Christ” (15:29) or, as in another epistle, that he has lived his life with a “clear conscience before God and men” (Acts 23:1; 24:16; cf. 1 Ths 2:10; 1 Cor 11:1). My position, as in the views of others, does not answer every question that may come up to refute it but, for me, it resolves most of my questions and better upholds the message and substance of the Gospel. |
||||||
78 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165237 | ||
Hi Doc, Verse 7 is describing the Law as holy and v.13 as highlighting sin. Regarding v. 18a, even unbelievers can be conscious that nothing good dwells in them. Not knowing their sinful condition is necessarily their problem; their problem is, once being conscious of it, they refuse to come to Christ for deliverance. I think that v.18b,19,21 are good descriptions of the unregenerate. Some even confess their situation in like terms. Again, the problem is not so much that they cannot realize their sinfulness but they cannot see the value of believing in Christ for deliverance. Verse 25 to me reflects the sinner’s plight without grace and the divine influence or work of conviction upon his conscience (it is possible the first phrase of thanksgiving is out of place). To me this verse is equivalent to what is stated in vs.19-21. So, yes, if anything, these verses are descriptive of the unregenerate. In light of Romans 8, I do not see how it can be otherwise. With all respect to the Puritans, if one is living this kind of struggle, of coveting (v.8), “of flesh sold into bondage to sin” (v14), of always doing what he does not understand and what is contrary to his good intentions (15-20) as a “prisoner of the law of sin” (v.23), and serving the law of sin through indulgences of the flesh (v.25) on the contrary, he ought to take the time to reexamine his spiritual state to see if he is of the faith (1 Cor 11:28; 2 Cor 13:5; 1 Jn 1:6; 2:4,29; 3:6-7; 5:3-5). No one is denying that there may be a struggle in the believer’s life but as I think another poster pointed out, it is not a struggle of losing and falling into sin as Rom 7 depicts it; but it is a struggle in which the outcome is victory over sin. Whether or not consistent victory over sin is actually the case in one’s personal life is not my argument. That the struggle in the Christian life should be one of victory is my point. If Romans 7 is descriptive of the apostle Paul’s way of life, notwithstanding Rom 8, we are looking at, from my point of view, a pathetic state of affairs. I would question how one could call a life of always wishing the good but always doing the evil instead as walking according to the Spirit. |
||||||
79 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165240 | ||
I fail to see why Paul cannot use the "first person" as a device in writing to others to explain a point. Sometimes, too much of an argument is made based on the grammer or the meaning of a word (not that it should be dismissed) and that is why some mistakes are made in interpretation, that is, in attempting to understand the intended meaning of the text. In any case, I am unfamiliar with Greek and cannot answer based on the Greek language or grammer (I'm bad enough with English!). But let me give and uneducated answer: Rom 7:6. Here the apostle is literally referring to himself. The illustration using himself begins from verse 7 through to the end. In these verses he is expanding on the illustration of marriage to make his point. Note that what he says in verse 6 is contrary to the what he states in the verses that follow. Regarding vs. 7-25, I have stated before my reasons for disagreeing with the interpretation that these verses literally describe Paul before or after conversion. In any case, "ongoing struggle against our 2 natures", however, the struggle in Rom 7 is seen as a losing battle against sin; it does not depict one who is walking in the Spirit as Galatians depicts it. Also, allow me to back up a bit. I do not mean that Paul was not a sinner or a slave to sin before conversion, nor do I mean to say that in all respects Rom 7 does not depict, to one degree or another, in one form or another, the apostle's plight apart from grace. Paul may have been a covetous person. The point is, he did not see himself as a covetous person before conversion. He saw himself as righteous according to the Law. Paul may have contended with a guilty conscience for some time, nevertheless, he seems to have mollified it's pangs with an evaluation of himself as righteous. I am saying, Rom 7 does not necessarily have any literal reference to the apostle's life before or after conversion. He is making a general statement concerning the law and man's condition in relation to it; it is applicable to every man as a sinner (not as a believer, cf. v.1). The point he wished to make was not so much what his life was or is like but what the Law is and its function (v.7). For example, before conversion Paul could not have seen that the Law was death (v.9-10) to him because he felt that he was following the Law and thus was, not a "sinner", but a righteous man; he felt that the commandment gave him life (Phil 3:6). Paul persecuted the Church because he thought it was the righteous thing to do. After his conversion, the apostle learned that his zeal for God, rather than establishing righteousness for him, brought him under the divine disapproval (Rom 10:3); and it is through hindsight he says, "when the commandment came to life, sin sprang to life, and I died" (v.9). I do not advocate "sinless perfection", however, I do believe the attainment (on this side of heaven) of living blamelessly before God is possible. I have met two persons who I believed lived such a life, at least, as long as I've known and been in close or intimate contact with them. That one may struggle against sin does not necessarily nullify the possibility of living in Biblical perfection (or blamelessness); Gal 5:16-17 does not speak against its attainment but for it. |
||||||
80 | Paul's physical description | Matt 11:28 | atdcross | 165260 | ||
...just seeking clarity. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |