How does this news item fit with the one yesterday saying Robert A Schuller has been removed from the church by his father for preaching a different message?
I have heard the explanation that the two witnesses are the Holy Spirit and the Word. The Word (Jesus Christ) lay dead three days when He arose He'd defeated Satan and therefore death. They are certainly not olive trees or candlesticks which is the literal explanation given in the book of Revelation.
Why are people so concerned with the music being used in worship? From my reading Jesus and the disciples worshipped regularly in the temple where many different instruments were used with and without singing. The Jews stopped this form of worship when the temple was destroyed as a sign of mourning. Why do so many Christians today say we must also stop using instruments? Aren't we now the temple? We are also told we are priests so are entitled under the OT laws to use instruments. We sing the psalms that tell us to use instruments in our worship. Many early Christians songs have been identified in the NT writings. This has puzzled us for some time.
This survey does not have mutually exclusive answers. All except the second and third are backed by some scripture. The second one God tells us, in scripture, all are destined for hell but in his love he chose some to eternal life, so it has no basis in scripture. The third one is universalism and has no basis except before the fall when God pronounced everything as good. The others however can be shown from scripture.
I was raised using the RSV and NASB but have changed to the AV, mainly because it tells you if the writing is to one or more than one person. In many passages this is important. Take the passage "ye are the temple". Is this each individual person or is it talking of us as a group of believers. "ye" is plural "you all".
Are these the laws written on the hearts of Christians? Did Adam and Noah know the same law as was given to Moses after God had brought the people out of slavery? I believe we are now free to obey the law of God, whereas before we were held under its rule but were unable to obey it.
JD Look at Gal 2:20 "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." This is Paul, a Jew, speaking. Whose faith is mentioned here?
When you've looked at that go back to v16 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ," Whose faith is mentioned that we might believe.
JD you said " He could not have made it more simple. Christ died for all men but all men are not justified until they believe God." Is unbelief a sin? yes - well Christ died for it. no - well we're all saved those who believe and those who don't.
I think I'm beginning to understand. Biblical Fundamentalism is the term you use if you do not hold all the points of armenianism or all of the points of calvinism. Yet people with this theology cherry pick the points of each belief that they like. Am I correct?
Thank you again for your explanations. Am I to understand that the first term has changed in meaning or that calvinism or arminianism have changed in meaning? I can consult a book and get a good definition of each of the latter words, but what is biblical fundamentalism? Someone must be able to set out the points for this stance as over 1000 people have said it is their theological position.
Thank you to those who tried to help with an explanation of the differences in the first 3 options. If anything you have left me more confused. Wasn't the council of Dort refuting arminianism when it came up with its 5 points of calvinism, yet some here have said that they were both reformed. I do not understand how this could be. The first option doesn't seem to even be an option and yet nearly half the respondents voted that way.
A few days ago I asked someone, anyone who knows to list the basic differences between the first three answers. How does someone who says he is a biblical fundamentalist differ from a calvinist and from an arminian? 1019 people have made the distinction.
Looking at the questions in this survey. can anyone explain the first option. Is it different from the 2nd or 3rd, or another name for one of them? If it's different where are the points of difference? Over 1000 people said they are neither calvinists or arminianists. What is a concise summary of the belief system "biblical fundamentalism"?
MurrayA, I agree with your analysis of Casob. He has not to my knowledge answered one question put to him in a logical manner. Can anyone explain the first option. Is it different from the 2nd or 3rd, or another name for one of them? If it's different where are the points of difference?
Casob are you telling us that your god cannot control the events that happen; that poor puny man can reject god in a way that makes him change his plan of salvation completely. My Bible says just the opposite. God is in control; working his purposes out in this world. He was in control with Adam and Eve, with Noah, with Abraham, with King David even to today where he knows you and me and is working things out for his purpose.
10/29/08 6:29 PM
10/27/08 7:47 PM
