GCM Home | Bible Search | Rules | Donate | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
Theology Forum / Re: Changing Masters in Romans 6
« Last post by new creature on Yesterday at 10:00:38 PM »
Quote
You posted the verse from 1st John which says they that are born of God cannot sin. It seems like you don't believe that it pertains to me though. Why is that?

I believe it pertains to every child of God.

Did you read what I said about that passage? If so, I guess I just don't understand what you find wrong in what I am saying to you. What I am saying here I believe pertains to all children of God.
Agreed.

So if a child of God can not sin, how is it that each day they have to choose not to sin all over again. They can not, right?

I did read what you said earlier but did not agree as I posted.
52
End Times Forum / Re: What Verses Support Amillennialism?
« Last post by TonkaTim on Yesterday at 09:58:49 PM »
"Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel." Psalm 2:9

Isn't the rod of iron a symbol of Authority, Kingship & divine judgement?

The Triumphant Messiah

1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
53
Churches of Christ Forum / Re: Law and Positive Law
« Last post by Norton on Yesterday at 09:45:03 PM »
The "positive law" teaching has been deeply embedded in the doctrine of Churches of Christ for several generations. but I don't think it became popular until after the original Restoration leaders passed on. The concept of positive law as described does figure large in the OT, but not in the NT. I can't think of a single instruction for the church or anyone who would come into the church, that I would classify as a positive law, or a nonsensical law given for no other purpose except to test ones faith and obedience.

The doctrine of "positive law" seems to have come about as a way to bolster the argument for baptism being essential to salvation. The command to be baptized became a positive law in Churches of Christ and people were baptized to be forgiven of the unforgivable sin of not being baptized.  People were saved because they had performed  a work of law. Of course Romans 4 had to be reworked to make the doctrine fit the Scriptures. Some preachers said Abraham was not credited with righteousness when he believed but was really saved when he obeyed and offered Isaac on the alter. Others said Abraham was not credited with righteousness when he believed, but was really saved when he obeyed and headed for Canaan. For these preachers, it was just not possible that Abraham could be credited with righteousness apart from obeying a positive law.

Positive law seems to have been some of the rationale for the church pattern doctrine in Churches of Christ. The main purpose of the assembly was not so much to teach and encourage each other, but to make sure the positive laws given by the apostles were strictly obeyed, whether anyone was edified or not.

I am not saying we need to understand the purpose of a command before we obey it. To obey God just because He commanded it is admirable, but for myself, I don't see any such commands for this day and age. We please God by being conformed to His image, not by jumping through the hoops of positive law.

54
Theology Forum / Re: John 10.28
« Last post by revivin on Yesterday at 09:36:36 PM »
People can't work for initial salvation just as people can't work to lose salvation. It's impossible. Your strength can't get you saved, nor can your strength undo salvation. Faith and belief are always contrasted from works.

So don't discount it is quite possible for you to give your life to the Jesus who never lets go, always gives the strength to remain faithful, and desirous even when he or she slips.
55
End Times Forum / Re: What Verses Support Amillennialism?
« Last post by revivin on Yesterday at 09:33:30 PM »
revivin,

Can you show how Jesus could be High Priest right now, but not yet on David's throne? If you acknowledge that He is on the throne of David, in fulfillment of O.T. prophecy (such as Psalm 110), then you might have to acknowledge that your interpretation of Revelation is incorrect.
Jesus at the right hand of the Father on David's throne right now cannot be construed as reigning with a rod of iron over the nations on earth right now. Rev. 2.26,27 says the overcomers will reign over the nations. Are the presidents and prime ministers of the nations Christians? Probably not a one of them.

Satan is the god of this world for now. How can it be said the god of this world is in the pit now? But at the end of the 1000 years he is let loose for a short while, so that makes the millennium have to be before the New City, but also after the church age.

No other option is permitted.
56
Theology Forum / Re: Just reading the bible and I read this?
« Last post by hap on Yesterday at 09:27:25 PM »
Man is raised at the last day

John 6:39-40,44,54 KJV
[39] And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. [40] And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. [44] No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
57
Theology Forum / Re: John 10.28
« Last post by revivin on Yesterday at 09:10:32 PM »
You say no Christian wants to backslide to the point of losing salvation. You talk as if you know every Christian and their every motive and situation.

So, in becoming a Christian, you made an arrangement so that any later possible choice to sever the relationship will be overridden by the previous choice you made that He not allow it to happen? That's not freedom of choice by any stretch of the imagination.

Also, God is smart enough and righteous enough not to give eternal life to somebody who might relinquish it?

I believe we have found your soteriology. God sees the end, and so He gives His salvation only to those who will not give it up. All others who may desire it are rejected because they will eventually reject Him anyway.

You know how all this sounds, right? Not biblical at all.
The arrangement a Christian entered into was to be kept so it stands to reason no Christian would fall always all the way, because God honors that arrangement.

It's a contradiction to say "you made an arrangement so that any later possible choice to sever the relationship will be overridden". It's a contradiction because the Holy Spirit restrains any desire to sever as promised by that arrangement.

What's not Biblical is saying you accepted Christ when you claim you gave your life to Him today, lose it tomorrow, get it back next week, lose it next year, get it back in 10 years, on and on. That's just goofy. Salvation is not by works or self-strength lest anyone should boast. How many eternal lives do you need? Sounds like reincarnation.
58
Theology Forum / Re: Changing Masters in Romans 6
« Last post by soterion on Yesterday at 09:09:07 PM »
Quote
You posted the verse from 1st John which says they that are born of God cannot sin. It seems like you don't believe that it pertains to me though. Why is that?

I believe it pertains to every child of God.

Did you read what I said about that passage? If so, I guess I just don't understand what you find wrong in what I am saying to you. What I am saying here I believe pertains to all children of God.
59
Theology Forum / Re: John 10.28
« Last post by revivin on Yesterday at 09:04:35 PM »
Pauls words in context there is nothing about the first resurrection.

20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.

25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

26 I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air:

27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

King James Version (KJV)
"Run the race...receiveth the prize" pertains to the 1st resurrection. That is what is meant by it. It's a reward for overcoming.

He is not talking about salvation by works, lest any man should boast.
60
End Times Forum / Re: What Verses Support Amillennialism?
« Last post by soterion on Yesterday at 09:03:13 PM »
revivin,

Can you show how Jesus could be High Priest right now, but not yet on David's throne? If you acknowledge that He is on the throne of David, in fulfillment of O.T. prophecy (such as Psalm 110), then you might have to acknowledge that your interpretation of Revelation is incorrect.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10