-
Posts
4,313 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Gallery
Forums
Calendar
Store
Musicbox
Everything posted by Nelg
-
All believers understand and know that "God is love," and that Jesus is "Truth." But neither of these can be determined without have read and studied the biblical revelation. I am NOT talking about studying theological books written by man; that makes things even more confused. I am talking about studying GOD's WORD, the revelation He has given to mankind in the Bible. Such a belief is NOT limiting God! Such a view about what was said is reading into what I have written. Are you looking for points to be critical? There may be hundreds of books that are inspired revelation from God. However, we only have those in the present form of our Bible. If you know of any more, you might enlighten us, for no one else knows of them. I'm not interested in the known gnostic writings, are those written by frauds. If you are "receiving" new revelation by the Spirit of God, then start writing it down for it is SCRIPTURE. If it is just the Spirit speaking to you by assisting you in understanding His direction, or by helping you make decision to grow in righteousness, or following the directions (already revealed) of ways to evangelize. If you mean those things, then great; but that is not new revelation from God. I speak to God and He speaks to me almost everyday of my life, but He is not giving me new revelation on a par with the Bible. One day we may have need of another revelation to be found and brought to mankind, but that day has not come and we are left with the revelation of the BIble. Now there is not a way in the world that I can know anything about God, His mercy, His grace, His love, or anything else without FIRST have learned about those things from the Bible or a person telling me about those things. If you are saying that you receive that information from another source, then you are indeed a special person and you do not need ANY written word from God. There is noway that I will follow another man or woman. "Let God be found true and every man a liar." I think you might "rethink what you have said."
-
First, the 12 apostles had to learn as well. The spent 3 years with the greatest teacher that ever lived, God in the flesh, Jesus Christ. Not only did they receive personal teaching from Him, He also gave to these disciples the gift of the Holy Spirit, the promise of the Father, to continue giving them revelation of the word and teaching as to its meaning (John 14:16-20; 14:26; 15:26-27; 16:13-14). A gift that Paul also received. The agreement between the apostles and Paul are because they had the same teacher, the Spirit of God (Gal 1:11-19). They needed no hermeneutics, but they did need the revelation and inspiration of the Spirit. Since full revelation has been given to the writers of the Bible, there is no need for further revelation. Today we have the full revelation of the word of God in the book written by men, but Authored by God. No person today has been given the gift and power of the Spirit to reveal what God wants us to hear, that has already been given (Jude 3). Today's reader is left to study and discover what God has revealed in His word. No one stated that you were in need of "higher" formal education before understanding the word of God. My earthly father had only an 8th grade education but understood and studied the Bible. He did put in some time learning on his own how to study the Bible. He was "self-taught." What we are saying is that ANY PERSON wanting to know the Scripture can learn good methods and have good tools which assist in building your spiritual house. Only AFTER you have done the work of studying the word is it proper to ask God to assist you in understanding the meaning of what you have studied. He is not going to give you an understanding of what you have not studied. The NTChurch, the Kingdom of God, was not established by any apostle, or any person, but was established by Jesus Christ. It was not the Catholic Church, or any other human organization. The church was established on Pentecost by Christ. It has been in existence since that time. All human organizations trying to replicate the church has never been able to do so. REASON: They left the word of God, the Bible, God's Revelation to us of what He wanted us to do and be in this world. The gradually took steps that were/are not biblical and moved out of the realm of truth and into the world of "think-so" and personal revelation. Your salvation has never been the focus of this discussion. Only God can know the answer to that. There are many who are confused about what particular verses mean, how they relate, and what they reveal about ones relationship with God. We (humans) are not the Judge. However, we can and must try to guide individuals away from error and come to an understanding of the truth; truths that do not contradict and do not abuse the other Scriptures. Have a great day.
-
George, thanks for the support. Your post was "spot on" and with more patience than I have shown. One of the greatest threats to listening to the voice of God is a rejecting of the diligent and hard work it takes in studying the Scriptures to discover what God has already said and delivered to us through the Scripture. (I used Scripture twice for emphasis.) Ever since I started participating in the DV Forums there have been individuals bent on bringing in topics to raise controversy: race, gun laws, UFOs, conspiracy theories of all color, flat earth, and biblical topics such as prophecy, the end of the world, or the predictions of a coming RV. Some of them are hilariously wild and funny; even some which deal with biblical topics. However, when it comes to biblical topics I become irritated seeing the biblical texts quoted and interpretations given that have no bearing on the topic at hand, yet being used as if they did. OT passages are used with the same authority as the NT passages. The OT is quoted to give a “clearer” meaning to NT texts when it should be the other way around: NT interprets the OT. The emphasis in many churches has shifted away from careful, disciplined Bible study to more intuitive and internal methods of spiritual formation. It is a dangerous pattern when it comes to divine direction. People who profess to love the Lord treat His truth carelessly, or disregard it altogether. I become irritated seeing the biblical texts quoted and interpretations given that have no bearing on the topic at hand, yet being used as if they did. I have also seen biblical texts being ripped from their context and made to say what it was never intended to say; or, a particular passage being quoted as a promise to all believers when in reality it may have only been promised to special individuals, aka. Inspiration and revelation of the “word of God.” Too many believers today are trying to hear directly from God—whether through an audible voice or a stirring of their spirit. Worse still are the people who legitimize everything from heresy to fundraising schemes to simple personal decisions by asserting the leading of the Lord. Misinterpretation causes all sorts of problems, ranging from ridiculous errors to dangerous heresies. To protect their position some state, “The Lord told me” as a “sanctified shield” for all sorts of claims. And to undiscerning eyes and ears, it’s generally an effective way to insulate a spurious message from the scrutiny of critics and those who hold a different position. After all, who wants to take sides against the Lord or His messengers? But believers cannot allow that unsubstantiated claim to disconnect our discernment, or give a free pass to everyone with the temerity to claim they speak for God. Instead, we need to measure every message against the truth of God’s Word. Have a great day.
-
Chess, that is entirely wrong definition! What you presented is a "leap of faith," a faith without evidence. Anyone saying they have faith without evidence or facts has little or no biblical faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of the things not seen.
-
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. Gen 1:6 Expanse, firmament, means a division or physical separation. The translation “firmament” is not a good rendering for the Hebrew raqia. It comes out of the Vulgate firmamentum, which is a literal rendering of the Greek “steroma” that is trying to indicate the Hebrew meaning of something “made firm’ by a craftsman. In Rev. this same phrase becomes “a sea of glass, like crystal: before the throne of God (Rev 4:6). Firmamenum involves the idea of something that s firmly put in place. The original idea behind the Hebrew word, raqia (firmament) seems to be the process of beating or stamping out. In the development of language this has led to two distinct meanings. If clay in a mould is stamped on it will become compressed – firmer – more solid. Hence some have supposed that the Hebrews conceived of a solid roof over the sky, a dome to which the stars were affixed. This misconception is partly due to the Septuagint translation of the word by the Greek word stereoma, which is nearer in meaning to solid than to space or expanse. But the word raqia was connected with a second and much commoner conception. If gold or silver was beaten or stamped out it became very thin. The ancients were in fact very good at this process and specimens of their work show that they used gold leaf down to 1/5000th of an inch thick. The word thus acquired the meanings of expanse and of thinness and we find this borne out in related expressions such as the word raq used for Pharaoh’s ‘thin’ cattle and raqiq used for ‘wafers’. Stamping out (hammering out) leads to spreading out or expansion (cf Isa 42:5; 44:24). The force of the word in Geneses 1 is clearly that of an expanse, something very thin, which separated the clouds from the oceans. God called the firmament or expanse ‘heaven’,, a word with, as we have already seen,denotes ‘that which is extended.’ And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so (Gen 1:7). Physical separation of the canopy of water vapor and heavy mist that was above the earth from the physical seas and oceans upon the earth. Morris and Witcomb in The Genesis Flood make a good argument for a canopy of water over the face of the whole earth; not rain clouds (cf. Gen 2:5). The canopy of water vapor placed into position by God at creation of the earth by His decree. This is not by the hydrological cycle common today. This vapor canopy stayed in place until the flood of Gen 6. It was used by God as part of the flood waters that descended from the heavens when judgment came upon the world during the days of Noah. The “firmament” is not a great vaulted dome in the sky, as some have interpreted it, but is simply the atmospheric expanse established between the waters above and below. Since God specifically identified it with “heavens,” it also can be understood simply as “space.” Thus, on the second day, God separated the primeval deep into two deeps, with a great space between. The waters below the space retained the elemental earth materials which would be utilized on the following day to form the land and its plant cover. The waters above the firmament had apparently been transformed into the vapor state in order to be separated from the heavier materials and elevated above the atmosphere, where it could serve as a thermal blanket for the earth’s future inhabitants. Such a vapor canopy would undoubtedly have provided a highly efficient “greenhouse effect,” assuring a perennial spring like climate for the entire earth. Water vapor both shields the earth against harmful radiations from space and also retains and spreads incoming solar heat. A vapor canopy would thus provide an ideal environment for abundant animal and plant life and for longevity and comfort in human life. Water vapor is invisible, and thus would be translucent, allowing the stars to be seen through it. This would not be the case with a liquid water or ice canopy. 1:7 above the firmament. The “waters which were above the firmament” are clearly not the clouds or the vapor which now float in the atmosphere. The Hebrew word definitely requires the meaning “above.” Furthermore, the absence of rain (2:5) and the rainbow (9:13) is not only explained but required by a vapor canopy, not by an atmosphere like that of the present. These waters extending far out into space eventually condensed and fell back to the earth at the time of the great deluge, providing the source of the worldwide rainstorm that contributed to the flood. Although the exact extent and structure of this canopy is still being researched by computer simulations, there are no major scientific problems with the concept. Just as “expanse” or “firmament” is used several ways in Scripture, so is the word for “heaven.” Context determines which meaning is being used. o 1st heaven is the sky where the birds and the clouds are seen. o 2nd heaven is used as the place where the stars and galaxies are located, the cosmos. o 3rd heaven is the eternal realm where God dwells and is located out of the realm of time, space, and the physical cosmos. Paul says, “Paradise.” And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day (Gen 1:8). The expanse or firmament that is called heaven here is the place where the clouds and birds fly. (1st heaven) And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so (Gen 1:14-15) . And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth (Gen 1:17). The expanse where the sun, moon, and stars exist, we now call the cosmos. (2nd heaven or the expanse where the rest of space, the galaxies, and stars are located.) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven (Gen 1:20). (1st heaven) To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.]] The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork (Ps 19:1). To the Psalmist, this heaven and declaring the glory of God is the cosmos with all its wonders. It is the heavens and firmament (2nd heaven) Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the firmament of his power (Ps150:1). (3rd heaven – the realm of God. This firmament /expanse is the spiritual realm where God dwells. It is outside the realm of time, space, and the physical worlds.) And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above (Ez 1:22). Firmament, expanse, or barrier. This was upon the heads of the living creatures; suggesting a separation between the area above their heads. It seems to indicate that the “sea of crystal” is some type of separator. Such a barrier is also depicted in Revelation as a “sea of crystal” or glass (Rev. 4:6) And under the firmament were their wings straight, the one toward the other: every one had two, which covered on this side, and every one had two, which covered on that side, their bodies (Ezk 1:23). And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads, when they stood, and had let down their wings (Ezk 1:25). And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it (Ezk 1:26). Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament that was above the head of the cherubims there appeared over them as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of the likeness of a throne (Ezk 10:1). And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars forever and ever (Dan 12:3). Like I ask earlier, what's the problem? 1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.” Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...” Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...” Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.” Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...” These here are verses describing a non spinning earth! Why do these verses indicate that the earth is not spinning? You make the assumption that “immovable and firm,” “fixed it fast,” etc. means that it cannot spin. That is supposition and not fact. The expressions could just as well mean that the earth and our universe are fixed in space. It does not necessarily mean that the earth and our universe cannot be moving. From what we know from science all of the created time, space, and matter are moving away from each other but still “fixed” in space. Science isn't in the business of proving things. Rather, science judges the merits of competing models in terms of their simplicity, clarity, comprehensiveness, and fit to the data. This is to admit precisely what cosmologists like Alexander Vilenkin have contended all along: that the evidence makes it more likely than not that the universe began to exist. This picture represents our part of the cosmos in which each of the disk-shaped objects is a galaxy like our Milky Way. All of these galaxies are moving relative to each other. Their movement has a very distinct pattern that causes the distance between the galaxies to become greater with every passing day. When the “big bang” (singularity) occurred some 13.7 billion years ago, all of creation started to move away from each other. The answer to the age of the universe is beaming down on us from the sky. We know the universe has been expanding since the Big Bang, so if we can measure its size and its expansion rate, we can extrapolate the age of the universe. Since you can't extend a ruler out into the stars, all estimations are made by studying objects’ brightness. Cepheid variable stars are a special type of pulsing star whose cycles of intensity and dimness indicate their inherent brightness. When astronomers find Cepheid variable stars in galaxies, they compare how bright they truly are with how faint they appear over distance, and thus determine the distance to those galaxies. It's something like judging the distance to a car on a dark road by gauging the brightness of its headlights. Before Hubble, astronomers had only been able to narrow the universe’s age down to 10-20 billion years old – not a particularly exact measurement with 10 billion years of leeway. What we do know is that they are much, much, farther away from the earth than the calculated 300 miles! Hubble performed the definitive study of 31 Cepheid variable stars, helping to determine the current expansion rate and thereby narrow the age of the universe down to the most accurate it's ever been. Its observations of Cepheid variable stars in galaxies like NGC 4603, combined with measurements by other observatories, eventually pinned the age down to 13.7 billion years old, plus or minus a few hundred million years. Hubble’s observations helped change the age of the universe from a vast range of possibilities to the kind of number whose precision required a decimal point. Since the cosmos has not been around for an infinite number of years, the reversing of the distance and age we can determine the approximate time of the beginning of the cosmos. Physical evidence for the expansion of the universe is found in astrophysics. Prior to 1920s, scientists had always assumed that the universe was stationary and eternal. In 1917, Albert Einstein made a cosmological application of his newly discovered General Theory of Relativity. Einstein found that GR would not permit an eternal, static model of the universe. As a result Einstein’s universe was balanced on a razor’s edge, even the transport of matter from one part of the universe to another would cause the universe to implode or to expand. Then in 1920s two individuals, the Russian mathematician Alexander Friedman and Belgian astronomer Georges Lemaitre were able to formulate independently equations which predicted an expanding universe. Up to this time the idea of the expansion of the universe “was absolutely beyond comprehension.” In 1929 Edwin Hubble showed that the light from distant galaxies is systematically shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. This indicated that the light sources were receding in line of sight. What Hubble had discovered was the expansion of the universe predicted by Friedman and Lemaitre on the basis of Einstein’s GR. The model does not describe the expansion of the material content of the universe into a preexisting, empty space, but rather the expansion of space itself. Here is an experiment that will illustrate what is being said. Note a simple illustration: Take a balloon and make dots on it to represent the universes and stars. The balloon represents all of creation including time, space, and matter. When you blow up the balloon the galaxies and universes start moving away from each other yet they are at the same location on balloon. Our universe is “fixed” in space and time, but it is moving and expanding at incredible speed. It is interesting that the Bible confirms the expansion of creation thousands of years before the scientific model. Thus says God the LORD, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread out the earth and its offspring, Who gives breath to the people on it And spirit to those who walk in it, (Isa 42:5) I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone (Isa 44:24). “It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands And I ordained all their host. (Isa 45:12) It is He who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom; And by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens (Jer 10:12). It is He who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom, And by His understanding He stretched out the heavens (Jer 51:15). I appreciate the passages you quoted to justify the “fixed” position of our universe in the cosmos (the entire creation of time, space, and matter). But no one believes that the global earth is “flying around in empty space” or “the earth is a ball floating aimlessly around in a vast emptiness,” which seem to be a mantra of the “flat earth” people. I don’t believe that for a moment. Of course I don’t believe that the earth is setting on four pillars in the emptiness of space either. It reminds me of the question a boy from India ask is father, “What holds the earth up?” The father answered, “An elephant.” The boy thought and said, “And what holds the elephant up?” To which the father replied, “A hugh turtle!” After a little thought the boy enquired again, “And what holds the turtle up?” The father, now becoming irritated stated, “It is elephants and turtles all the way down!!!” That is sort of the logic I see with the idea of “pillars.” And, yes, I do know that it comes from the Bible, but I also believe it is being misused. Are the pillars on the ground? Where did the ground come from? However, there are other passages concerning “judgments” in time and a “final judgment” stating that the earth can be shaken, the stars can fall, the sun and moon be darkened, heaven and earth will pass away, heavenly bodies will be shaken (Mt 24:29 35; 2 Pt 3:7, 10, 12, Is 13:10; 34:4; Joel 2:10, 31; 3:15 to name a few). To state that they are “fixed and cannot be moved” is a contradiction of the judgment passages, which state that they will be “shaken.” One needs to take the “fixed” passages and the “shaken” passages into their larger context so that they are in harmony. And they can be harmonized when used properly and used in their context. And these verses talk about the ends of earth that would suggest it is a plane: “Four corners of the earth” indicate the four directions: north, south, east, west. For it to be literal, the earth would have to be squared with four corners, which is literally not the case. At least that is what is indicated when pictures are shown, and statements are made that the earth is a circle and not a square!! I can see the angels now scratching their head and saying, “Where are the corners? God said that it had four corners!! Certainly God was not wrong, but how can a circle have corners?” Isaiah 11:12 12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV) What about those in the middle of the earth? Revelation 7:1 1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV) I notice that you did not address the “four winds of the earth.” Does this mean that there are only “four winds” that blow on our planet? According to your logic, there are only “four corners of the earth,” therefore there must be only “four winds of the earth.” Your interpretation is not consistent. Job 38:13 13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV) Show me how this can be? If the earth has four corners, where is the ends of the earth? Is it a tube containing the wicked? If it is a tube and not a square, then is God contradicting Himself? Or these expressions metaphors used by God to indicate concepts rather than the literal earth? Jeremiah 16:19 19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV) Do the Gentiles not live in the middle of the earth? Daniel 4:11 11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV) If this is literal does it mean that the tree could be seen from one end of the earth to the other? Matthew 4:8 8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV) Again, you are assuming that it is the highest mountain, but that is beside the point. How did the devil show Jesus ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD? Were they in existence at the time? No. Did Satan mean just the ones that were in existence during Jesus’ day? Hardly. All the kingdoms of the world are those in the past and in the future. So did the devil show Jesus these kingdoms in a vision or physical kingdoms? There is a difference between the literal and the physical intent of a passage. Any good Bible student knows that! Can these expressions be used as metaphors to convey meaning rather than a physical description? Sure they can! And this is what is being happening in these passages. I suggest a book for you to read. Very interesting concerning the use of metaphors: Plowhares & Pruning Hooks: Rethinkinng the Language of Biblical Prophecy and Apocalyptic, D. Brent Sandy, IVP Academic. There are more Nelg but your going into it with globe earth goggles on...sooooooooooooooooooooooo why not look at that? This is in the bible...your source?! The same could be said about your perspective. Do you have on your Flat Earth glasses? Hummmmm. I’m not trying to be caustic or mean about this, but there are principles of interpretation that assist the interpreter in determining how a phrase is being used, what a passage means, and how to comprehend what the writer is trying to convey what God has revealed to him. That is why one needs to understand hermeneutics or at least do a cursive study of books on how to understand the Bible. It is essential if you are going to do use the Scripture as evidence, use them properly and no as someone unskilled.
-
Shedagal, I am going to go back on what I said. There is too much bad, bad, reasoning (or non reasoning) being leveled at what I believe to let it pass. If I do, these pseudo knowledgeable conspiracy lovers twist, cut, and distort the biblical texts so badly that even to answer them is futile. They are bound to continue this shameful illogical charade until now individuals are beginning to doubt the Word of God! They quote the biblical text like the citing of passages is the end of the matter. It isn't. But some people, taken in by their "spirituality" and "biblical references" are dragged into their false interpretation of Scriptures. So, if you do not want to be offended, try to not read these threads.
-
https://www.google.com/search?q=picture+of+atmosphere&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjT4dKXhrTKAhXF7SYKHeXbDZcQ7AkIMw&biw=804&bih=455 Not ice, but the atmosphere of a global earth. In any research you do not "prove" something is true or false. You present evidence for your particular model or conception. This is not an ice shelf but the moisture of the atmosphere that surrounds the earth. a. No one has seen the "ice shelf" that is suppose to surround the earth. b. No one has ever been to the supposed edge of the earth to examine the ice shelf. c. In the modern world of the 21st Century, no scientist in his right mind would allow a discovery of this magnitude to go unexamined. :. Since it has never been examined (ice shelf at the edge of the earth), the ice shelf does not exist. :. These pictures do not serve as evidence of a "flat earth" nor of any "ice shelf."
-
I know what you mean. I've stated the same thing when the discussion gets out of hand and someone gets angry. However, if the discussion is done with respect then both parties can learn and grow. Presenting an apologetic for ones belief is biblical and needed to "defend" the faith that one holds. I am the one who said "this is my last post." on this subject. I said that because the topic was illogical and stands against reason. I came back to discuss because there are some individuals who really think the earth is flat and because some had questioned my integrity. But I had much rather talk about Christ and salvation. That is much more important. And if I gave the impression that I was trying to gloat or impress others with my interpretive skills, then I was wrong. Please accept my apology. I have several pages written about the "firmament," the "expanse of the cosmos," and answer to "sun ray" dilemma which LDG has, and a few more items that have been considered. But I think I'll put that on "save" and not continue in this discussion. It was useless anyway when one believes they have an interpretation from God.
-
Triple +++ Thanks!
-
HermiWhat? Hermeneutics is the set of rules a person uses to interpret the biblical texts. It is both an art and a science. Unfortunately if one has a bad hermeneutic the interpretation will be bad. Recently I sat down with someone who had obviously spent considerable time in the Bible, who stated a desire to know God's truth and was willing to work diligently to please God, sacrificing both time and money. However, when it came to determining what the Bible taught concerning how we might please Him and what we must do to be saved, we found little we could agree upon. At times it felt as if we were reading two completely different texts. The problems I encountered were the result of different rules of interpretation. The rules that one uses to interpret Scripture play a vital role in determining the meaning of a passage, and thus, our understanding of God and ourselves. Does John 1:1 refer to Jesus as the co- creator of the universe, existing with God the Father eternally, indeed, being of the same essence as the Father? Or is Jesus' divinity somehow inferior to the divinity of God the Father, a view that Jehovah's Witnesses hold? The way we interpret this passage will be determined by the rules of interpretation we bring to our study. It is obvious that both interpretations cannot be correct. When John wrote the words for his Gospel, and specifically for the first chapter, he had one meaning in mind. He may not have understood all of the implications of what he was writing, nor could he have imagined all of the applications possible in future contexts. However, via the inspiration of the Holy Spirit John's words were to communicate a specific truth about God. There are three good reasons why we have difficulty understanding the biblical text. First, we are separated from the historical events written about by thousands of years of history. Second, we live in a dramatically different culture, and third, the biblical texts were written in foreign languages. These are a few of the “context” one must consider while obtaining a comprehension of the text. These obstacles to understanding can be challenging to those who want quick and easy comprehension of the Bible without doing the hard work of hermeneutic. This also make it possible for others to place their own agenda over the text, knowing that few will take the time to uncover what the writer's original intent might have been. Our goal should be to exegete, or draw meaning from the Scriptures, rather than to impose meaning onto them. Context? Disastrous? Once we appreciate what God has done to communicate with us, we may begin to apply the principals of interpretation, or hermeneutics, to the text. To be successful this process must take into account the cultural, historical, and language barriers that limit our understanding of the original writings. There are no shortcuts to the hard work necessary to accomplish this task. Some have wrongly argued that knowledge of the culture and languages of biblical times is not necessary, that the Holy Spirit will interpret the text for us. The role of the Holy Spirit is to illumine (shed light for) the believer in order to accept and apply what is found in Scripture. The Bible says that the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14). The Greek word for "accept" means "to take something willingly and with pleasure." The key role of the Spirit is not to add information to the text, or to give us special translating abilities, but to soften our hearts in order to receive what is there. The goal of this process is to be mature in Christ. The Bible is not an end, it is a means to becoming conformed to the image or likeness of Christ. So tell me, is your church a 501c3? Yes. We are so because the permits the structure for tax purposes. It does not need to be a 501c3, but such a structure allows the church to meet the obligations of civil law and put aside more funs to be used in evangelism, benevolence, and education (maturing) the saints. And at the end of the year do you give your parishioners a statement telling them how much they tithed to your church? We have no Old Testament rule for a “tithe,” but function on the New Testament principle of letting “each one do just as he has purposed in his own heart; not grudgingly or under compulsion; for God loves a cheerful giver” (2Cor 9). A statement is given to those who ask for it but we do not automatically send it to them. Others have a different method. Why does this matter? So, when Jesus told Peter to go fishing and find a piece of gold to pay the taxes for him and for Peter was he speaking figuratively? From what the context states by using the principles of hermeneutics, this was a literal event that Jesus used to instruct the individuals believers to live in respect to the civil law as long as the law does not conflict with God’s teaching. In the context, the tax being considered is one taken by the Jewish leaders for the upkeep of the worship in the temple based on Ex 30:11-16. It was controversial and the Sadducees didn’t like paying the tax, and the Qumran community paid it once a lifetime. What the enemies of Jesus wanted to do is to see how he would respond. Would he alienate the patriotic Jews, thus splitting the young followers of Jesus? What Jesus did was answer without being offensive. The context indicates that Jesus, nor Peter, were obligated to pay the tax. Jesus apparently heard them speaking about the matter, for when Peter comes into the house to ask Jesus, Jesus asks him a question: “What do you think, Simon? From who do the kings of the earth collect customs or poll tax, from their sons or from strangers?” Simon Peter answered, “from strangers.” Apparently, therefore, Jesus and Peter were exempt from paying the tax! But in order not to cause offense, Jesus sent Peter to take the coins from the mouth of the fish (Mt 17:24-27). Jesus may not have intended this command to Peter to be a “command” to all people for all times. The story illustrates Jesus willingness to comply with the conventions of society rather than cause unnecessary offense. When Jesus said render unto Caesar that which is Caesar and under God that which is God's Was he speaking metaphorically, or was he speaking figuratively? The context of this passage is different than the above (context, context, context). The questioning here concerns the imperial Roman taxes (Mt 22:15-22). A revolt had taken place in AD 6 by the followers of Judas of Galilee (Zealots). It was the imposition of direct Roman taxation that sparked the revolt. To approve the tax was to openly oppose the militant nationalism that received strong support among the Jews. The rejection of the tax would place Jesus in revolt to the government of Rome and the Jews could get them to act against Jesus. The question was a trap by the Jews to put the ministry of Jesus in jeopardy and reflect badly on Jesus. It is neither figurative or a metaphor but an actual attack by these “leaders” on Jesus. The tax is the tax that all Jews had to pay directly to Rome, but this tax was the primary mark of their political subjection to a foreign power. It was obligatory for them to pay. The term “lawful” does not refer to Roman law but to the law of God. The implication of the question is it permissible for the people of God to pay the tax and express allegiance to a pagan emperor? The money for the tax was the denarius, which had an image of the Roman emperor and, therefore, objectionable for most Jews (“making of images”). The point Jesus makes is that they were using Caesar’s money; so let them return Caesar’s money. The word “render” generally means, “give back.” It means the paying a bill or settling a debt they owed to Ceasar. But Jesus says that children of God have the image of God, therefore we “give back” to God what belongs to Him, our own life! Jesus has a wider perspective. It was loyalty to God that was the basis for the Zealot’s objection to Roman taxation, but Jesus, without reducing the demands of loyalty to God, indicates that political allegiance even to a pagan government is not incompatible with loyalty to God. The secular finds its proper place within the claim of the sacred. What should happen when the two conflict is not at issue here. When it does conflict, the higher law, the law of God and obedience to Him will always be the choice of saints. Or do you believe that you're following the laws the way they are written and therefore it is okay? But that law also says it's okay to slaughter a baby in the womb and suck its brains out before birth, is that okay? Don’t be guilty of making the assumption that because one is compliant to one part of the law that one WILL also comply with the other parts of the same body of law! That is illogical. Not all that is permitted by civil law is right or moral. Anyone participating in such “slaughter” participates in a moral evil. We are not justified when we obey that which we find convenient to obey and disobey that which is convenient to disobey. I really don’t know where this has it’s origin, but it is always convenient to obey God. When the laws of man conflict the laws of God, those laws cannot be obeyed. In the end I shall use everything that I can to learn all that I can, but my final solution will always be to bring it to the Lord in prayer and listen to the Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit will give to all men liberally and not hold back knowledge to those who truly seek it. Once we appreciate what God has done to communicate with us, we may begin to apply the principals of interpretation, or hermeneutics, to the text. To be successful this process must take into account the cultural, historical, and language barriers that limit our understanding of the original writings. There are no shortcuts to the hard work necessary to accomplish this task. Some have wrongly argued that knowledge of the culture and languages of biblical times is not necessary, that the Holy Spirit will interpret the text for us. The role of the Holy Spirit is to illumine (shed light for) the believer in order to accept and apply what is found in Scripture. The Bible says that the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14). The Greek word for "accept" means "to take something willingly and with pleasure." The key role of the Spirit is not to add information to the text, or to give us special translating abilities, or to give us an interpretation that is a direct revelation of the meaning, but to soften our hearts in order to receive what is there. The goal of this process is to be mature in Christ. The Bible is not an end; it is a means to becoming conformed to the image or likeness of Christ. I did not ask you nor want you to stop the debate, I merely desired that it become a little more respectful. And in the end what I desire most is for you to bring this issue truthfully to the Lord in prayer. I have and He has answered through His word. (See above.) Because I believe that when you do you will find it is a sin to operate a 501c3 in the name of Christ. Operating a 501c3 is not a sin but a provision by the government that exempts some organizations from paying tax. It is neither against the word of God nor against the civil government but falls under the provisions of that government. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONE OBEYS THE LAWS OF A GOVERNMENT THAT STAND IN OPPOSITION TO THE LAWS OF GOD. A Christian will obey the word of God no matter what the “law of the land,” the civil law, laws of man states as a privilege, right, You will find that teaching your parishioners to manipulate their taxes to their own gain in the name of Christ is a sin. I have no parishioners. I teach members of the body of Christ and unbelievers. Nor would I ever teach a person to sin. Your opinion as to what is sinful, in this case, is an opinion and not biblical. Yep.
-
Did you ever ride in an open bedded truck and 60 miles per hour and throw a ball into the air? The ball will return to the bed of the truck and the truck does not move from under the ball. The ball has become part of the moving vehicle underneath it. Just so, we are part of the vehicle (earth) which is moving underneath us. Only when we disengage do we experience the movement of the vehicle. http://earthsky.org/earth/why-cant-we-feel-earths-spin https://www.quora.com/If-the-earth-is-rotating-at-a-high-speed-and-we-jump-up-why-doesnt-the-earth-move-below-us-at-high-speed-1 https://www.quora.com/Does-the-atmosphere-of-the-earth-rotate-with-the-earth-itself-around-its-axis https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/earths-rotation-speed-question.613919/ Have a nice ride. The earth is rotating and we are part of the earth.
-
Being skeptical is necessary when studying the Scripture. Just saying that one believes the Bible without asking questions as to whether it is true or not is a "leap of faith" that is inconsistent with belief or biblical faith. Faith is established by testing the evidence to see if what you read is true. Many religions are established, promoted, and sustained only by a "faith" based on supposition and speculation without solid evidence that would verify its validity. Individuals who are searching for "Christ" need to be questioning every phase of teaching by demanding evidence. Faith without evidence is speculation. True biblical faith is based on evidence and reason.
-
Socialism means more government, which means more control, which means taxing the wealthy working class and big business while redistributing to the those who "have not." Communism is the name given to the theory that it is desirable to have a community of goods, and a total or partial abolition of private property. Socialism is is often used to designate the same system, but is more commonly applied to the concept that government should own the land and all the implements and equipment of industry. For business or individuals to own property is theft against those who own no property. When the government owns everything then everything belongs to all the people; or so it would seem. Under both systems government control is the chief aim, for the government knows best about who gets your money and how that money is spent. If you want either system then you are heading toward a "Third world" existence. Believe me when I say that we do not want that to happen.
-
Let me tell you what makes me angry: certainly the senseless killing of the young or old "just because we can;" the capitulation and submission of a strong people to a weak leader; the ripping the "guts" out of a healthy and liberating constitution; the apology, any apology given to an enemy bent on destroying the Republic and degrading any the innocent; the persecution of any individual or group who stand for what they believe and do so peacefully; the ignorant politician standing in a pool of flush-able waste and calling it "the will of the people;" the nut-bag willing to criticize the administration for their emotional response WITHOUT be willing to do anything about the current situation that produced the passion. It is enough to make one angry!
-
Seems like everyone is "trying to make a deal" to get a large amount of USD for their dinar. No much is happening with "independent" collectors so they try to combine large amounts to "broker" a deal. I don't know how many of these groups are trying to do something like this story, but probably a number of them. Everybody is trying to get ahead of game and they are making themselves susceptible to the schemes of the corrupt "business(?)" person connected to "religion" and self appointed "important" people. Now they are in big trouble and will probably loose it all.
-
Just as a side issue: Supposedly this plane will go straight up for 78 miles! According to the "Flat Earth" touters such a flight would is impossible! The "canopy" or "firmament" is only 32 miles. Since the flight depends upon the rotation or spin of the earth, and the earth is flat and does not spin, the flight would come down close to the place it took off. Now that is a conundrum! LOL!!!!!
-
Even the worst of humanity can become a child of God through hearing the gospel of Christ packaged in truth and love. It has happened before and it will happen again. Yes, true conversion is a transformation of the individual through the power of the blood of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit. But I have never observed a transformation to take place without the presentation of the message of salvation and truth found in Jesus Christ. An Arab, a Russian, an American from the USA, a Mexican, a Honduran, etc. are all NATIONALITIES of individuals NOT necessarily Muslims, or even radical Muslims. To condemn a people, or consider them unfit for redemption is judgmental and rash. Personally I can not do that. My responsibility is to proclaim the message of Christ's love for all people, His propitiatory death by suffering the wrath of God, and the miracle of His resurrection from death and the grave. That message is contained in the truth of the Bible. If we fail to teach those truths, then we have failed totally. CHANGE, TRANSFORMATION, CONVERSION to Christ will not take place unless the message of the gospel is preached, heard, and believed by the hearer. Without the message, the individual will never be changed. The battle we are fighting is not against "flesh and blood," but against the spiritual forces of evil and wickedness; against their shameful thoughts which produce the life that they live. Our fight is with the philosophies and teachings that they have in their minds, not with them physically. The god of this world is actively trying to blind those who will not hear the message. Conversion, transformation, is a battle for the mind of a person and no physical weapon can do that, only the teaching and speaking the Truth can do that. You want to destroy the Muslim? Teach them the gospel. Struggle with the mind, change the mind, then you will see the work of God, BUT THE MESSAGE CANNOT BE THE PHILOSOPHIES AND DOCTRINES OF MAN. IT MUST BE THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.
-
The way to win the Muslim to Christ is to "out love them," and at the same time teach them the power of the grace and mercy so clearly defined and taught in the text of the Bible. Thanks Markinsa! Drivemaster, I understand the frustration. Often it is not that the 4 million are refusing to convert but they are not getting a chance to hear the gospel of Christ. Christians are reluctant to go and teach and at the same time the Mullas are preaching against Christianity with a message about Christ that is unrecognizable to believers in Christ. The radical Islamists are those not only from Islam, but thugs from all over the world looking for a place to vent their poisonous hate on the world. They then use the innocent and ignorant disenfranchised who fall for their lies and the romance of war. At times I think they can be rescued from the ISIS evil, but then again I feel like the only way to handle them is to eliminate them were they stand. I'm torn between the two positions.
-
Origin, destination, cargo, location, and number of transport vehicles are all known. It seems simple to me. Load the missiles on X number of planes, launch, fire and destroy ALL OF THEM, return to base, report, and go to lunch. No more tankers, no more flow of money to ISIS, and wait for the next bunch to get on the road. Am I missing something?
-
MERRY CHRISTMAS! (Adam Montana Weekly 22 December 2015)
Nelg replied to Adam Montana's topic in Chat Logs
Merry Christmas Adam, and the same to all your family. May God continue to give you "Peace and Good Will" for now and forever. G. Glen Gray (Nelg) -
One thing we all know, something is a foot. Change is going to take place during the first part of the year. We can only guess at what it will be. Our hope is that it will be a large revaluing to our pocketbook, purse, or bank account. It would be nice if SOMETHING happens to the dinar that will benefit the holders of the paper.