Results 721 - 740 of 801
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
721 | Beware "Another" | 2 Cor 11:4 | jlhetrick | 156532 | ||
Hi Victor, Yep, I read the Domatic Constitution on Devine Revelation. Thaks for the link. You are abaolutely right. It's all right there. It's obvious from reading it what the Pope had to have meant. So the bottom line is, on the surface, taking the words of the Pope at face value, there is nothing inappropriate stated (my opinion). Taken in context with what the RCC claims as it's role in revealing God's truth (which I see happens to only INCLUDE the scriptures)it does become obvious what the Pope meant. HUMMMM. Do I smell wool? Is that sheeps clothing he is wearing? Thanks for the link, Jeff |
||||||
722 | Beware "Another" | 2 Cor 11:4 | jlhetrick | 156486 | ||
Hi Mark, I hear ya! I don't think the Pope is a member of this forum. I bet he does have an email address though. Jeff |
||||||
723 | Beware "Another" | 2 Cor 11:4 | jlhetrick | 156473 | ||
Hi bro. Mark, No, I don't think your all wet. You may be very accurate about your conclusion regarding the Pope's intent. I am not convinced of it but I concede that your presentation and rational certainly support your thought. The one thing in your argument that does give particular support to your conclusion is that: "his words are telling us that we need the Catholic Church to interpret the Bible for us. That is fully in line with other things the Catholic Church has said." I think it is the position of the Roman Catholic Church regarding it's self-proclaimed position of authority that has lead to this thread in the first place. Again, I preach context, but I did not include the wider context of the RCC's position on it's own authority which is important. But with that said, I want to point back to the actual words of the Pope and say that I don't come to the same conclusion that you have for the reasons I gave in my previous post. Now, I also do not disagree with any argument you make. And we are back to the dilemma of being only able to speculate. I'm interested in more dialouge on this topic. Jeff |
||||||
724 | Beware "Another" | 2 Cor 11:4 | jlhetrick | 156456 | ||
Hi Mark, This is a great question, thanks for asking it. I would like to comment while we wait on Humbled to respond. Again I think that context can help us understand the Pope's comments. I realize you are asking for an opinion (what is thought) of the statement and agree that opinion is really all any of us can offer. I looked at the quote in context with the immediate statements before and after the statement you quoted. "This is why love for Sacred Scripture is so important, and in consequence, it is important to know the faith of the Church which opens up for us the meaning of Scripture. It is the Holy Spirit who guides the Church as her faith grows, causing her to enter ever more deeply into the truth" The Pope here seems to be putting special emphasis on "love for sacred scripture." He also emphasizes that it is the "Holy Spirit who guides the church as her faith grows." He also atributes to the Holy Spirit as being the "cause" of the church "entering more deeply into the truth." With this in mind, It may be that the Pope has Romans 10:17 in mind. Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Wish we knew for sure what he meant. Jeff |
||||||
725 | Beware "Another" | 2 Cor 11:4 | jlhetrick | 156444 | ||
Hello humbled, Thanks for bringing it back to the issue. Too often these threads get way off focus (I know I have contributed to it) and we miss the opportunity to address the issue. Personally, I have tried to push for other's to quote things in context (as others on the forum encourage as well). Thanks for taking Doc's quote of the Pope and putting it in context. I was one of those following along without looking for myself to see what the Pope actually said. I am not Catholic and have a whole list of doctrinal teachings of the Roman Catholic Church that I disagree with based on scripture (as I do with other denominations). Anyway, It appears clear, when taken in context, what the Roman Catholic's Pope was saying. "Anyone who discovers Christ must lead others to him." "But religion constructed on a “do-it-yourself†basis cannot ultimately help us. It may be comfortable, but at times of crisis we are left to ourselves. Help people to discover the true star which points out the way to us: Jesus Christ! LET US SEEK TO KNOW HIM BETTER and better, so as to be able to guide others to him with conviction. (emphasis added). Mar 9:38 John said to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name. We tried to stop him, because he wasn't a follower like us." Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, "Don't stop him! For no one who works a miracle in my name can slander me soon afterwards. Mar 9:40 For whoever is not against us is for us. Thanks again humbled, Jeff |
||||||
726 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | jlhetrick | 156239 | ||
Hi Mark, This is bible study, well done and thank you. I wish I had been able to articulate it as you have. My original post to cynzast was sidetracked by a rebutle but I believe that the interaction served to get the truth across as you logically and systematically present. There has not been much mention made of the scriptural understanding of "two" deaths. That is, the obvious physical death and the just as obvious spiritual death. They are two different things. Adam's sin was imputed to me and all men, making us sinners. God passed judgment on that sin and part of the curse (Gen. 3:19) is physical death. Our bodies are corrupt and our nature is sinful. We commit sin as individuals. The judgment is death. Of course our bodies have already been judged to die (and this judgment is permanent). The death for our personal sin is that second death, the death of our souls, that is, eternal separation form God, Hell. Jesus died on the cross taking on Himself the sins of the world and with them, the judgment. He overcame death and rose again, paying forever the price owed for your sin and mine. Hallelujah and praise the Lord, what an awesome God we serve. Thanks for your post, Jeff |
||||||
727 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | jlhetrick | 156202 | ||
Hi Doc, Again, thanks for the posts. I want to say that I do not like taking personal offense and feel confident in saying that I do not take personal offense when others disagree with me. I believe that I do take personal offense when I am personally offended. In the very paragraph that you encourage me to not take personal offense, you refer to my position as erroneous. You say you are interested in truth and present that you are as prone to error as the next man, however, in my observation (which does not include nearly the extent of your interaction on this post admittedly) I have seen you, time and time again refuse redirection from others or to accept that you are in error on any point. All the while, the majority of your post (that I have observed) are redirecting and challenging others. Now let me say that I appreciate this because one does not come to believe what they believe in light fashion. We believe what we believe because we believe it, we have been convinced of it. But then when your redirection is based on the authorities of men and councils primarily (at least as evidenced by your posts) credibility is lost. The scriptures should always be the only reference for authority and then all that other stuff is certainly legitimate for example. Doc, I don’t avoid dealing with the Scriptures you offer. I can’t really respond to this statement without understanding what you are basing this statement on. I hope it’s not to mislead others that may be following into thinking that I avoid scripture that might contradict my argument. You write: “You support your disagreement with the imputation of Adam's sin to his descendents by citing Ezek 18:20 and Mat 12:37.†Let me set the record strait for the sake of any following. Does Doc’s above statement represent accuracy? Look at what I actually wrote in the post he is referencing, copied and pasted from my actual post. I wrote: “Doc is right that the sin of Adam is imputed to each of us at conception†Doc, with these kinds of misleading accusations, the credibility thing becomes even more in question. But let’s look at Ezek 18:20 and Mat 12:37: Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. What have I missed here? You mention the importance of context so I am encouraged that you have in fact given heed to my encouragement and we do agree on this importance. So present your argument as to how I have taken this verse out of context as you insinuate I have. Furthermore, is it possible for you to present a context where Eze 18:20 does not apply and does not mean what it clearly says. Consider the words; shall and shall not. Your argument here Doc, absolutely and very thoroughly supports my whole position; this keeps happening with you. I can’t figure this type of thinking out. You write: “God is saying with great clarity, "You are suffering the captivity because of your own sin. You are the ones that are not just. You are the ones who deserve even more than what has come upon you." You write: “By using sound exegesis, you cannot come to the conclusion that Ezekiel was attempting to deny imputation.†I argue, that you have effectively made this argument yourself. Doc, please. What part of “you are suffering...because of your OWN sin†(quoted from Doc) implies imputed sin? But still you misrepresent me. I never ever presented an argument that this verse DENIES imputation. I argued that there is sin and resulting judgment that is individual and personal and not related to (save for the sin nature created by) imputed sin. You write: “Unfortunately, this passage does not suit your intended purpose. It cannot be made to say what you are asserting without quoting it outside of its original context.†Well, argument offered above more than sufficient to address this. I will respond to the remainder of your post in a separate post for lack of space here. Doc, with all love and sincerity, I’m not following you. Does anyone else have feedback? Jeff |
||||||
728 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | jlhetrick | 156172 | ||
Very good, thank you | ||||||
729 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | jlhetrick | 156155 | ||
Hi Doc, You "disavow" my position? Brother, my position needs neither your acceptance nor your approval. My position is clearly supported by the authority of scripture. You would do well to rely more on scripture and less on the uninspired thoughts and writings of men. I have attempted to be subtle in coaching you on this but you are not receiving well. Your responses to others are very often lengthy and full of quotes from sources other than the bible and I might add that you seem to present these sources as authoritative. Sir, you once wrote cautioning one to consider ones integrity. I offer you the same advise now. semi-Pelagianism? Let me just say that my belief and position rests on the scriptures, not on church history, counsels, or church doctrine. Not all of us on this forum rely on the arguments and resulting conclusions of men. Human beings are not born to go to Hell. We were created for a relationship with God. The sin we inherited from Adam resulted in our sin nature and the penatly for that sin IS physical death. There is no salvation from that. The bible clearly teaches that the saved as well as the unsaved will experience physical death. It is the sin that you personally commit and are responsible for that results in your spiritual death. You wrote (or quote): "The doctrine of imputation is throughout the Scriptures. The Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms defines it as 'A transfer of benefit or harm from one individual to another. In theology imputation may be used negatively to refer to the transfer of the sin and guilt of Adam to the rest of humankind. Positively, imputation refers to the righteousness of Christ being transfered to those who believe on him for salvation'." One again you make my point while trying to dispute it. Look carefully at what you have written here. Did Adam's biting of the Apple do a greater work than Christ's work on the Cross? Of course the answer is no. But Adam's single act can condemn all men to Hell, while the work of Christ on the cross can only provide atonement for some; that is those that believe? No, Adam's sin serves to condemn all men to physical death and to produce in us a nature of sin. Your sin condemns your soul to Hell, that is spiritual death, eternal separation from God (as does mine). Thanfully for you and me and all other people, Jesus died and rose again so that "those who believe" will be saved from "their sins". Let us take a look at scripture: Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. and in Matthew: Mat 12:37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. You see, the argument doesn't work, regardless of what material you pull your references from. The only authority to quote from is the bible. Adam passed on a "sin nature" represented by a "mortal body". It will die. My sin nature encouraged me to sin, I obeyed it, I bit the apple. It was my own disobedience that condemned me, and therefore, only I am responsible and only I can choose to receive salvation when called by God. I hope this is helpful. I realize that some things are difficult to discern from scripture and are truly only understood as the Holy Spirit gives it to us. The essential thing here is realizing, understanding that we are sinners in need of the atonement that can only come through Jesus Christ. Understanding the deeper implications and workings of these truths provides for encouragement and hope. Jeff |
||||||
730 | Is the Word of Faith movement Biblical? | Matt 24:11 | jlhetrick | 156053 | ||
Hi Dalcent, You asked for an example from the bible regarding praying for the sick so here ya go. James 5:16 6 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. NIV You are right regarding "believing before receiving" but be careful not to offend God by quoting His word out of context. Context, context, please. Mark 11:24 is very clear. The scriptural context is also very clear. We are to "believe before receiving." We are also to ask in accordance with God's will. Something the "word of faith" movement declares as a lack of faith. Praying and asking God "if it be your will" is considered by the WOF as a prayer lacking faith. As Christians we are never to pray and ask for anything unless we know it is the will of God or, in the case where we don't know, we include and expect the answer to be in accordance with His will. For example; I may ask in prayer for the life of my sick child to be spared and healing to occur. But God has already told me that it is appointed for each of us to die. I can not assume that my faithful prayer can change what has already been established by God. My child may die. God is faithful. You wrote: "I'm not 'Word of Faith' but I believe in some respects they have had some genuine biblical insights." Be aware, Satan himself "in some respects" has some "genuine biblical insights." Lets not condone his efforts. Jeff |
||||||
731 | Theological Term: Theotokos | Luke 1:31 | jlhetrick | 155980 | ||
Hi Doc, Good point. If we are to concern ourselves with the creed, we must first read the creed before we can intelligently consider what others might say about it. "...the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;" Right there it is, good job. Thanks again, Jeff |
||||||
732 | Theological Term: Theotokos | Luke 1:31 | jlhetrick | 155979 | ||
Hi Doc, Excelent articulation on a most interesting and yet often neglected topic. I'm glad you quoted Luke 11:27-28. I am always amazed at how we men can present all kinds of studied arguments to make a point and then turn to a place in scripture and find the truth put simply and definately. Good post, if it weren't for post like these some would never look into these things to include the history of the church and doctrine. I would like to point out also that the Council of Chalcedon's postulating the the virgin birth of Christ, the diety of Christ, and the dual nature of Christ was also in keeping with the Holy Scriptures. Thanks for the thought provoking posts, Jeff |
||||||
733 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155853 | ||
Hi Mark, I think we have exhausted the benefit of this thread as we are continuing to revisit the same arguments over and over. But, I will respond to this post. Where I referred to my personal views, opinions, I was specifically talking about this "issue" of suicide. I felt it necessary to refer to opinion because of what I do for a living. My line of work is not well received by a great many christians, as my spiritual beliefs and convictions are not by many a colleague. I always feel it challenging and important to explain to other christians that I do not take the liberal, scientific explanation for all truth which is without absolute, position that most in my field take. Interestingly, I never feel obligated to explain myself to my associates as the truth of God needs no validation from me. Perhapse one sticking point in our discussion, I see now, did have to do with the issue of "body" verses "life". And because suicide was the original topic of this thread, I may have mistakenly assumed that life was the issue at hand. I tried to explain this by asking the question something like this. If one loves his body does he hate his life and if he loves his life does he hate his body. Bows44 appeared to be making this observation in that he referred to Eph. 5:29 specifically to relate to the issue of suicide. From this point on perhapse more than one involved began a play on words, myself included. I can accept that this would have been done unintentionally while trying to make the various points clear. Finally, my references to blasphemy. Blasphemy certainly includes vilifying and insulting God, but it also includes an irreverence toward God and His word. Perhapse I was defensive, but, I felt like I was being accused of being just that. Thanks for the discussion. It is among those that I have had on the forum that gives me encouragement and growth. Jeff |
||||||
734 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155852 | ||
Doc, Thank you for your comments here and for supporting my argument. I find it a laborious task to ridirect the thinking of some who seek to understand the scriptures through understanding what they mean to them rather than seeing and understanding what the writer meant. Well said. Jeff |
||||||
735 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155851 | ||
Doc, specious argument. Thanks for putting a name that represents my entire argument. But I can see that you still are not following. Using big words to explain what I have spent several posts explaining and then following up with a paragraph that attempts to unsubstantiate my argument that you articulately agree with doesn't follow. My example of "all flesh" did exactly the opposite of what you state here. What it did was invalidate the attempt of another to "pin God down" by using the literal definition of a single word to give meaning to a verse and passage that doesn't exist. Please consider and take your offered advise at the end of your last post to me. It most obviously applies in your response here. Jeff |
||||||
736 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155843 | ||
Hi Mark, Yes, you misunderstand me. You also misquote and/or misrepresent what I have been saying. You are doing it with each post with subtle yet obvious statements like "I just cannot accept the arguement that because your experiences with people have shown you something different than what the Bible says, we must now therefore understand what the Bible say differently then we would if we just sat down and read it. We have to also take into account your experiences." I have never made such an argument! And for the sake of others that might read this post, let me say clearly that; no experience can show or teach you something different than what the bible says because, what the bible has to say is absolute truth and is not contradicted by man's words, thoughts, or experiences. I hope I make my position clear on this matter. Your comment is a gross misrepresentation of anything and everything that I have said throughout this dialogue. But you throw these things in between logical and friendly statements as if this some how excuses you for misrepresenting my comments. This is shameful behavior. This is also the basis for my commenting that you accuse me of blasphemy. Now, moving on. The first part of your most recent post very definately makes my point and, I think, clarifies to me that you got my point all along. You took the verse I presented (to Doc) and presented it in "context" of scripture to demonstrate that God's referring to "all" and "every thing" specifically meant, "all" and "every thing" EXCEPT Noah, his family, and the animals as He completed His thought and intent in the next verse. A perfect example of how "we" as God fearing christian men never, ever take a single verse, much less a single word and "assign" meaning to it without the context of the whole of scripture being in agreement. I believe and hope that all following this dialogue have benefitted from both of our presentations. Jeff |
||||||
737 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155840 | ||
Hi Doc, I am either very misunderstood (poor poor me) or there continues to be a play on words (which is common on the forum so responses to my posts should be no exception). So, here we go: If you wear the "all or nothing" epithet as it might be defined by my presented rational, then I'm sorry. Your are one of the most knowledgeable members on the forum regarding the scriptures and the exegesis therof. Therefore, I find your statement concerning (unless of course it is in fact a play on words). Gen 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy ALL flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and EVERY THING that is in the earth shall die. (KJV) (I added capital lettering for emphasis). God said ALL, He said EVERY THING. Did He mean "all", absolutely EVERY THING? Did He mean it in the "all or nothing" kind of reasoning? If He did, Noah and his family and all those animals sure got away with a big one. Case rested: Jeff |
||||||
738 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155839 | ||
Hi Doc, You will have to read Mark's comments in their context to understand my statement you are questioning here. At no point in this thread (or any other) did I say or suggest that the bible does not say what it says. Rather, I question from time to time whether the bible says what other's might try to extrapolate from it. Context, context, context.... Jeff |
||||||
739 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155838 | ||
Hi Bows44, I apologize and thanks for the correction. I also owe Mark an apology because I was in fact referring to your post and applying it to him. So, Mark, if you read this, I appologize for that and please disregard the section of my post regarding this. Jeff |
||||||
740 | how can suicide be the same | Eph 5:29 | jlhetrick | 155804 | ||
Hi Mark, I appreciate your described way of thinking but caution that this approach can sometimes be faulty. "Acting" based on ones "state of mind" can have disastrous consequences and even be dangerous (as I have attempted to demonstrate in previous posts here). And thanks for explaining how you see the bible with a "black and white kind of mind set". I don't criticize this statement because I think I know where you are coming from. That is, trying to demonstrate that you believe in the inerrancy of scripture. This I applaud and assure you that we hold this in common. But God expects us to do more than read His word. We are to read it and understand it in the context of all that has been given therin. Black and white thinking isn't sufficient in the study and discernment of God's word to us. A deeper, thoughtful approach is necessary. (please see 2 Tim. 2:15) I accept your appology in not meaning to bring offense by your pointed question, but then you offend me in the next paragraph. Again, I feel you twist my statments and meaning in order to, well, accuse me of blasphemy. You write: "you had already made clear that you did not accept that verse as having the plain, face meaning of the scripture" I shall expect an apology for this statment. Sir, I ask you to assign "plain, face meaning of scripture" by heading 2 Tim. 2:15 and reevaluate the verse in context of the passage and the rest of scripture. And as to why you asked the question in the first place, I believe that I did and do understand that. If you carefully read Doc's post to your original question and them carefully read mine, I think you might discover that I was actually giving opinion and belief that supported your original thoughts on this while throwing caution to some of what Doc had written, that is; that "suicide is ultimately rooted in self-love" which contradicted your premise articulated in your question. Finally, in having the bible allow for the verse in question being a generalization, I believe that the vers in Job very directly opposes the black and white thinking that absolutely no human being can or will "hate his body" or himself. In fact, you articulated in your original post that you yourself do not even believe this. One final attempt to make my point here. Let me try to give a short example from scripture of how a seemingly definative statement might actually represent a generalization. 1 Cor 7:29 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none NIV Mark, I am a married man. Shall I get up from my computer tonight, go to bed, rise in the morning, and live the rest of my life as a single man? Would that be taking the scriptures at "plain, face value"? Sincerely, Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ] Next > Last [41] >> |