ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

God Of Opinions Of Man

Should a Christian accept the opinions of mere men (be they religious leaders, scientists or academics) over the Word of God?

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Bible History Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 2/5/16
     Helpful Blog Vote (6)

Post a New Blog



Your question is way too broad.
What opinions of what ?
----earl on 2/21/16


So, john, why don't you accept what St. Athanasius and St. Ireneus said about the Eucharist, apostolic bishops, and the like, too?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/20/16


john9346:

I sincerely appreciate your sentiments, but:

I want to ask you to please consider and think about what you are saying. ... You have committed sin against him.

What, in particular, have I been saying that is a sin, and such a bad sin that it could imperil my soul? In this blog, I have been discussing the precise nuances of the word "Jew". If I have been wrong, please show me where and how.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only man who lived a perfect and sinless life and he is the only way to God.

Have I ever said otherwise?
---StrongAxe on 2/20/16


Strongaxe,

With love,
I want to ask you to please consider and think about what you are saying.

This is a matter of your Eternal Soul.

God your creator is holy.

You have committed sin against him.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only man who lived a perfect and sinless life and he is the only way to God.

I invite you to repent/turn from your sins today my friend and trust Christ to save you.

Call/plead with him to show you mercy and to save you from his wrath against sin.

Always In love,


John
---john9346 on 2/19/16


So everyone understands how Athanasius viewed the Holy Scriptures.

Compare what Cluny has said to what Athanasius said:



"These are the fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness."

Athanasius

Also Irenaeus

"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith."



---john on 2/18/16




Trav:

You wrote: These "gnats" you see me post are Israel. All Israel, two Houses of. This covenanted people you prefer to avoid is a "tell" when you avoid them.

I don't avoid them. I just use one word rather than twelve, as they THEMSELVES do.

Actually, there are 12, not just two. Also, the term "Jew" was used to refer to all of Israel, not only today, but also 2000 years ago, in the New Testament itself. The "Jews" who opposed Jesus were Pharisees, some of whom were priests (e.g. from Levi, not Judah). Also, Paul said in Christ there was no distinction between Jew and Greek - do you really think he as deliberately excluding the other 11 tribes here?
---StrongAxe on 2/19/16


They were caught up in their understanding. So they put their thoughts and ideas above Jesus.

That is why Jesus pointed out to them the word teaches about him. But my making their understanding the final word they refused to recognize who Jesus was.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 2/17/16


\\cluny states, "Nope. He wasn't. Rather, He was warning that devotion to the Scriptures can get in the way of a relationship with Himself."

Correction, in context, jn 5:39-47 Jesus is rebuking the jews for not believing "Scripture." that prophesied his coming.\\

St. Athanasius, you, and I are all saying the same thing: they were so caught up in the Bible they missed Jesus.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/17/16


Trav:
You are choking over gnats here. Poeple in the Jewish community ...
---StrongAxe on 2/12/16

These "gnats" you see me post are Israel. All Israel, two Houses of. This covenanted people you prefer to avoid is a "tell" when you avoid them. Found thousands of times in scripture as "the" subject. Both the old and New Covenant . Ironically, you just made an opportunity to discuss them.
Practice your A B Axe math below.
Deu_7:9 ...to a thousand generations,
Eze_37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them, it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
---Trav on 2/17/16


Here is another example of Strongaxe allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture and very well done I must say...

see below:


You say that the pastor has talked to him about it. There is a biblical procedure for dealing with sin, described in Matthew 18.

If a brother is sinning, there are four steps to correcting him.
1) one or two others should speak with him about it privately. Having the pastor speak with him does this.
2) if that doesn't work, the elders should speak with him privately.
3) if that doesn't work, the matter should be brought openly before the whole church body.
4) if that still doesn't work, the church should treat him as a heathen and non-believer.

---StrongAxe on 2/12/16
---john9346 on 2/17/16




strongaxe said, "On the other hand, if there IS such a guide, where is it? I just showed that it isn't in the 3 scriptures quoted."

No sir, you just said regarding 2 Tim 3:15, "I don't no."

In regards to jn 5:39 and Acts 17:10-11 you didn't answer the question.

What is contradictory is your own, "Statements." which logically if the bible provides no guide for proper interpretation you would state, "Neutrality." of which you donot in stating.

BTW, you misunderstood my correction of cluny's statement.
---john9346 on 2/17/16


Seekers of the truth take note:

So you can understand what I am saying to strongaxe,

Here is another statement by Strongaxe where he is allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture keep in mind that he has said that the bible provides no Specific Guide for proper interpretation:

See below:


John 6:56:
Drinking blood is SPECIFICALLY forbidden in both old and new testaments, so if this were literal, Jesus would be commanding breaking the Law (of which he said not one iota would pass away).
---StrongAxe on 1/24/16
---john on 2/17/16


john:

You wrote: If there is no guide as you state, how could Paul have told Timothy this?

I don't know, perhaps using something every single person on this planet is given - God-given common sense? I.e. he was not estabilishing a new doctrine or creating a new law, but rather, explaining how one could reasonably deal with what had been previously given.

On the other hand, if there IS such a guide, where is it? I just showed that it isn't in the 3 scriptures quoted.

This is your third time being corrected on this same statement.

He was essentially saying, loosely, was "You can't see the forest, for the trees", which basically agrees with both of you.
---StrongAxe on 2/16/16


If a Christian (Born Again, fully sold out to Jesus) is listening to the news, and he hears that an earthquake hit Babylon,and 5,000 people are dead, should he immediately look up the significance or earthquakes in Babylon in the Bible? Or should he stop and pray that God will have mercy upon the souls of the dead?

Monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 2/16/16


Strongaxe states, "2 Timothy 3:5 says you have know Holy Scriptures from infancy, which can make you wise, but doesn't say anything about one scripture interpreting another."

If there is no guide as you state, how could Paul have told Timothy this?


Remember, you stated the following on another blog which you are absolutely correct:

"You need to understand the difference between "prescriptive text" (that defines rules) and "descriptive text" (that merely clarifies their ramifications)."
---john on 2/16/16


cluny states, "Nope. He wasn't. Rather, He was warning that devotion to the Scriptures can get in the way of a relationship with Himself."

Correction, in context, jn 5:39-47 Jesus is rebuking the jews for not believing "Scripture." that prophesied his coming.

Athanasius also in the Festal Letters understood jn 5:39 that Jesus was rebuking the Jews for not knowing what the Scriptures prophesied of him.


This is your third time being corrected on this same statement.
---john9346 on 2/16/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


strongaxe:


"John 5:39-40 says to (KJV) or they (NIV) search scriptures. This says nothing about comparing one scripture to another,"

Sir, Does not searching involve comparing one scripture to another.??


"Acts 17:10-11 talks about the Bereans who "searched the scriptures daily to see if these things were so". This says nothing about "scripture interpreting scripture", but rather "scripture verifying preaching"."

doesn't verrifying, interpreting involve searching??
---john9346 on 2/16/16


john9346:

John 5:39-40 says to (KJV) or they (NIV) search scriptures. This says nothing about comparing one scripture to another,

2 Timothy 3:5 says you have know Holy Scriptures from infancy, which can make you wise, but doesn't say anything about one scripture interpreting another.

Acts 17:10-11 talks about the Bereans who "searched the scriptures daily to see if these things were so". This says nothing about "scripture interpreting scripture", but rather "scripture verifying preaching".

Due to blog restrictions, often there aren't enough words available to reply to every question asked, so even if I have the time, the web site doesn't allow me to use it.
---StrongAxe on 2/16/16


Let us see what the Bible says.

Isaiah 28:10 NASB
For He says,
fnOrder on order, order on order,
Line on line, line on line,
A little here, a little there.

Isaiah 8:20
To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.

The Bible does not contradict itself. So therefore all scripture must be combined to find truth.

Not like the Pharisees Jesus was correcting. For they did not search for truth but to prove their traditions which they placed above scripture.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 2/15/16


\\1. So, in Jn 5:39-40 was not Jesus teaching "Scripture-interprets Scripture."?\\

Nope. He wasn't.

Rather, He was warning that devotion to the Scriptures can get in the way of a relationship with Himself.

And what the KJV renders as an imperative, other English translations render as simple indicative: "You search the scriptures..." It's the same word in Greek.

In the context, indicative makes more sense.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/15/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Strongaxe states, "Yes, but NOWHERE in scripture does it ACTUALLY say "scripture interprets scripture". This is not Biblical direction - "


1. So, in Jn 5:39-40 was not Jesus teaching "Scripture-interprets Scripture."?

2. In 2 Tim 3:15 was not Paul teaching "Scripture-interprets Scripture."?

3. In Acts 17:10-11 is this not "Scripture-interprets Scripture."?

Blog Restrictions is why I make time to respond to all questions so as to not confuse those who are Genuinely Seeking the truth...
---john9346 on 2/15/16


john9346:

No. You obviously totally missed what you just quoted (i.e. I use them because the Bible DOES NOT provide any specific guide - i.e. since it doesn't say what you can use, it doesn't say what you CAN'T use either.)

yet, on the other blog, your conclusion adequately utilized, "Scripture interprets Scripture Principle."

Yes, but NOWHERE in scripture does it ACTUALLY say "scripture interprets scripture". This is not Biblical direction - it is merely common sense. You would use parts of ANY document to corroborate other parts of that same document.

(blog restrictions are why I don't always have time to answer previously-asked questions)
---StrongAxe on 2/15/16


strongaxe said, "I interpret using logic and common sense (i.e. since the Bible does not provide any specific guide on biblical interpretation, I have to do the best I can with the tools I have)."

So, are you saying that the bible doesn't allow us to use, "Logic and Common Sense." when studying it?

You state, "the bible itself does NOT specify a "proper biblical interpretation",yet, on the other blog, your conclusion adequately utilized, "Scripture interprets Scripture Principle."

wa

I understand word restrictions on this blog, but lets be honest and truthful to not mislead others who are seeking the truth.
---john9346 on 2/14/16


\\you should know that your postings are petty and completely irrelevant. \\

You don't actually think that YOUR postings are relevant, do you, jerry?

Are you THAT badly deluded?

As far as repeating your favorite word "psychobabble," I thought I could show you how UGLY you sound when you use it. Apparently on your postings it means, "I have no rational argument against what you said".

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/13/16


Send a Free Humor Ecard


john9346:

I interpret using logic and common sense (i.e. since the Bible does not provide any specific guide on biblical interpretation, I have to do the best I can with the tools I have). I do not condemn this method - I just point out that those who insist on "proper biblical interpretation" are themselves also using it, as the bible itself does NOT specify a "proper biblical interpretation".

Also, the 125-word limit severely impedes the ability to deal with more than one message per post, and the rules here forbid multiple postings. If you don't like that, complain to the moderators, not me.
---StrongAxe on 2/13/16


cluny: I see that you are enamored with my word "psychobabble", but you should know that your postings are petty and completely irrelevant. Come back when you grow up.



---jerry6593 on 2/13/16


Trav:

You are choking over gnats here. Poeple in the Jewish community call THEMSELVES Jews, yet also acknowledge specific bloodlines (e.g. Levi for levites, Cohen for priests, Katz for high priests, etc.) so they use the tribal name even though they know full well they represent all the tribes. If you don't like that word because it is inaccurate, use another, but accept what they and others call them.

I don't like the term "Native American" beause it is inaccurate (i.e. ANYONE living on this continent who was also born here is a native - the Canadian term "first nations" seems more apt), but I don't quibble with people over it, since we know what everyone means by it.
---StrongAxe on 2/12/16


Trav: "Jew" loosely means someone from ANY tribe of Israel.
2 or 3 witnesses mean independent sources, not "gut feelings".
---StrongAxe on 2/11/16

Well sir you are misled greatly. And to your loss today, of a greater understanding. Tomorrow? I'd be more gentle but we are men.
Don't feel alone, I grew up being taught this as well. Most have been. It is a simple exercise to read the verses over 2500 about Israel in scripture. Judah is not jew. It is late slang language in print.

Witnesses: Isaiah is an independent witness, Jeremiah, Hosea etc. Download eSword search Sheep, Dog, Hog, Israel, marriage, divorce, bridegroom, only, etc, etc, etc.
Witnesses GOD provided.
---Trav on 2/12/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


jerry, when you quit spouting psychobabble and say something substantive for a change, I'll discuss things with you, OK?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/12/16


Strongaxe states, "john9346: those recommend studying scripture, but don't say HOW to study it."

Sir, can you be forthcoming in your statements:

1. You never answered the 2 questions I asked you see previous addressed to you.

2. On a Prior posting, you stated this same statement and then you turned right around and interpreted contextually right after you said there was no principle to Properly Interpret Scripture...
---john9346 on 2/12/16


aservant: To which point did Never refer?
---StrongAxe on 2/11/16


Should a Christian accept the opinions of mere men (be they religious leaders, scientists or academics) over the Word of God?

I was answering the only question asked.
---aservant on 2/12/16


Here's another question for you to ponder:
Was the New Testament really written in Latin?
If it was, why does (Acts 2:7) say the disciples spoke Galilean?

Also note, there were Latin speaking people in attendance, on the Day of Pentecost, who were amazed to understood the disciples message. If the Disciples spoke Latin, why were they amazed?

---David on 2/12/16

I reject this notion for it has no Historical Support.
---john on 2/12/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


aservant: To which point did Never refer?

john9346: those recommend studying scripture, but don't say HOW to study it.

Trav: "Jew" loosely means someone from ANY tribe of Israel. Most are from Judah, but some are from other tribes (e.g. Cohens are priests, Katzes high priests).

Trav: Mormons say "ask the Spirit for confirmation that the Book of Mormon is the Word of God", and will say they receive this witness. You would say they are wrong, but since THEY "feel" the Spirit has said it's right, this "feeling" is not reliable.

2 or 3 witnesses mean independent sources, not "gut feelings".
---StrongAxe on 2/11/16


cluny: The problem with you Catholics is that you are so steeped in your mystical fantasies that you can't even keep on the track of a blog topic, but descend into hateful denominational attacks when you can't defend your anti-biblical, worldly opinions. [I know you claim to not be a Catholic, but the differences are imperceptible.]

You cling to the opinions of religious leaders, scientists and academics and against the Bible when it comes to your belief in Theistic Evolution, among other false theories.


---jerry6593 on 2/12/16


Never. God is not subject to error or sin.

See 2Tim 3:16. All Scripture is God breathed (inspired).
---aservant on 2/11/16


Strongaxe states, "While this is sensible, the Bible itself does not actually say this. So this is a "tradition of men", even though it is a very reasonable tradition."

Actually, the principle comes from Scripture Jn 5:39, Acts 17:10-11, and 2 Tim 3:15.
---john9346 on 2/11/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


Is this why EGW said the "angel" that took her through outer space also said she might be among the 144,000, even though the Bible makes it clear that these are Jews?
---Cluny on 2/11/16

We agree that egw is a false prophet and woman that should have kept her mouth shut for the harm she has done.
It was not or ever will be 144 thousand "jews" in Rev. Judah is 1/12 of Israel and never constitutes the combined houses of Israel.
It is just another false teaching that is even taken root and blossomed in your mind and then to print.
Rev_7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.
---Trav on 2/11/16


If scripture says "God says X", and person A says "This means Y" and person B says "No, this means Z", short of God speaking from heaven who is right, we have no way of knowing.
---StrongAxe on 2/9/16

This is similar to that I used to say, so I recognize your point.
It is found false because GOD did give witnesses to everything specific in scripture. 2 or more. You gave an example but, if the spirit resides in you or you ask, and seek...the answer is given. Heb 8:10...the heart of law knows. If one doesn't it is a mark.
Isa_28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, ...
Mat_18:16 ...two or three witnesses every word may be established.
---Trav on 2/11/16


\\No one's word should be accepted over the word of GOD. Which EG White supported.. \\

Is this why EGW said the "angel" that took her through outer space also said she might be among the 144,000, even though the Bible makes it clear that these are Jews?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/11/16


Samuelbb7:

The problem with EGW's writing isn't her support of scripture, but rather, those things she wrote that were completely loony (literally, in this case).

The problem with people is they take verses out of context. We are to compare scripture with scripture. We are to look at who the writing is too and when. We are see the event in which the writing is set.

While this is sensible, the Bible itself does not actually say this. So this is a "tradition of men", even though it is a very reasonable tradition.

Reading scriptures in the original languages helps understand the nuances that translators can only approximate.
---StrongAxe on 2/11/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


Cluny why are you bringing a story about White when that is not the topic.

No one's word should be accepted over the word of GOD. Which EG White supported.

The problem with people is they take verses out of context. We are to compare scripture with scripture. We are to look at who the writing is too and when. We are see the event in which the writing is set. All must be based in Jesus.

I cannot read the original Hebrew but I can read different Bible translation by scholars.

Thank you Jerry. Good points.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 2/11/16


\\ There is no mention of the moon on EW, p. 39, but on p. 40, she says:\\

More psychobabble, jerry?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/11/16


colony: You said:

"See EARLY WRITINGS, p. 39, about Enoch being on a moon."

"I agree. What EGW said about Enoch being in the solar system is a laughable lie."

As usual, you can't read, so you make stuff up. There is no mention of the moon on EW, p. 39, but on p. 40, she says:

"Then I was taken to a world which had seven moons. There I saw good old Enoch, who had been translated."

This was not in the solar system. Why don't you stick to the blog topic and stop beating on a poor dead woman? Good grief!


---jerry6593 on 2/10/16


Strongaxe,

So, Let me make sure I have this correct, according to your world view.

The bible is not an Objective Test because people have various opinions on certain Scriptures is this correct??

Strongaxe asked, "Yes. I have looked at the original Hebrew. Have you?

Yes sir, and tell me in exo 21:22, what is the hebrew word Moses use?
---john9346 on 2/10/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


///Strongaxe states, "short of God speaking from heaven who is right, we have no way of knowing."

Please tell us on what basis do, "we have no way of knowing?"

Sir, tell me, have you honestly studied Exo 21:22 in context yes or no?
---john9346 on 2/9/16///

Yes, "IN CONTEXT" John. You're absolutely correct. That's the key to "believers" understanding the entirety of Scripture. Many CN bloggers fail to comprehend that paramount fact. Subsequently, confusion of mind ensues. God has knit everything together in the Bible so that we can know, with certainty, what His will is for us...
---Leon on 2/10/16


Should a Christian accept the opinions of mere men (be they religious leaders, scientists or academics) over the Word of God?
---jerry6593 on 2/5/16

I'll never forget being 40yrs old and freed from every denom, opinion, preacher, scientist etc by the 2+ witness scriptures GOD provides in scripture.
There are hundreds and thousands of witnesses depending on the subject. Israel as example is found 2,301 times but, is rarely mentioned in churches, even more rarely here. A mark and sign.

While your question seems like a "duh" question, "sheep" are fooled/misled daily by the opinionated idiots/dogs and false prophets you refer too. Blinded, never seeking, never hearing, unaware, of the witnesses.
---Trav on 2/10/16


john9346:

You wrote: Please tell us on what basis do, "we have no way of knowing?"

OK. Please tell me what way YOU have to determine the "true and correct meaning" of a scripture when some people disagree with the interpretation.

Sir, tell me, have you honestly studied Exo 21:22 in context yes or no?

Yes. I have looked at the original Hebrew. Have you? Just as with the English translations, the word rendered "mischief" does not specifically indicate whether it applies to mother, child, or both. There are differing opinions on this. How can you determine for sure what was originally meant?
---StrongAxe on 2/10/16


Strongaxe states, "short of God speaking from heaven who is right, we have no way of knowing."

Please tell us on what basis do, "we have no way of knowing?"

Sir, tell me, have you honestly studied Exo 21:22 in context yes or no?
---john9346 on 2/9/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Here's psychobabble from EGW about her trip into outer space, from EARLY WRITINGS, page 40

\\Then I was taken to a world which had seven moons. There I saw good old Enoch, who had been translated. On his right arm he bore a glorious palm, and on each leaf was written Victory. Around his head was a dazzling white wreath, and leaves on the wreath, and in the middle of each leaf was written Purity, and around the wreath were stones of various colors, that shone brighter than the stars,...\\

Look it up.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/9/16


john9346:

If scripture says "God says X", and person A says "This means Y" and person B says "No, this means Z", short of God speaking from heaven who is right, we have no way of knowing. Many scriptures are ambiguous thus (e.g. the miscarriage scripture says "unless there is mischief". Does this mean injury to the mother, or child, or both? It's not clear from the context, and there have been opinions on both sides).

Calling someone a heretic is one thing. Killing them for it (which Calvin did) is NOT something Jesus ever taught (it contradicts "love your neighbor"), so it would make some one, de facto, a heretic himself for doing it.
---StrongAxe on 2/9/16


Strongaxe states, "Unfortunately, short of God speaking from heaven and saying "this is my servant in whom I am well pleased", there is no objective test."

Sir, I submit to you that God did and does in the Scriptures that are, "Theopneustos."

If we are to logically conclude based on your reason, was Nicaea condemning Arius wrong, Ephesus condemning Nestorius wrong, and Constantinople condemning Honorius wrong??

BTW, did you read all of why Calvin called catholics heretics?
---john9346 on 2/9/16


jerry6593:

You wrote: What! You're becoming as looney as cluny. EGW NEVER said any such thing. The Investigative Judgment occurs in HEAVEN, prior to Christ's return.

Again, there is no mention in the Bible that anyone has to pour over the books in heaven for centuries before opening them. All are gathered, the books are opened, and they are judged.

The whole doctrine of "investigative judgment" is because of the Millerite prophecy that Jesus would return around 1844, and when he didn't, rather than admitting that the whole notion was hogwash, it was retconned into "He DID come then - just not HERE", giving the lie to "behold, I come quickly".
---StrongAxe on 2/9/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


\\And, of course, looney cluny's assertion about Enoch being in the solar system is another laughable lie.
\\

I agree. What EGW said about Enoch being in the solar system is a laughable lie.

But the rest of what you said is just psychobabble, jerry.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/9/16


\\ And, of course, looney cluny's assertion about Enoch being in the solar system is another laughable lie. \\

See EARLY WRITINGS, p. 39, about Enoch being on a moon.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/9/16


StrongAxe: "If Christ has not yet returned but will later, why did EGW say he already had?

What! You're becoming as looney as cluny. EGW NEVER said any such thing. The Investigative Judgment occurs in HEAVEN, prior to Christ's return. That is why Christ said:

Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

And, of course, looney cluny's assertion about Enoch being in the solar system is another laughable lie.



---jerry6593 on 2/9/16


Is EGW's claim to have conversed with Enoch on one of the moons in the solar system (Jupiter, I think) the opinion of a mere woman or to be accepted as the Word of God?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/8/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


jerry6593:

This has nothing to do with left or right. Why do you have to make everything about that?

Both passages you quoted show an imminent judgment - those judged are before the throne, the books are opened, and they are then immediately judged.

If Christ has not yet returned but will later, why did EGW say he already had? The idea of "investigative judgment" is back-pedalling to explain how Christ has already returned, yet has not ACTUALLY physically returned yet. It is verbal sophistry designed to cover up a failed prophecy.

Jesus himself said how he would return - as lightning visible from east to west (i.e. instantaneously so every eye can see), not invisibly and taking centuries to actually arrive.
---StrongAxe on 2/8/16


Where is that written Steveng?
---Leon on 2/7/16


StrongAxe: "They didn't have to wait hundreds of years for God and his bureaucracy"

What a shame that you view God through your left-wing liberal philosophy. God does not have a bureaucracy. The judgment does not run continuously, as the context of Dan 7 & 8 is the time of the end, with the beast being destroyed and Christ returning.

Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Dan 8:17 ... O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.



---jerry6593 on 2/8/16


Here is a prime example of a Christian accepting the opinion of man over the Word of God:

Genesis is extremly brief about creation, and supplies next to no details. These days, we understand more and more about details of how the world works, so it's natural to be curious about those things that aren't explicitly written down.

- StrongAxe on 1/19/2016


---jerry6593 on 2/8/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


/plethora of ideas/opinions about what the bible says.// steveng

Because that is the beauty of the Bible. That people do think and act differently. God acts and meets people exactly where they are, not where they are supposed to be. Religion says do x,y,z, for God to benefit you. In Christianity God says just trust God. This may mean one person needs to tithe to get control on his finances, while another may need to not tithe because he puts his trust in his tithe. The problem arises when someone finds a solution to his/her problem, which is awesome, but then falsely assumes that all people need this specific solution, and learner blindly follows. Both people have good intentions. This is why personal quiet time is important.
---Scott1 on 2/8/16


It is written that christians are to have one mind, that is, thinking in one thought. How is it that christians today have a plethora of ideas/opinions about what the bible says.
---Steveng on 2/7/16


Why is everything you post on these blogs psychobabble, jerry?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/6/16


jerry6593:

You wrote: Dan 7:9,10 ... Rev 20:12,13

Precisely. Note that those being judged stood before God, and the books were opened, and they were judged, right then and there. They didn't have to wait hundreds of years for God and his bureaucracy to process the books in heaven unseen, to see what they meant. That may be the case in bureaucracies on earth, where when you apply for something, it may take years for the application to be processed, but not so in heaven.
---StrongAxe on 2/6/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


"Joseph, how do you know that your understanding of the Word of God is the correct one?" I don't, my understanding is simply what I believe I have been given of the Father to embrace and share, and I trust Him with that understanding. Knowing that "every one of us shall give account of himself to God". That would include the man who decides, based on his understanding of the book of Joshua, to kill anyone. Whether of not he would have gotten that understanding from listening to a preacher would depend upon the preachers understanding, and that ones willingness to receive it. Regardless, it is better to embrace ones own understanding, because we all will stand before the judgement seat of Christ, alone.
---joseph on 2/6/16


Forgive the typo, this line is of course meant to read "Arguments are futile, let us simply share one with another, receive what we can, and quietly dismiss what we can not." Mistakes are humbling, and goes to show that even with our best efforts, mistakes are made. Therefore rather than focusing on one another's inaccuracies, let us try to hear the goodwill intent of every message being delivered.
---joseph on 2/5/16


cluny: "One opinion of the SDA is the "investigative judgement [sic]," which is nowhere in the Bible."

Really?

Dan 7:9,10 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit ... and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

Rev 20:12,13 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God, and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. ... and they were judged every man according to their works.


---jerry6593 on 2/6/16


Joseph said, "One must always embrace ones own understanding of "The Word of God"."

Joseph, how do you know that your understanding of the Word of God is the correct one?

For instance, what if someone read the book of Joshua, and decided that killing unbelievers was okay, because that was his understanding of that book?

You have to listen to tradition at least a bit, to have an understanding of what God is saying in his word. If that same man had been going to church, and listening to the preacher, he wouldn't get that understanding, would he?

Pray for me,
Monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 2/6/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Thank you Press on. It is my hope that everyone who reads the response will hear and receive it as well as you have. If not, may we, as believers, at least acknowledge that in " every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached, and I, therein, do rejoice, yes, and will rejoice. Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way." Arguments are futile, let us simple share one with another, receive what we can, and quietly dismiss what we can not. For Jesus is the Truth, and He will reveal Himself to all, in His time, in His way.
---joseph on 2/5/16


The holy spirit usually through the bible is the ultimate decision maker. But if you constantly are going against successful accomplished older wiser men. You need to make sure you are not in the wrong.
---Scott1 on 2/5/16


Which is right in Gods eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges!" (Acts 4:19) Do not go beyond what is written. (1 Cor 4:6) "what is the meaning of that which is written? (Luke 20:17) What is written in the Law? How do you read it? (Luke 10:26) "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophets own interpretation of things." (2 Peter 1:20) Often we accept the opinions of mere people over the Bible. Often those who say the Bible is TRUE and clear often do not agree on what the Bible says. Opinions change. But clearly, people are parting from scripture. "Watch yourself and watch your teaching" "Keep a close watch on all you do and think." (1 Tim 4:16)
---mike4879 on 2/5/16


Depends on what you mean by opinions of mere men. Nowhere does the Bible say that A should be 440, 442, or 444. (Philadelphia Orchestra--A 444 and rising.)

One opinion of the SDA is the "investigative judgement," which is nowhere in the Bible.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/5/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


It is man's opinion that God wants us each to be the kind of person that needs to be COMMANDED/ordered to be good/peaceful, and true (many churchgoers seem to agree wholeheartedly).

God wants each of us to be "LOVERS OF GOODNESS" not needing to be TOLD what to do in order that goodness be done).

It is man's opinion that GOD should be our MASTER instead of our FATHER the only way we can be a SON of His is to have Him as Abba FATHER).

...SO now you know but do you want to live
MAN's opinion instead of TRUTH?
---faithforfaith on 2/5/16


Beautiful explanation, Josef!
---Press_On on 2/5/16


No. One must always embrace ones own understanding of "The Word of God". However that understanding, when shared, will ultimately be viewed as the personal opinion of a "mere man" by those who embrace a different view. Father opens a mans understanding of His word as He see fit, suitable, applicable, and most conducive to that mans growth in Him. The only truth that seems to be universal for all believers is the truth that Jesus is Lord and Savior, and even accompanying that absolute, are differing views of what that means.
---joseph on 2/5/16


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.