Results 721 - 740 of 823
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: humbledbyhisgrace Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
721 | 3 brothers descendants changed | Col 1:16 | humbledbyhisgrace | 205965 | ||
Hank, It seems to me 1 Timothy 1:4 could apply here! Certainly by now in the discussion we are developing our own myths! Theory I believe is more of analysis of a set of facts :-) I like what the Bible Knowledge Commentary said about it. (In part) Whatever their nature, they were empty of any spiritual value and led only to further speculation, questions, and arguments. Such speculations were to be avoided because they did not further God’s plan, which is grasped and implemented not by human imaginings, but by faith. By contrast, human speculations tend to lead off down endless blind tunnels which serve only to confuse and obscure God’s truth.—Bible Knowledge Commentary In this case, we have arrived at a point we call one so called theory a lie because it has no scripture to back it up and press on to validate another so called theory which also has no scripture to back it up, yet some how it is not a lie. To borrow a word from Doc, Sheesh! Steve |
||||||
722 | "The Great Commission" ? | Col 1:23 | humbledbyhisgrace | 192817 | ||
Greetings Derowr! Welcome to the Study Bible Forum! What might the mystery of Christ be and why would Paul seek the brethren to pray that God would open a door for the word so he could speak the mystery of Christ? If the job had already been completed who was Paul going to speak the Mystery of Christ to and why would he need to? Colossians 4:3 (NASB) praying at the same time for us as well, that God will open up to us a door for the word, so that we may speak forth the mystery of Christ, for which I have also been imprisoned Steve PS. I hope you are here to seek and share the truth and when confronted with the truth in scripture you are willing to change your views to align with scripture. After all, you don't want to "war against Truth" and label yourself a heretic :-) |
||||||
723 | "The Great Commission" ? | Col 1:23 | humbledbyhisgrace | 192823 | ||
Greetings Doc! There is some misguided folks in Simpsonville, SC who claim to be Baptist who teach this same thing. Here is portion of their "About Us" statement. The first section is titled "Baptist" and get a load of their first sentence in their statement. Baptist We are Baptists, like John the Baptist, our Lord, His apostles, and many martyrs. Wow! I never knew the Lord and his apostles had a denomination. Go figure! Besides that, check this out... KJV Bible We are Bible Christians. Without Scripture, we cannot know Jesus Christ. God inspired and preserved His words perfectly. Each is vital to truth. Satan attacked God’s words in Eden, and he attacks them today with many false versions and proud skeptical attitudes. (Proof: Psalm 12:6-7; 119:128; Pro 8:8-9; II Tim 3:16-17; II Pet 1:16-21). Note the slick way they promote the KJV as the Bible, Scripture, the only way to know Jesus, God's inspired and preserved words etc... and exclude other translations as false versions of God's word. Let's face it Doc, as sinners we are disgusting. Every last one of us! If it can be twisted mankind has spared no effort to do so. How humbling it is to know God even gives us a second thought! You see stuff like this and it really reflects on the sinfulness of mankind and how absolutely desperate we are for a saviour. Praise God we have such a wonderful Saviour! A Lord worthy of all glory and praise! Were would we be if not for the Love of God and the atoning work of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? How blessed are we that He loves us? Imagine, us, even when we were dead in our transgressions! Thank you Jesus!!! Steve |
||||||
724 | Jehovah Witness questions | Col 2:9 | humbledbyhisgrace | 194816 | ||
To the first question I would start off with a big smile and point out how interesting it is the Pharisees and JW are so much a like in their religion. Both deny the Trinity, Both deny the physical resurrection of Christ, Both deny salvation by grace and both deny the Deity of Christ. Hummm.... To the second question I would say it is impossible for you to explain the trinity to him as he fails to even understand the scriptures that clearly teach Jesus is God (John 1:1, John 1:14, Romans 9:5, Colossians 2:9, Hebrews 1:8, 1 John 5:20) the Father is God (John 6:27, Romans 1:7, 1 Peter 1:2) and the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4, 1 Corinthians 3:16, Romans 8:9) Do not allow his unbelief and deceitful ways trick you. He poses his question well to trap you. However, you know the truth and even if he cannot understand and/or see that yes, the Father can speak to the Son and the Son to the Father etc... And yes, there is only ONE God (Deuteronomy 6:4, 1 Corinthians 8:4, Galatians 3:20). This is what Scripture teaches us. This is the truth we stand on! The truth is not dependent on him understanding and/or accepting it. So when he has trouble believing that it is likely or not, it matters not! When dealing with the JW cult, be sure not to allow their questioning to pull you away from the truth. Do not look for ways to answer the questions outside of what Scripture actually teaches. This is how they play the game that they play. They twist scripture and their questions not to seek and/or find the truth, but to deceive and hide the truth. Steve |
||||||
725 | Just needing a little more insight | Col 2:18 | humbledbyhisgrace | 205307 | ||
Greetings Sandy, This comes from the Bible Knowledge Commentary and may help. "Those who turn believers from the reality in Christ to the shadow of the Law disqualify them for the prize. That is, they rob believers of their spiritual rewards. As a judge disqualifies those who turn the wrong way in a race, so believers who turn from faithfully following Christ will be “robbed” of their rewards from Him (cf. 1 Cor. 3:10-15). Some heretics who turn believers away from faithful service have a false humility, which is only “a form of godliness but denying its power” (2 Tim. 3:5) that is in Christ (Rom. 8:3-4). This artificial godliness of legalists was connected with the worship of angels which Scripture forbids (Ex. 20:3-4; cf. Rev. 22:8-9). In fact, legalism is a teaching inspired by fallen angels (1 Tim. 4:1) who as “elemental spirits” (Gal. 4:3, rsv) would bring men into slavery by their mystical meditations. These legalistic mystics dwell on what they have seen (in visions), which Paul called idle notions. This phrase may have occasioned the variant (but less preferable) translation “which he hath not seen” (kjv). Far from being humble, such a person’s unspiritual mind (lit., “the mind of the flesh”; cf., lit., “the body of the flesh,” v. 19) is puffed with pride in his visions." —Bible Knowledge Commentary Steve |
||||||
726 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | humbledbyhisgrace | 207909 | ||
Dear Cheri, Wouldn't the fallacy in that teaching be that one believes the answer to protecting the life of another requires them to lie? This appears to be mankind's way of justifying sin. God says not to and mankind says, well okay however, if this or that takes place then I believe I am justified. And even worse then that, you are saying God condones the very thing He prohibits in His law. How is it one can ever justify their disobedience to God? Truly His ways are much higher then ours! Also, consider what it is you are actually teaching. This concept would bring into question that God's laws are limited and not absolute! This would in fact insert fallacy in the perfect laws of a perfect God. His laws do not contradict one another nor is there any thing lacking in them. They are absolute, perfect, solid through and through! They come from a perfect and holy God! Something else to consider. You speak for God as if your theory is His when you say "BUT in God's eyes a human life is the priority if and when that choice arises against an innocent person." Where in scripture do we find this teaching? John 15:13 (NASB) "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends." - Now why would one approve of lying (sinning) when there is no requirement for them to lie (sin) and most importantly, God's law teaches us not to? If your concern was for the persons life, scriptures says the greater love is to lay down ones life. Lying for them is not love, it's more like a selfish act to protect one's own interest. Steve |
||||||
727 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | humbledbyhisgrace | 207915 | ||
Dear Cheri, If it is not condoned by the Father, why dear would we dare lead another to consider it? I can think of no biblical or moral reasoning for such. Perhaps it is how you are viewing this. You said "knowingly play a part in the death of another human being". Well let me ask you, if you were faced with the scenario you have laid out, what part of their death would you play? And further more, what mandate is there that you even speak? Do you have to say anything at all? Certainly we would not say that if ask the question "where is this person I wish to kill" that not speaking is a lie of omission would we? There's is no requirement at all for one to speak. Now there may be motivation for one to protect there own life and/or interest but no mandate to lie. It would seem to me that in fact if one chose to lie in such a case it is out of convenience. And yes, I agree with you God puts a very high value on life which is reflected in His laws that He commands us to obey. God bless, Steve PS. I too hope we are never faced with such a trial! |
||||||
728 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | humbledbyhisgrace | 207933 | ||
Bowler, “Both had their actions approved by God and that included lying, although the scriptures do not say that God condoned that particular part. But since there was never going to be plan B, then God ordained that they would lie, whether that was a sin or not, to save some lives that were central to God's plan…” Really?! You seek to justify lying but your reasoning falls short. Why? Because it contradicts God’s laws! God ordained that we not lie! How could you possibly even think that a holy God would ordain the very thing His law prohibits? I am amazed at such a statement! Surely there is a great need for us to be mindful of who He is. Are you really advocating that God’s plan was dependent on a lie? Wow! You said “I am not saying God condones sin”. Well, you did this very thing when you say He ordained it. You said “I would say to you that you are right God's laws are never limited and they are absolute. But by the same token whatever He decides will happen are righteous and holy decisions that may include all kinds of things that His laws state are not righteous and holy - He never contradicts the law because He is perfect.” Then how is it you reason He ordained they would lie? I’m not sure you even understand your own argument. Your heart tells you that He is a holy God, perfect in all His ways which we are clearly taught in Scripture. But you reason like a fallen man! I’m guilty of this too so don’t take the statement the wrong way. My intentions in our discussion are not to condemn and I know first hand the struggle of understanding His ways. But I have to ask, are you even thinking your way through before commenting? You ask the question, “why would you assume that God would be pleased that you stood on Biblical principle and refused to lie as if that were a better good than saving a life just to save a life by lying?” Because the biblical principles are those of God. They are His laws not mankind’s to rank and to implement as he sees fit to suit his own needs and understanding. Now, let me ask you why would you assume God would accept and/or condone the disobeying of His laws to fulfill the requirements of another? Does this question help you see the fallacy in your argument? In your comments about Anne Frank, what lie of omission are you talking about? You said “Question; why would you assume that God would be pleased that you stood on Biblical principle and refused to lie as if that were a better good than saving a life just to save a life by lying? Which one is worse lying, or being complicit in murder? That reminds me of a certain group of people that believed you could not do anything on the Sabbath because it was one of the Ten Commandment sins, as is lying, but Jesus said to them, "which one of you would not break the law to save the life of his live stock if it fell down the well?" to paraphrase that is the jist of what He meant. I think that says it all right there. I think we should be willing to consider that there are higher goods and acts than law keeping and preservation of somebody elses life might be one of them.” I do not assume God would be pleased that I stood on biblical principles and refused to lie as if that were a better good then saving a life. The assumption is with you not me! What needs to be understood is that both are sinful, God does not expect nor condone we do either one nor does he present us with the option of choosing one over the other. It is the fallacy in fallen men to think he has to lie to save the life. It is the fallacy in the hearts and minds of fallen men who also misunderstand and misrepresent God’s laws. Case in point, the paraphrase you gave is not what the scripture teaches so let’s be careful how we approach the word to bolster our position. Matthew 12:11-12 (NASB) 11 And He said to them, "What man is there among you who has a sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12 "How much more valuable then is a man than a sheep! So then, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." Note the Lord says in verse 12, it is LAWFUL to do good on the Sabbath. You on the other hand present it as the breaking of the law which in fact is the same thing those who set out to trap the Lord was doing. Can you see the error? He did not break one law for what you would call a better good. There is no “better good” in breaking any law! Steve |
||||||
729 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | humbledbyhisgrace | 207934 | ||
Dear Cheri, Did you actually read the post you referenced by bowler? Do you really qualify this as a “marvelous” job? I am amazed not only at his post but at your acceptance of his teaching. Perhaps it is good you see no need to parrot him. Correcting is what is needed! He wrongly interprets the scripture and even has gone so far to say our Lord actually broke the law which scripture clearly teaches us He is sinless. This is unbelievable coming from some of those I see accepting of these teachings including you! There is so much wrong with what he has said it’s hard to even know where to start! But I will attempt to point out what I see as the fallacy in his understanding simply by pointing to his wrong interpretation of the scripture he is hanging his hat on. He pointed to Luke 14:5. And from this verse he develops his argument that even the Lord Himself would break one law for the better good. Unfortunately, bowler should allow scripture to interpret scripture. Matthew 12:11-12 (NASB) 11 And He said to them, "What man is there among you who has a sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12 "How much more valuable then is a man than a sheep! So then, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." Note the Lord says in verse 12, it is LAWFUL to do good on the Sabbath. bowler on the other hand presents it as the breaking of the law which in fact is the same thing those who set out to trap the Lord was doing. bowler even goes so far to say that “Jesus said to them, "which one of you would not break the law to save the life of his live stock if it fell down the well?" Well, where in scripture does it say that? bowler explains it as the Lord breaking one law for the better good. Problem with bowlers interpretation is it contradicts the scripture. The Lord did not break one law for what bowler believes to be the better good. Nor did the Lord ask "which one of you would not break the law to save the life of his live stock if it fell down the well?" as bowler said He did. The scripture teaches us He is without sin! According to the scripture, He did not break the law at all for He said (not bowler, but the Lord Himself said) it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath! See, there is no law against doing good! As a matter of fact, doing good is a manifestation of the fruit of the Spirit! So what you attribute as a “marvelous” job, actually wrongly interprets scripture, accuses our Lord Jesus as breaking the law, and promotes to others it is better to sin then to obey. At this point I am dumbfounded by his teaching and your acceptance of such. Steve |
||||||
730 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158245 | ||
This is my opinion. I'm basing it on the word of God and how I understand it. Take a look at some of the scriptures that are used as an argument for this practice. 2 Chronicles 5:14, Matthew 17:6, Matthew 28:4, John 18:6, Acts 9:4-8, Revelation 1:17 In none of these cases do you find that someone laid hands on or said prayers over anyone that caused them to fall. There are several of these verses that speak to the laying on of hands. But it was done by the Lord and it was to comfort those in fear. Interesting point don't you think? Read each verse and understand what was going on and why they fell to the ground. Your question was, is this biblical. Those that practice this do apparently draw on scripture as the basis for their practice. Or at least they point to scripture. But from the way I read these scriptures and understand them, their claim falls short in my opinion. I think most would agree that if any of us were to actually experience the presence of the Lord as those did in the referenced scriptures we would more then likely fall to our face out of fear and reverence at His very presence and His holiness. I have to question if this is what those that claim to be slain in the spirit are experiencing. |
||||||
731 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158256 | ||
The scripture you point to here states, "I am He" which we all know it is Jesus speaking in this verse. They drew back and fell to the ground. They were not slain in the spirit, they were in fear because the very Lord stood before them. Notice that He only spoke. There were no laying on of hands. Are you saying they were slain in the spirit in this verse? If so, what do you make of verse 7 where it says, "Therefore He again asked them, "Whom do you seek?" And they said, "Jesus the Nazarene." If they were slain in the spirit as you say, how then could they immediately respond to His question? You yourself said if anyone is up within 5 minutes they are faking it. What do you make of their ability to speak during their slained state? Also, exactly how do you get "slain in the spirit" out of the verse in the first place? Please explain. In none of the verse I pointed out in an earlier post do I see anything at all that would back up the "slain in the spirit" argument. I see nothing more then a natural and uncontrollable fear of being in the very presence of God. If you believe this is taught in the scriptures please take the time to explain where and give your interpretation of the verses. |
||||||
732 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158273 | ||
Okay, for the sake of discussion, lets say that the proper amount of time had passed between verse 6 and 7 that those of you familiar with the slain in the spirit practice would be convinced they were not faking. Where in this verse does it teach us they were slain in the spirit? Please don't avoid the questions and request for explanation. I'm only asking for you to explain how you get slain in the spirit out of the scriptures that is used to justify the practice. If you believe in this practice, then surly you can explain why and how the rest of us can interpret the meaning as you do. I'm basing my belief on the scriptures as I read and understand them. In none of the scriptures used to back this practice can I find the meaning given to them by those that practice this. So, if you so strongly believe that they do, take the time to explain how you get this interpretation from the scriptures. |
||||||
733 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158281 | ||
If you wish to teach the word of God, it is necessary to remember who's word it is and the responsibility that goes with teaching it. Your approach is to teach and not discuss. You speak as one with authority yet you fall on common sense as your basis for that authority and lack the ability to explain your authoritative position on the word of God. At a minimum you should state that something is your opinion and not state it as fact if you cannot back it up. Maybe you should instead choose to discuss as many of us do and not try to teach. If you were in a position to teach the word of God you would not run from it nor any question ask of you to justify your belief. Are you sure this is your interpretation of the scripture or where you taught this by someone else? Just ask yourself that question. No need to respond. Another good question to ask yourself. Why is it that these type of "manifestations of God" only happening in certain types of churches? Again, no need to respond. I like volleyball also and I know, just like being slain in the spirit, it's not in the bible. But I can't help but wonder if sooner or latter someone out there will not find a verse in the bible that says other wise. As far as musical instruments, I love them. Never was smart enough to figure them out though. But I do love to hear others that have mastered them. Also, know this, I am your brother in Christ. I do not claim to know all there is to know about God or His word. I disagree with others as well to their interpretation of scripture sometime. However, that does not mean we are enemies and that we are not brothers in Christ. But as your brother in Christ, I would caution you to think long and hard about how you use the word of God. I for one believe it is better to keep seeking the truth in it then to sling it out there as if you know the truth without being able to explain it and why you believe it. |
||||||
734 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158282 | ||
I agree it's a lot easier to explain salvation after you have received salvation, yes. But we are are talking about salvation right, not being slain in the spirit? Just want to make sure your not tying the two together. The difference is, you can point to scripture to back up salvation. You cannot point to any scripture that even remotely backs up being slain in the spirit. |
||||||
735 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158340 | ||
Your correct, I do not believe "slain in the spirit" is from God. I do believe the verse you reference is from God. But your conclusion as to it's meaning is not from God. Sorry but there is no evidence in scripture to backup the claim. Interesting that you came to the conclusion on your own what the verse means if you were not taught this from man. Can you give any reasoning for this based on scripture? My guess is no. My guess is also that you have been taught this from man. I base this on your whole argument. It's classical teaching from the type of church you evidently participate in. Your next statement is more proof of that. You say "The reason that these types of manifestations only occur in some churches is that only some churches have enough faith over unbelief in this area. See Matthew 13:58". Proof of my statement is in your patent response. Here is the problem with your statement taught to you by man. It attributes God's abilities to the belief and disbelief of man. God is not limited by our belief or disbelief. We have no affect on His power or abilities in any way. He is God, with us or without us. As a matter of fact, God himself gives each of us the ability to believe. He Himself gives us our faith. Romans 12:3 "For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith". As you can see, you have been taught wrong. You have been taught to pull scripture out of context to create a man made belief and practice. Satan used scripture also when tempting Jesus. But it was used out of context and used improperly and was unacceptable to Christ as it should be to mankind when used improperly. The same principle applies to Gods word in regards to needing mans help as it does to God needing mans help (or belief) to perform His miracles. He does not need nor require our help in any way to be God! You have not explained anything. You have only stated something as fact with no evidence to back it up. Why should someone accept it? Pointing to scripture and making a claim about it that completely contradicts it's teaching does not make it so. To be of God it must be what God's word said not something created from mankind's imagination. So yes, I completely reject your teaching because it is not scriptural. It's not of God and therefore unacceptable as His teaching. You do not honor your Father by playing games with His word. As I've said before, remember who's word it is your talking about. Do not take it upon yourself to use as you see fit. This does not bring Him honor. Remember this, "For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil". Ecclesiastes 12:14 I have no intentions of dishonoring you. You dishonor yourself and the Father. I only disagree with your interpretation of the scripture. Holy Laughter is as real as slain in the spirit. It's real to those that chose to practice things other then what God has directed through His word. Again, you dishonor the Father by your own words. |
||||||
736 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | humbledbyhisgrace | 158366 | ||
"I did not receive this from man." - Yes you did. Proof is in your patent answers and explanations of scripture. Your answers are not scripture, their scripted. I did not refer to God's abilities, only His actions." - Sure you did, read your own statement. Again, proof that your words are taught and they are scripted. You know not what you say, but only repeat what you are taught. "I did not claim that God needs our help." - Sure you did, read your own statement. Again, proof that your words are taught and they are scripted. You know not what you say, but only repeat what you are taught. "Where has God in His Word directed not to practice "holy laughter"? - See answer below! Galatians 1:6-9 6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! Your holy laughter comes from Rodney Morgan Howard-Browne, a charismatic preacher from South Africa, born June 12, 1961 in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, not from scripture. |
||||||
737 | Fruitless Scripture Discussion? | 1 Tim 1:6 | humbledbyhisgrace | 206763 | ||
bowler, What your asking for is opinion and your sure to get more then one should others decide to respond :-) I'm not aware of any topic rooted in scripture that cannot be discussed. However, we do have 1 Timothy 1:4, 1 Timothy 4:7 , 1 Tim. 6:3-4, 2 Timothy 2:23, Titus 3:9 as examples of things not to do and/or to turn away from. Also, take a look at Ephesians 4:29 (NASB) 29 Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. Something interesting in this verse to me is that it speaks of a word good for the edification according to the need of the moment! Considering the fact we have a tendency to add much opinion when discussing the word, there needs to be wisdom in how we approach it (My opinion) (May the Lord give us wisdom). There may be many different things to consider. For example, some questions ask on this forum really should not be addressed especially with ones opinion with very little or no scripture to back it up. It does not mean the topic should not be discussed among the saints, but it could very well be this forum is not the place to discuss it. Some things are better left to those who are equipped to deal with and on a personal level not via a text only interface. Giving ones opinion in some matters could be extremely harmful even if that is not the intent of the person giving their opinion. In matters like these, it seems the wiser thing to do is to encourage the person to seek guidance from a local pastor or Christian counselor perhaps. They would be much better equipped by God to deal with it. Another example might be topics which tend to create controversy such as the Calvinism and Arminianism discussions. I’ve seen on this forum where some people are equipped to discuss the matter with grace and some who are not. We should be able to discuss these things among the saints, but when the saints don’t act like saints we are no longer edifying but rather turn to glorifying ourselves. So the topic becomes better left alone by some and for others well, their discussions can be edifying to others. But history shows on this text based forum this is one subject that gets out of hand quick! Sad but true! So, as you see I too have a tendency to give opinion :-) Most of us do (I think) approach things with good intentions. But it might also be wise of us to step back from time to time and realize even though we may have an understanding of something our opinions might not be the best thing to offer given the circumstances. Does that help any? Steve |
||||||
738 | Fruitless Scripture Discussion? | 1 Tim 1:6 | humbledbyhisgrace | 206800 | ||
bowler, You said "When someone asks a question that is personal in nature, but there is definetely scripture that attends the problem with a literal interpretation, then this should not be seen as offering and "opinion" or pushing ones' view. Literal interpretation is literal interpretation, it is not an opinion, or advice, or pushing a view." Agreed! But claiming literal interpretation for ones opinion does not make it a literal interpretation! Seems you missed the point altogether. I failed in trying to explain myself so let me try again. Point: Some times, the wise thing to do is point someone to another who is actually equipped to deal with the issue. Your opinions, even if you believe them to be literal interpretation of the scripture and even if they are literal interpretation of scripture are better left on the shelf for the sake of the one who needs helping. The one who is actually equipped to minister to the person in need can not only point them to the truth that the person needs to know and understand, but also can help them work through all that will be required of them to embrace that truth and live it! Let me point you to a perfect example of what I'm trying to get across. Go and read post number 206736. Our brother Hank, one of our elder brothers in the Lord who is more qualified then most on this forum to give an accurate biblical interpretation of scripture shows much godly wisdom in his approach to an issue just like we are discussing now. He could have addressed the issue from scripture but he understands this person needed much more then he could provide with text on a screen. So with compassion he seeks to encourage this person to seek the help they need. And knowing brother Hank like I do I feel confident that he then prayed for this person. If he reads this and I'm wrong I'm sure he will correct me :-) In regards to the Calvinism and Arminianism issue you said "I actually went through some of the branches on that to see what you were talking about. What I found was that some only appeared to have grace on the surface and once the line of sovereignty was crossed in the discussion it digressed into the judgmental, or bordering on being crass in response." Well, seeing how this is all you had to say about this, I have to say this is much to broad a statement leaving the readers of this forum with the impression that any and all who ever discussed this subject only "appeared to have grace on the surface". I would encourage you to read more then a sampling. That way you would be in a better position to cast your judgment. But here again, the point was to show you a topic that when discussed, many times leads to "Fruitless Scripture Discussion". bowler, you closed with this... "By the way what I was asking for was how to interpret a specific scripture in how to apply it - the whole paragraph there before and after in the scripture is definitely about what topics are acceptable to be discussing - to try to understand which ones would be off limits is not asking for an opinion, it is asking for clarification." I pointed you to other scripture for reference and tried to show you application you can see right here on the forum. I take it my attempt did not measure up to your opinion of what you thought the answer should be. What can I say? Steve PS. Don't let the word opinion disturb you. Anyone claiming they don't give opinion simply set themselves up as an authority. That's even more disturbing! Not many around here will buy into that unless the person is spot on ever time and even then (if there were to ever be a then) it would not make one authoritative in regards to the scripture. |
||||||
739 | Adam and Eve Perfect or Flawed | 1 Tim 2:11 | humbledbyhisgrace | 208142 | ||
Dear Cheri, John and Azure, I was reading through the thread and thinking about all that was said and what the scriptures reveal to us on this matter. Eve's statement in Genesis 3:2-3 (NASB) "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.' " Considering at this point we are not dealing with the fallen nature and Eve's words are "God has said", should our view of the matter be that God indeed had said "You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die" ? Certainly, if Eve spoke on behalf of God saying something that God had not said, not only would she be lying, but she also would be making God out to be a liar. Steve |
||||||
740 | Adam and Eve Perfect or Flawed | 1 Tim 2:11 | humbledbyhisgrace | 208149 | ||
Azure, Given the text, it would seem to me that looking back to the written command of God to Adam in Genesis 2:16-17 and comparing it to what Eve said in Genesis 3:3 we assume that Eve has lied, misquoted, twisted the word etc, etc... I've even reasoned this myself in the past :-) But the text of Genesis 3:3 as I understand seems to prevent such reasoning based on the fact Eve said "God has said". I'm not seeing a harmony issue. I think perhaps it may appear that way because we compare the written account of God to Adam and the written account of Eve to the serpent. I don't deny the difference in what Eve has said. But considering all the text, are we not making assumptions of what Eve said by comparing the two passages? For me, I can't get past the words "God has said" and that she said this before the transgression. She did not say Adam had told her, she said "God has said". So, although I agree there is no written account of God speaking this, the written account is that "God has said" and it comes before the transgression as I understand the transgression is found in v3:6. If indeed she lied, then how do we account for the fallen nature before the transgression (v3:6)? :-) In regards to 1 Timothy 2:11-14 I'm not sure of your point or thoughts on this passage. However, in regards to what we are discussing, I think verse 14 is key. She "fell into transgression". If she was in error regarding what she said in Genesis 3:3 would that not then be the point in which she fell into transgression? Or is the proper understanding that she fell into transgression when "she took from its fruit and ate" (Genesis 3:6)? I've probably repeated myself in trying to explain my understand of this but hopefully you can see how I'm understanding it! Your thoughts? Steve |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ] Next > Last [42] >> |