RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology.

RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine

Message

benelchi -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/2/2008 7:03:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: "These three are One" has a different meaning than "three in one". Hope that helps. That is about as clear as mud, what exactly do you believe is wrong with how the Christian church teaches the Trinity? Is it simply a disagreement about using the word 'Trinity' or are you trying to say that there is a significant doctrinal error? If it is the latter, please clearly explain what you believe in error. I provided an explanation. Any more may be misconstrued, so I will err on the side of caution. The Scriptures were provided earlier. Thank you. It can only be misconstrued when you are unclear and/or vague in your definition. It appears that you reject the teaching about the Trinity that most Christians believe is completely supported in scripture and a doctrine esential to the Christian faith. Again it may be something I have misconstrued, but your reluctance to clearly state your beliefs leaves the appearance that you are trying to hide something; I admit that my opinion is likely colored by the fact that most of the time I have met people who will not clearly state what they believe, it is because what they believe is based on teachings that do not come from the bible i.e. JW's, Mormons, and other cult like groups, and they don't want that exposed. If this is a misconception of mine, please clear it up by clearly stating what you believe.

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/2/2008 7:26:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi It can only be misconstrued when you are unclear and/or vague in your definition. It appears that you reject the teaching about the Trinity that most Christians believe is completely supported in scripture and a doctrine esential to the Christian faith. Again it may be something I have misconstrued, but your reluctance to clearly state your beliefs leaves the appearance that you are trying to hide something; I admit that my opinion is likely colored by the fact that most of the time I have met people who will not clearly state what they believe, it is because what they believe is based on teachings that do not come from the bible i.e. JW's, Mormons, and other cult like groups, and they don't want that exposed. If this is a misconception of mine, please clear it up by clearly stating what you believe. I’ll provide the Scripture again: I Jn 5:7 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Do you need me to be any clearer?

benelchi -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/2/2008 7:42:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi It can only be misconstrued when you are unclear and/or vague in your definition. It appears that you reject the teaching about the Trinity that most Christians believe is completely supported in scripture and a doctrine esential to the Christian faith. Again it may be something I have misconstrued, but your reluctance to clearly state your beliefs leaves the appearance that you are trying to hide something; I admit that my opinion is likely colored by the fact that most of the time I have met people who will not clearly state what they believe, it is because what they believe is based on teachings that do not come from the bible i.e. JW's, Mormons, and other cult like groups, and they don't want that exposed. If this is a misconception of mine, please clear it up by clearly stating what you believe. I’ll provide the Scripture again: I Jn 5:7 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Do you need me to be any clearer? When what you quote clearly supports the doctrine of the Trinity, but you indicate that you do not believe the doctrine of the Trinity, it doesn't clear much up. What is it about the doctrine of the trinity that you reject? BTW - This verse is one that seems to have been influenced by those who believed in the Trinity, and wanted a little more support for it. It is only known from the Latin Vulgate, and from Greek manuscripts after the 14th century. All of the earlier Greek Manuscripts read "The Spirit, the water, and the blood".

MrFribbles -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/2/2008 11:00:39 PM)
quote: BTW - This verse is one that seems to have been influenced by those who believed in the Trinity, and wanted a little more support for it. It is only known from the Latin Vulgate, and from Greek manuscripts after the 14th century. All of the earlier Greek Manuscripts read "The Spirit, the water, and the blood". nod nod Any serious textual critic will not accept the translation that notmycity provided. It's simply not a good rendering, nor is it honest to our best resources in terms of getting as close as possible to the original autographs of Scripture.

benelchi -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/2/2008 11:30:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrFribbles quote: BTW - This verse is one that seems to have been influenced by those who believed in the Trinity, and wanted a little more support for it. It is only known from the Latin Vulgate, and from Greek manuscripts after the 14th century. All of the earlier Greek Manuscripts read "The Spirit, the water, and the blood". nod nod Any serious textual critic will not accept the translation that notmycity provided. It's simply not a good rendering, nor is it honest to our best resources in terms of getting as close as possible to the original autographs of Scripture. What is funny is that he quotes this verse from a translation that was overly influenced by trinitarian theology and yet indicates that he rejects trinitarian theology; it doesn't make a lot of sense.

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 2:23:44 PM)
It is possible that he is of one of the groups who view the trinity in these terms. i.e., the Father who became the Son, who then became the Holy Spirit. (Same God, three different "masks" or persona). This belief is known today as the "Jesus Only Movement". It is taught by the United Apostolic and United Pentecostal churches. In the second and third centuries this was know as Modalism (Monarchianism) declared to be heresy. It is still considered to be in error among orthodox Christians. This is my understanding of what the orthodox meaning of Trinity is. The word "trinity" is a word used to describe one fact the Bible teaches about God: Our God is a Trinity. This means there are three persons in one God, not three Gods. The persons are known as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit and they have all always existed as three separate persons. The person of the Father is not the same person as the Son. The person of the Son is not the same person as the Holy Spirit. The person of the Holy Spirit is not the same person as the Father. If you take away any one, there is no God. God has always been a trinity from all eternity. ( CARM Theological Dictionary)

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 2:28:33 PM)
One other thing, I have often seen this cited (especially in this thread) but never seen it attributed. So for those with an obsession for attribution: In Essentials, Unity - In Non-Essentials, Liberty - In All Things, Charity (Augustine of Hippo) (Some times translated Love rather than Charity) Tim

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 3:01:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark One other thing, I have often seen this cited (especially in this thread) but never seen it attributed. So for those with an obsession for attribution: In Essentials, Unity - In Non-Essentials, Liberty - In All Things, Charity (Augustine of Hippo) (Some times translated Love rather than Charity) Tim We’ve heard the above before. Question please.... What in God’s Word could be construed as “non-essential”? Thank you.

JimboFletch -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 3:12:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity What in God’s Word could be construed as “non-essential”? Lots of things. Like, whether the Lord drank or made wine containing alcohol. Knowing the answer to that will not get you - or keep you - saved. That's the key to knowing an "essential," whether to is a factor in salvation or the deity of Jesus Christ or the nature/character of God.

MrFribbles -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 3:35:45 PM)
quote: That's the key to knowing an "essential," whether to is a factor in salvation or the deity of Jesus Christ or the nature/character of God. Indeed. There are many things that Scripture is not 100% clear on that, while they certainly matter, are not a big enough of an issue to cause schisms over. There are even some things that Scripture is entirely clear on, but still leaves room for interpretation. For example, Christians are called to praise God through song (along with other means, obviously), but there is disagreement on what exactly that should look like. Is there one absolute right answer? Nope, because Scripture doesn't tell us.

BookerG -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/3/2008 3:40:17 PM)
"In Essentials, Unity - In Non-Essentials, Liberty - In All Things, Charity (Augustine of Hippo)" I've heard that saying before, but never attributed to Augustine. It doesn't sound at all like the times he was living in. A little googling found someone who seems to have researched it pretty thoroughly, http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/jod/augustine/quote.html He attributes the words to a Lutheran theologian, Rupertius Meldenius, during the Thirty Years War, around 1627. He defined Essentials and Non-essentials: Necessary dogmas are, (1) articles of faith necessary to salvation; (2) articles derived from clear testimonies of the Bible; (3) articles decided by the whole church in a synod or symbol; (4) articles held by all orthodox divines as necessary. Not necessary, are dogmas (1) not contained in the Bible; (2) not belonging to the common inheritance of faith; (3) not unanimously taught by theologians; (4) left doubtful by grave divines; (5) not tending to piety, charity, and edification. I get the sense that notmycity doesn't have a problem with the doctrine of the trinity as much as he insists on saying nothing at all doctrinally unless it's a verbatim quote from Scriptures.

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 2:22:36 AM)
quote: What in God’s Word could be construed as “non-essential”? There are certain things that are core essentials that define orthodox Christianity (they are well stated in the fairly well in the Statement of Faith http://forums.crosswalk.com/m_2133/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#2133 ), if any of those things aren't present then it isn't a Christian church. Beyond these essentials lies a broad range of doctrines where there are "proof texts" on both sides of the dogma, where there is room for disagreement and discussion. http://forums.crosswalk.com/Range_of_Doctrines/m_1014/tm.htm Nothing in God's word is non-essential. Much in mans (any specific church/denomination) dogma is, being based upon preference and emphasis rather than incontrovertible scriptural proof. Tim

MrFribbles -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 2:29:50 AM)
quote: Nothing in God's word is non-essential. Much in mans (any specific church/denomination) dogma is, being based upon preference and emphasis rather than incontrovertible scriptural proof. I think that's a good way to put it. Also, I believe that dogma is not a bad thing in and of itself, as long as it does not go against that incontrovertible Scriptural proof. Of course, it sometimes takes a good deal of humility from us to honestly examine our pre-conceived notions about what is really incontrovertible or not.

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 9:32:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrFribbles Also, I believe that dogma is not a bad thing in and of itself, as long as it does not go against that incontrovertible Scriptural proof. Of course, it sometimes takes a good deal of humility from us to honestly examine our pre-conceived notions about what is really incontrovertible or not. If scripture had rules to cover every conceivable detail of how to be a Christian under every possible circumstance how big would the Bible have to be? How many good Christians read their way through Leviticus and Deuteronomy (granted that is how Hebrew worship is to be conducted and Jewish laws, but Christianity has its roots in those traditions.) How many would read the far larger collection of tomes required for detailed rules for Christian life? I have seen people leave churches over such burning and essential theological issues as what color the new carpet in the sanctuary should be, or some minor change in the order of worship. There are unreached people in the world in danger of eternal perdition, and all too often the Church is spending more energy arguing what color uniform the rescue team should be wearing. Get the essentials wrong and you get a cult, like the Mormons or the JWs, there are lines to be drawn, to be sure. But it is only pride that separates Christian brothers when it comes to the non-essentials. During the Protestant Reformation Luther and Zwingli met to see if a treaty of mutual defense and protection could be made. They agreed upon all the details except one. The nature and degree of the presence of Jesus during the communion. They both agreed that Jesus had a presence there, and that transubstantiation wasn't it, but because of such minor doctrinal disputes they not only could not find a way of settling a mutual defense pact, there were occasional wars between them as well! Tim

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 11:44:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark If scripture had rules to cover every conceivable detail of how to be a Christian under every possible circumstance how big would the Bible have to be? What if I could prove to you that Scripture does “cover every conceivable detail of how to be a Christian under every possible circumstance”? 2 Tim 3:16-17 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. How much Scripture? All. That the man of God may be “(complete),thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (NKJ)

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 12:32:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark If scripture had rules to cover every conceivable detail of how to be a Christian under every possible circumstance how big would the Bible have to be? What if I could prove to you that Scripture does “cover every conceivable detail of how to be a Christian under every possible circumstance”? 2 Tim 3:16-17 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. How much Scripture? All. That the man of God may be “(complete),thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (NKJ) Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. Scripture has what we need to know to understand and accept God's offer of salvation, and between the Holy Spirit and the Word we begin to see where some of our actions are not in keeping with God's will, and we begin to change. In that manner we become complete, lacking in nothing, for every good work. But that does not mean that there are complete, explicit answers to every possible situation and question. There are definitely some things that are explicitly stated behaviors that are not to be found in Christians, but the list is hardly exhaustive. But there is also freedom and liberty in the Christian life. Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17) If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)--in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence. (Colossians 2:20-23) Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself; for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. (Romans 14:1-10) Tim

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 1:50:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you.

BerianAardvark -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/4/2008 2:54:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you. Then simply direct me to the set of specific and complete instructions to one of them and thus demonstrate that they are there. I do not mean to give the impression that I think that the scriptures are incomplete or inadequate, the reason such exhaustive listings are not there is because they are not needed. Lists of rules lead more to a search for loopholes than compliance. When we raise kids we provide them with rules and guidelines at the start, but as their understanding grows they are able to translate those basic rules and guidelines into principles that allow them to make proper decisions. An understanding of the principles of moral living (God's model of morality, not man's) leads to compliance, not through fear of punishment, but because they understand the reasons for and importance of moral living. God is the same way, He provides some very specific rules about the way we are to live our lives. As we mature in our Christian walk He expects us to develop our understanding of these rules into the precepts that allow us to make decisions involving how we act in every situation. The rules for moral living that He has set up are very clear. But the things that divide Christians have not been (until very recently) MORAL issues, but rather differences in matters of preference and manner of worship and minor theological matters. There is room there for family disagreements in those areas because they are matters of preference. (high liturgy, or low type of praise and worship music, sanctuary or auditorium, and the like) Or degree (like Zwingli and Luther's efforts at a mutual defense treaty coming apart over the degree and nature of the presence of Jesus at the communion), Or minor theological matters like how often to take communion, or the exact composition of the components: loaf bread, because Jesus broke the bread, or wafer/cracker, leavened or unleavened, wine or grape juice. Such things are not salvation issues, nor are those who decide in one way holier or honoring God more than those who decide in another. Tim

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 4:03:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you. Then simply direct me to the set of specific and complete instructions to one of them and thus demonstrate that they are there. Ok.... Matt 26:17-29 17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover. 20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 22 And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I? 23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. 24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. 25 Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said. 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. 1 Cor 11:23-26 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. I don’t want to get off-topic, but everything we need to know about breaking bread and taking the cup is contained in the above Scripture. We know that it was unleavened bread and the “fruit of the vine”, we also know the disciples broke bread at least once per week (Acts 20:7).

benelchi -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 4:14:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you. Then simply direct me to the set of specific and complete instructions to one of them and thus demonstrate that they are there. Ok.... Matt 26:17-29 17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover. 20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 22 And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I? 23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. 24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. 25 Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said. 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. 1 Cor 11:23-26 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. I don’t want to get off-topic, but everything we need to know about breaking bread and taking the cup is contained in the above Scripture. We know that it was unleavened bread and the “fruit of the vine”, we also know the disciples broke bread at least once per week (Acts 20:7). So then, are you saying that communion should only be taken during the Passover seder, as part of a seder celebration?

notmycity -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 4:36:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you. Then simply direct me to the set of specific and complete instructions to one of them and thus demonstrate that they are there. Ok.... Matt 26:17-29 17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover. 20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 22 And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I? 23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. 24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. 25 Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said. 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. 1 Cor 11:23-26 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. I don’t want to get off-topic, but everything we need to know about breaking bread and taking the cup is contained in the above Scripture. We know that it was unleavened bread and the “fruit of the vine”, we also know the disciples broke bread at least once per week (Acts 20:7). So then, are you saying that communion should only be taken during the Passover seder, as part of a seder celebration? Please re-read my post...

MrFribbles -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 5:11:40 PM)
quote: we also know the disciples broke bread at least once per week (Acts 20:7). That doesn't mean we have to. Acts is a book of history, not a book of commandments.

earthless -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 5:21:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: notmycity quote: ORIGINAL: BerianAardvark Yes, it does equip us thoroughly for every good work, but it does NOT give detailed instructions for every situation where a decision must be made. It does give broad general precepts, some of which have room for differences and preferences. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions for what type of songs are acceptable for worship? No. Does it explicitly give detailed instructions as to how often and in what manner we are to take communion? No. Does it explicitly and without possibility for discussion or difference of opinion explain the rapture, when/if it will occur(pretribulation, mid-tribulation, or post tribulation), and in what manner? No. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. I know of Scriptures that give specific instruction on all of the above. Thank you. Not if it is kosher to play Grand Theft Auto IV....

benelchi -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 5:25:53 PM)
quote: We know that it was unleavened bread and the “fruit of the vine”, we also know the disciples broke bread at least once per week (Acts 20:7). So then, are you saying that communion should only be taken during the Passover seder, as part of a seder celebration? We also know that they used unleavened bread only during the passover and the following week i.e. the feast of unleavened bread. So either they used leavened bread for communion each week when the broke bread, or they only had communion once a year. That is if we are to assume that these scriptures tell us every little detail about communion.

earthless -> RE: Trinity, rapture and other unscriptural terminology. (7/7/2008 5:29:35 PM)
Is someone really arguing that there are no secondary issues? Styles of worship How often to take communion How often to congregate etc etc etc All things we can discuss and disagree on, but do not have to divide over.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI