Results 661 - 680 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
661 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 99253 | ||
mkm9: My sincere thanks to you for providing this information. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
662 | Unification Just For Unity's Sake? | 2 Tim 4:3 | Radioman2 | 84082 | ||
Unification Just For Unity's Sake? "Why are you dividing the Body this way? Why are you attacking Christians? These people love the Lord." [This is a question that, in various forms, I have repeatedly been asked, especially when I dare to question the teachings of certain TV preachers and others who "end up teaching things that are a bit bizarre and weird." --Radioman2] - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'I'm deeply concerned about any rush to unification just for unity's sake.' - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Christian:" A Sound or a Word? by Gregory Koukl 'I think the medium of TV lends itself to excess, such that people who are not well trained in theology can be launched into positions of high influence and authority, and end up teaching things that are a bit bizarre and weird. When that happens I take exception and try to be a defender of the truth, as I understand it. But then people call in and say, "Why are you dividing the Body this way? Why are you attacking Christians? These people love the Lord." 'If you've been around for a while and understand the issue of tactics here--especially the suicide tactic-- you notice that this objection immediately defeats itself because this person is calling me on the air and publicly telling me that I am wrong for speaking on the air about other people who are wrong. In other words, they are accusing me of doing the very thing that they are in the process of doing. It doesn't bother me because I don't think there is anything wrong with that, per se. But their whole point is that I'm so divisive. Why don't we stay unified? After all, we're all Christians. We all love Jesus--as if there is something magical about this sound "Christian," or this sound, "love Jesus," such that those who have a commitment to the sound should therefore not have any meaningful differences between them. 'My view is that "Christian" is not a sound, it's a word. And the phrase "loving Jesus" is not two sounds, it is two words. The difference between a sound and a word is that a sound is a noise and a word means something. It has particular and peculiar content. 'I would be the first to agree that sometimes we major in the minors. Christians get all hot and bothered about minuscule theological issues, and Paul himself says don't fuss about it; don't waste your time with the silly things. I think one characteristic of an ill-educated church is that they create a tempest in a teapot. They fuss over the things that mean very little and they ignore the things that are really critical. 'What's the difference? If you know anything about church history, you know the difference. It is easy for someone to say, "Koukl, you think that what's important to you is really critical, and the rest is insignificant. Well, maybe you're wrong." 'Well, maybe I am wrong, but I'm trying to line up my understanding of what is critical with what the church has characteristically lined itself up with over the last 2000 years. I'm trying to maintain a historical perspective and not simply play my own evangelical joy-toy, my own hobby horse. A historical perspective will help protect you from doing that. 'I'm deeply concerned about any rush to unification just for unity's sake. This is the problem with the World Council of Churches. Their idea is, "Let's just ignore our differences and get together." But any love that is not based on truth--as a teacher of mine once said--is not love, but adultery. 'I want you to think carefully about this for a minute. It really hinges on the distinction between the sound and the word. 'I might ask you then, "What unites us?" And you say, "We all love Jesus. That's really what is important here. Not all those little theological minutiae." My response is going to be, "Why do you want to be so divisive?" You'll say, "What do you mean?" I say, "Why would you exclude all these people who call themselves Christians, but who don't feel about Jesus the way you do? In other words, they don't 'love Jesus.' Why do you want to impose this doctrinal standard of 'loving Jesus' on them? That's very divisive. You probably want to start your own denomination of people who are the 'Love Jesus' denomination, excluding all those who don't love Jesus."' ____________________ "Christian:" A Sound or a Word? by Gregory Koukl This post is an excerpt from the above commentary. To read more go to: (http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/index.htm). On 5-15-2003 *only*, you can go to (http://www.str.org/cgi-bin/daily_commentary.pl). |
||||||
663 | Why are you attacking Christians? | 2 Tim 4:3 | Radioman2 | 84545 | ||
Why would I attack false teachers? NLT Ecclesiastes 12:12 But, my child, be warned: There is no end of opinions ready to be expressed. Studying them can go on forever and become very exhausting! AMPLIFIED 2 Timothy 3:13 But wicked men and imposters will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and leading astray others and being deceived and led astray themselves. AMPLIFIED 2 Timothy 4:3 For the time is coming when [people] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold, AMPLIFIED 2 Peter 2:1-3 BUT ALSO [in those days] there arose false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among yourselves, who will subtly and stealthily introduce heretical doctrines (destructive heresies), even denying and disowning the Master Who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their immoral ways and lascivious doings; because of them the true Way will be maligned and defamed. And in their covetousness (lust, greed) they will exploit you with false (cunning) arguments. From of old the sentence [of condemnation] for them has not been idle; their destruction (eternal misery) has not been asleep. NLT 1 John 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit. You must test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God. For there are many false prophets in the world. NLT 2 John 1:10-11 If someone comes to your meeting and does not teach the truth about Christ, don't invite him into your house or encourage him in any way. Anyone who encourages him becomes a partner in his evil work. |
||||||
664 | Why are you attacking Christians? | 2 Tim 4:3 | Radioman2 | 84599 | ||
Asis: You have my forgiveness, my friend. I welcome you and your contributions to the forum. God bless you richly in all things. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
665 | What in the world was Paul thinking?!? | 2 Tim 4:18 | Radioman2 | 96258 | ||
But he who endures to the end will be saved. Matthew 24:13 AMPLIFIED "The reference is not to the salvation of the soul of the believer who endures persecution, but to his deliverance by the Lord's return" (NSRB note at Matthew 24:13). In Matthew 24:4-31 the entire passage is Jesus' answer to the disciples' questions: "When shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age?" (v.2). In subsequent verses Jesus is teaching about Daniel's seventieth week of years: the end time; the middle of Daniel's seventieth week: the abomination of desolation; the great tribulation (latter half of week); and the King's return to earth at the close of the tribulation. So in the context this interpretation of verse 13 is the more likely interpretation -- i.e., that the reference is to the believer's deliverance by the Lord's return. In addition, we are not saved by enduring to the end. We are saved by grace through faith because of what Christ did on the cross -- not by anything that we do. No one is saved by holding on or holding out. When we are saved, it is because God Himself holds onto us. --Radioman2 |
||||||
666 | Snatch? | Hebrews | Radioman2 | 99801 | ||
Security of the Believer (Backsliding) [All of the following is a direct quote from the web page (http://ag.org/top/beliefs/christian_doctrines/gendoct_09_security.cfm). The article has been edited solely to fit within space limitations.] What is the Assemblies of God position on the security of the believer's salvation? ...We believe it is possible for a person once saved to turn from God and be lost again... In view of the biblical teaching that the security of the believer depends on a living relationship with Christ (John 15:6); in view of the Bible's call to a life of holiness (1 Peter 1:16; Hebrews 12:14); in view of the clear teaching that a man may have his part taken out of the Book of Life (Revelation 22:19); and in view of the fact that one who believes for a while can fall away (Luke 8:13); The General Council of the Assemblies of God disapproves of the unconditional security position which holds that it is impossible for a person once saved to be lost. ( . . . ) The Assemblies of God leans toward Arminianism, though it accepts scriptural truth found in both positions. We agree with the Calvinist emphasis on God's sovereignty or supreme power and authority. But we also firmly believe the Arminian emphasis on mankind's free will and responsibility for his actions and choices. We believe the Bible teaches both truths. "Eternal security," according to Calvinists, means "once saved, always saved." The key passage for this position is John 10:28,29— "No one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." There is great assurance in this passage and in Romans 8:35,39—"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? . . . Neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." The Assemblies of God also stands on these wonderful truths knowing we need not fear that something external will overpower us and take away our salvation. Only our willful choices can do that. But because we are creatures with free wills, we must be vigilantly on guard because the enemy of our soul, the devil, "prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith" (1 Peter 5:8,9). In our Fellowship we believe carelessness can lead to apathy, apathy to neglect, and neglect to a conscious decision to sin. We often refer to this spiritual decline as backsliding. We believe one who backslides is in danger of losing his salvation if the individual persists in rejecting the Spirit's call to repentance and restoration. Luke 8:13 makes clear the fact that believers can lose their salvation. It says some "believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away." Revelation 22:19 says "If anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life, and in the holy city." Certainly there are true Christians who believe and teach Calvinism; there are also true Christians who believe and teach that men and women have free will. Unfortunately, both sides have spent more time arguing doctrinal terminology and interpretations of theology than reaching out to a lost world. The irony of the disagreement is that Calvinists, who believe in predestination, are sometimes more active in witnessing and evangelism than Arminians who believe that man has a free will and should be encouraged to accept Christ as Savior. God, of course, looks on the heart and the actions rather than on the eloquence with which one defends a position. CONCERNS: Although the Assemblies of God adheres basically to the Arminian position on the spiritual security of the believer, there are extremes and potential abuses which must be avoided. The Christian life is not a roller coaster of Sunday salvation and Monday through Saturday backsliding. On the other hand, no Christian, no matter how spiritual, can claim perfection and sinlessness (1 John 1:8-10; 2:1). Therefore as Christians we must continually come to God sincerely asking His forgiveness for living below the potential He makes possible through the gift of His Holy Spirit. The truth of God's marvelous and free grace has sadly led some to imagine and indulge in a cheap grace, a grace that covers all sins with no need to live a holy life. Such an attitude is an insult to the great price Christ paid to purchase our salvation. Though we may fail and fall, and sometimes sin, the heart of the true believer always regrets, repents, asks forgiveness, and seeks never to sin that way again. To carelessly participate in sin, expecting to gain forgiveness later, is itself an act of backsliding that will lead ultimately to losing one's salvation. We therefore reject any "once saved, always saved" doctrine that excuses sinful lifestyles. |
||||||
667 | He doesn't try to speak and not get hear | Heb 1:2 | Radioman2 | 94466 | ||
God doesn't "try" to speak and not get heard. Does God Try? Some hold that God can be trying to speak to someone, but some human limitation gets in His way. 'God doesn't try. He is all-powerful. God doesn't attempt. He knows everything. Whatever He intends to accomplish He does, in fact, accomplish. 'Now I've got another question. What about this sense in many evangelical circles, especially in charismatic ones, that God is working hard to speak to individuals, but they don't "hear His voice" because they simply aren't listening? What of the notion that the ability to hear the voice of God requires we simply quiet ourselves and get in tune? 'Many have bought the idea that optimal Christian living involves "experiencing God" in a special manner: hearing His voice and getting special directives or assignments from Him. For those who say, "I don't hear God," the rejoinder is often, "He's been trying to talk to you, but you weren't listening." ( . . . ) 'I know of no place in the Bible, ladies and gentlemen, where God attempted to speak and He wasn't heard. Frequently, He wasn't obeyed, true enough. Certainly, people hardened their hearts against the revelation–which itself was clear–and refused to believe that which was spoken. But I know of no case where God was speaking and He just couldn't get through because people were not listening. 'For goodness sake, we're talking about special revelation. Paul's says in Romans 1 that even general revelation is so obvious and so forceful that people must actively suppress the truth in unrighteousness in order to ignore it. 'As far as I can tell, the Bible knows of no such thing as God trying to speak, but is incapable of being heard because fallen men and women have somehow closed Him off, denied His ability, and so can't hear Him or are just simply too busy to hear the still, small voice of God. 'This is simply a matter of consistent reasoning. It seems to me that if we hold that God can be trying to speak to someone, but some human limitation gets in His way, then we have to accept as valid the same objection against the authority of Scripture and surrender our confidence that God could guarantee the outcome of the writing of the Bible. 'If, however, we say that God is big enough to overcome any human limitations so He can guarantee the word-for-word accuracy of the Scripture, then the same sovereign power is available to God to speak to any individual when He so chooses. God doesn't "try" to speak and not get heard. 'Now, if that's true, then we don't have to spend any time quieting our lives to hear the voice of God as He "tries" to penetrate all the clamor. Instead, we can simply turn our gaze upon the only voice of God we are ever commanded to hear, to know, and to obey. That is the written, fully inspired, fully accurate Word of God: the Bible.' (www.str.org/free/commentaries/theology/doesgodt.htm) --Radioman2 |
||||||
668 | Judgement:preachers who curse nontithers | Heb 7:8 | Radioman2 | 79046 | ||
EdB: Excellent post! Well said. I agree with you that ten percent would be a good place to start. All that you say here about giving is certainly true. Thank you for saying it. Let us all remember the widow in the gospel of Luke who outgave the rich men. NASB Luke 21:3-4 And He said, "Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all of them; for they all out of their surplus put into the offering; but she out of her poverty put in all that she had to live on." Radioman2 |
||||||
669 | Ten Commandments or Nine in force? | Heb 8:13 | Radioman2 | 77737 | ||
In the Mosaic Law there are 613 commandments. Neither nine nor ten, but 613. | ||||||
670 | Ten Commandments or Nine in force? | Heb 8:13 | Radioman2 | 77743 | ||
I don't care to deal with the question of how many of the 10 Commandments are in force? I did deal with it on Fri 03/7/03. Following is a repost for those who missed it. "Are the Sabbath laws binding on Christians today? " "We believe the Old Testament regulations governing Sabbath observances are ceremonial, not moral, aspects of the law. As such, they are no longer in force, but have passed away along with the sacrificial system, the Levitical priesthood, and all other aspects of Moses' law that prefigured Christ. . . . Here are the reasons we hold this view. "In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul explicitly refers to the Sabbath as a shadow of Christ, which is no longer binding since the substance (Christ) has come. It is quite clear in those verses that the weekly Sabbath is in view. The phrase "a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" refers to the annual, monthly, and weekly holy days of the Jewish calendar (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 31:3; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11). If Paul were referring to special ceremonial dates of rest in that passage, why would he have used the word "Sabbath?" He had already mentioned the ceremonial dates when he spoke of festivals and new moons. "The Sabbath was the sign to Israel of the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:12; Nehemiah 9:14). Since we are now under the New Covenant (Hebrews 8), we are no longer required to observe the sign of the Mosaic Covenant. "The New Testament never commands Christians to observe the Sabbath. "In our only glimpse of an early church worship service in the New Testament, the church met on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). "Nowhere in the Old Testament are the Gentile nations commanded to observe the Sabbath or condemned for failing to do so. That is certainly strange if Sabbath observance were meant to be an eternal moral principle. "There is no evidence in the Bible of anyone keeping the Sabbath before the time of Moses, nor are there any commands in the Bible to keep the Sabbath before the giving of the law at Mt. Sinai. "When the Apostles met at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), they did not impose Sabbath keeping on the Gentile believers. "The apostle Paul warned the Gentiles about many different sins in his epistles, but breaking the Sabbath was never one of them. "In Galatians 4:10-11, Paul rebukes the Galatians for thinking God expected them to observe special days (including the Sabbath). "In Romans 14:5, Paul forbids those who observe the Sabbath (these were no doubt Jewish believers) to condemn those who do not (Gentile believers). "The early church fathers, from Ignatius to Augustine, taught that the Old Testament Sabbath had been abolished and that the first day of the week (Sunday) was the day when Christians should meet for worship (contrary to the claim of many seventh-day sabbatarians who claim that Sunday worship was not instituted until the fourth century). "Sunday has not replaced Saturday as the Sabbath. Rather the Lord's Day is a time when believers gather to commemorate His resurrection, which occurred on the first day of the week. Every day to the believer is one of Sabbath rest, since we have ceased from our spiritual labor and are resting in the salvation of the Lord (Hebrews 4:9-11). "So while we still follow the pattern of designating one day of the week a day for the Lord's people to gather in worship, we do not refer to this as "the Sabbath." (www.gty.org) |
||||||
671 | Losing our salvation | Heb 10:26 | Radioman2 | 87282 | ||
Ecargneb: Welcome to the forum! :-) Hebrews 10:26 "knowledge. The Gr. term denotes specific knowledge, not general spiritual knowledge (compare Heb 6:4; compare 1 Tim 2:4). Though the knowledge was not defective or incomplete, the application of the knowledge was certainly flawed. Judas Iscariot is a good example of a disciple who had no lack of knowledge, but lacked faith and became the arch-apostate." (p. 1915, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997) Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
672 | faith and believe are they the same? | Heb 11:1 | Radioman2 | 94725 | ||
You write: "with faith you may not KNOW how it will happen, but you FEEL(believe) it is possible" I respectfully disagree. 'Do not depend upon feelings. The promise of God's Word, not our feelings, is our authority. The Christian lives by faith (trust) in the trustworthiness of God Himself and His Word. This train diagram [see the website listed below] illustrates the relationship between fact (God and His Word), faith (our trust in God and His Word), and feeling (the result of our faith and obedience) (John 14:21). [In the train diagram, Fact is the engine that pulls the train. Faith is the car directly behind Fact (the engine). At the very end of the train is the caboose, which is Feeling.] 'The train will run with or without the caboose [Feeling]. However, it would be futile to attempt to pull the train by the caboose. In the same way, we, as Christians, do not depend upon feelings or emotions, but we place our faith (trust) in the trustworthiness of God and the promises of His Word' (Have You Made the Wonderful Discovery of the Spirit-Filled Life? (http://archive.christianwomentoday.com/spiritfilledlife.html)). Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
673 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | Radioman2 | 78798 | ||
If Jesus is God, then why did He not know the time of His return? In Matt. 24:35-36 (../kjv/Matt/matt_24.htm) Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away. "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah." If Jesus is God in flesh, then shouldn't He know what the day and hour of his return would be? After all, God knows all things. Therefore, if Jesus doesn't know all things, then He cannot be God. This objection is most often raised by the Jehovah's Witnesses (../witnesses.htm) but is also echoed by the Christadelphians (../christadelphian.htm). It is a good question. Jesus was both God and man. He had two natures. He was divine and human at the same time. This teaching is known as the hypostatic union (../dictionary/dic_g-h.htm); that is, the coming-together of two natures in one person. In Heb. 2:9 (../kjv/Heb/Heb_2.htm) that Jesus was ". . . made for a little while lower than the angels . . ." Also in Phil. 2:5-8 (../kjv/Phil/phil_2.htm), it says that Jesus "emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men . . ." Col. 2:9 (../kjv/Col/col_2.htm) says, "For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form." Jesus was both God and man at the same time. As a man, Jesus cooperated with the limitations of being a man. That is why we have verses like Luke 2:52 (../kjv/Luke/luke_2.htm) that says "Jesus kept increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men." Therefore, at this point in his ministry he could say He did not know the day nor hour of His return. It is not a denial of His being God, but a confirmation of Him being man. Also, the logic that Jesus could not be God because He did not know all things works both ways. If we could find a scripture where Jesus does know all things, then that would prove that He was God, wouldn't it? He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus *said to him, "Tend My sheep" (John 21:17 (../kjv/John/john_21.htm) - NASB). Jesus did not correct Peter and say, "Hold on Peter, I do not know all things." He let Peter continue on with his statement that Jesus knew all things. Therefore, it must be true. But, if we have a verse that says that Jesus did not know all things and another that says he did know all things, then isn't that a contradiction? No. It is not. Before Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection He said the Father alone knew the day and hour of His return. It wasn't until after Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection that omniscience is attributed to Jesus. As I said before, Jesus was cooperating with the limitations of being a man and completed His ministry on this earth. He was then glorified in His resurrection. Yet, He was still a man (cf. Col. 2:9; 1 Tim. 2:5. After Jesus' resurrection, He was able to appear and disappear at will. This is not the normal ability of a man. But, it is, apparently, the normal ability of a resurrected and glorified man. Jesus was different after the resurrection. There had been a change. He was still a man and He knew all things. For further reading please see the two natures of Jesus. (../doctrine/2natures.htm) (www.carm.org/witnesses.htm) |
||||||
674 | does God know all things? Genesis 22:12 | James 2:21 | Radioman2 | 80207 | ||
Romans 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 'Cf. (compare) James 2:24. These are two aspects of one truth. Paul speaks of that which justifies man before God, viz.: faith alone, wholly apart from works; James of the proof before men, that he who professes to have justifying faith really has it. Paul speaks of what God sees--faith; James of what men see--works, as the visible evidence of faith. Paul draws his illustration from Genesis 15:6; James from Genesis 22:1-19. James' key phrase is "ye see" (James 2:24 ) for men cannot see faith except as manifested through works.' Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Romans 4". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/) |
||||||
675 | does God know all things? Genesis 22:12 | James 2:21 | Radioman2 | 80285 | ||
You say you "don't want to argue, but this not right." I'm not sure you have an argument. I haven't seen it yet. You make assertions, but what is your argument, what is your scriptural evidence, to prove that "this is not right"? It seems all you have to say on the subject is: No, this is not right. Others present evidence to support their interpretation. You do nothing but make an unsubstantiated claim that they are not right. In short, they've supported their interpretation, but where is your evidence that they are wrong? You disagree with their interpretation, but offer no proof for an alternate interpretation. I'm not even sure that you have an alternate interpretation. Apparently, all you "know" for sure is that those who disagree with you are wrong. In your post, ID# 80205, you again write several paragraphs in which you state your opinion. But, again, you offer no scripture to support your assertions. |
||||||
676 | Ref. on animals having no spirit? | James 2:26 | Radioman2 | 93931 | ||
The Soul is Conscious After Death Revelation 6:9-11 "And when He broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained; and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, 'How long, O Lord, holy and true, wilt Thou refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?' And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, should be completed also." Obviously a person's soul is more than his breath. These robed souls under the altar, crying out to God, are not "breaths." Note that these souls are conscious after death. They were martyred and after death are very much alive in Heaven. They have the ability to cry out to God and to wear white robes. God Himself tells them that more of their brethren will join them after they are killed. Again in Revelation 20:4 "And I saw thrones; and they sat upon them, and judgement was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshipped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." Additional Scriptures Indicating the Consciousness of the Soul after Death Job 26:5-6 Matthew 22:31, 32 Luke 16:19-31 1 Thessalonians 5:10 Isaiah 14:9-11; 15-17 When the Soul Leaves the Body, the Body Sleeps The term "sleep" is never applied to the soul or the spirit, but only the body. The soul and the spirit continue to exist after death. The body "sleeps" and goes back to dust. (http://www.sdaoutreach.org/dead.html) |
||||||
677 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80422 | ||
Ed: Sorry? There's nothing in your post for which you should be sorry. You hit the nail right on the head regarding WOF. Well said! You write: "The biggest problem is they will not listen or read anything that may open their eyes." Once again you are right on target. I was just thinking today, even before I read your post, that every time I've ever confronted a WOF follower with the error of their doctrine, whether on the forum or here where I live, they absolutely would not listen to anything. They wouldn't even consider that their WOF gurus (many of them on TBN -- The Blasphemy Network) might be in error. Do they seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote. Not once has any WOF follower I've encountered ever replied to the contentions made by me or the sources. Yet their WOF masters are infallible, according to them. Thank you, Ed, for saying what needs to be said regarding the dangerous and harmful WOF doctrine. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
678 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80431 | ||
gracefull: You write: "...Hank LIED in his book..." Thank you for providing us with an example of what I just wrote about, which is: "Do they (WOF followers) seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote." You write: "I pointed out to you on other posts where Hank LIED in his book..." I missed the other posts in which you pointed out that Hank lied in his book. If you will provide me with the ID#s of those posts, I would like to read them. Thank you. Radioman2 |
||||||
679 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80433 | ||
P.S. I found your posts regarding Hank by using the search feature. So I would like to cancel the request I made of you that you provide ID#s for your posts. | ||||||
680 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80475 | ||
?God created man in “God’s class,” as “little gods,”? Matt 24:11 "Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many." I have a question for all who would defend the word of faith movement and its super-star preachers, including Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Fred Price, Paul and Jan Crouch, John Avanzini, Benny Hinn, Jesse Duplantis, and Marilyn Hickey. For a moment, forget their unbiblical doctrine of the prosperity gospel. What about their teachings concerning the nature of God, Christ and man, as summarized below? 'It (the Word of Faith movement) asserts that God created human beings in “God’s class” as “little gods.” Before the fall, humans had the potential to exercise a “God kind of faith” and could call things into existence. Humans took on Satan’s nature by rebelling against God in the Garden of Eden, thus losing the ability to call things into existence. In order to correct this situation, Jesus Christ became a man, died spiritually (taking Satan’s nature upon Himself), went to hell, was “born again,” and rose from the dead with God's nature. After this, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to duplicate the Incarnation in believers so they might fulfill their calling to be little gods. 'It follows, then, that those who have had the Incarnation duplicated in them by the Holy Spirit (thus giving them the ability to exercise the “God kind of faith”) should be successful in every area of their lives. Furthermore, hardships like indebtedness, illness, and even being left by one’s spouse show lack of faith because these problems should be eliminated by “claiming” God’s promises. While certain details of the above outlined doctrine vary from teacher to teacher, the general outline remains the same.' (www.equip.org/free/RC010.htm) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 ] Next > Last [40] >> |