Heresy or error?
- Thread starter Episkopos
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It took me a year and a half...basically the whole COVID time. I burned out twice writing it...one time I took a month off...it was just so hard to write. I'm not a writer per se...and the subject is SOO dense in content. The editing was a nightmare...a few chapters had to be re-written. I didn't realize just how big the book would be.
I'm currently gearing up for a follow up book...IF I can do it...much smaller. The title is "Spiritual Christianity" (a return to apostolic tradition)
There are a few publishing errors (they wrote in the Hebrew the wrong way, and I didn't notice that) as well as a few errors on my part. I fixed so many, but it seems there's always more. ;)
Certainly He was.
And people use His good act to justify their bad acts. Jesus was accurate, wasn't using a bullwhip, and spoke towards their actions, not characterizing the people personally. He was defending His Father's house, not verbally attacking others.
What I see so much of is when someone is challenged over something they write, and instead of responding to the content, they launch against the person, and then call it "truth in love", making a mockery of the Scriptures, and God's design for His church. There are many many examples of this on this forum.
I think it is THEN people respond by putting up various deflection mechanisms.
I'd say both things are true. We have to be very humble, which means being very honest with ourselves.
Much love!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
No. This is the crux of the matter. People like you are falsely equating words with actions, like Jesus turning over tables and whipping people.
The "act" by the victim that was bad wass not developing good character, not embracing the wisdom of 'sticks and stones', of being overly sensitive. In our case, these are just electrons flowing through the internet.
The "act" by the oppressor that was bad was speaking the truth - without grace - to the point of hurting the relationship. (They may speak the truth in love - of the truth rather than love of the person).
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I don't know there are any quite like me!
;)
Just the same, there is a lot in the Bible about our words.
Much love!
Actually, there are quite a few people in this world like you.... equating words with actions, and being offended by not getting people to agree with you.
Why did you post this? You are projecting this "offense", pure and simple, writing that I have this emotional affect as you imagine.
I don't equate actions and words, of course each are different. But enough about me, that's the point right now.
You've just written two untruths about me and what of it? I don't think you care one bit about that. I'm not bothered, I know what's true in this, and I'm not concerned about you or any readers, only about God. I live before Him.
Perhaps it's that you become offended when people speak in that manner to you, and imagine, for lack of a better idea, that others are the same. How offended would you be if I told you that you are Toto the dog? Obviously, I should think, you'd be more concerned over my mental state. That's how it is to me.
You write things about me that are obviously - to me - not true. It's very poor form, it's not what God defines as Love, or as spiritual fruit, and most importantly, in terms of a discussion, it diverts discussion into vanity. Now we shall speak out our opinions of each other, Now we shall enter into our personal defenses, Now we shall cease to speak of important yet troubling things.
I don't like to write this way, so directly on such a subject, and sometimes I find this kind of clarity is necessary. I hope you are able to receive it, and I will be perfectly happy to continue without these sorts of things.
Much love!
Last edited:
To show you how easy it is to offend you with words. Your response proves my point.
In other words, because you are attempting to provoke a poor response from me. Something to think about.
Much love!
Trying to show you how you are easily offended. A Point I have made before with you but one which you deny or are blind too. The Opportunity to expose this was there so I did.
You'll thank me later.
Rom_4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
Rom_4:23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
Rom_4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
Rom_5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Jas_2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
Imputed (ἐλογίσθη)
Lit., as Rev., reckoned.
Don't waffle, quote scriptures.
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
Good observation in my opinion. We must be careful to avoid the trap that caused many theologians to stumble. As you rightly point out, God acknowledged something true about Abraham himself. He was not, as some theologians say, seeing Abraham while wearing Jesus glasses. God gave Abraham credit where credit was deserved.
Hi LolLol
Why don't you ask ol' epi....
Rom_3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom_5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom_8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Rom_10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Rom_10:6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)
1Co_1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
Gal_2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Php_1:11 Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.
Php_3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
2Pe_1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
See ma, no hands....
2 Corinthians 5:21, "He [God] made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." Here we have a double imputation. God imputed our sins to Christ who knew no sin. And God imputed his righteousness to us who had no righteousness of our own.
Best definition! Guy I never heard of named Larry Trammell. Faith is the perception and the pursuit of the unseen realm.
You were gone for a day or so and I had to look real hard for anyone to argue with. Lol.
…the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe. He let the sins previously committed go unpunished; for the demonstration, that is, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
Heb 11:1 NOW FAITH is the assurance (the confirmation, the title deed) of the things [we] hope for, being the proof of things [we] do not see and the conviction of their reality [faith perceiving as real fact what is not revealed to the senses].
AMP
Faith (πίστις)
Without the article, indicating that it is treated in its abstract conception, and not merely as Christian faith. It is important that the preliminary definition should be clearly understood, since the following examples illustrate it. The key is furnished by Heb_11:27, as seeing him who is invisible. Faith apprehends as a real fact what is not revealed to the senses. It rests on that fact, acts upon it, and is upheld by it in the face of all that seems to contradict it. Faith is a real seeing. See Introduction, p. 363.
Substance (ὑπόστασις)
See on Heb_1:3 and see on Heb_3:14. On the whole, the Rev. assurance gives the true meaning. The definition has a scholastic and philosophic quality, as might be expected from a pupil of the Alexandrian schools. The meaning substance, real being, given by A.V., Vulg., and many earlier interpreters, suggests the true sense, but is philosophically inaccurate. Substance, as used by these translators, is substantial nature; the real nature of a thing which underlies and supports its outward form or properties. In this sense it is very appropriate in Heb_1:3, in describing the nature of the Son as the image or impress of God's essential being: but in this sense it is improperly applied to faith, which is an act of the moral intelligence directed at an object; or a condition which sustains a certain relation to the object. It cannot be said that faith is substantial being. It apprehends reality: it is that to which the unseen objects of hope become real and substantial. Assurance gives the true idea. It is the firm grasp of faith on unseen fact.
Evidence (ἔλεγχος)
N.T.o. Quite often in lxx for יָכַֽח, to reprove, rebuke, punish, blame. See Pro_1:23; Wisd. 2:14; Sir. 21:12. See especially on the kindred verb ἐλέγχειν, Joh_3:20. Rend. conviction. Observe that ὑπόστασις and ἔλεγχος are not two distinct and independent conceptions, in which case καὶ would have been added; but they stand in apposition. Ἔλεγχος is really included in ὑπόστασις, but adds to the simple idea of assurance a suggestion of influences operating to produce conviction which carry the force of demonstration. The word often signifies a process of proof or demonstration. So von Soden: “a being convinced. Therefore not a rash, feebly-grounded hypothesis, a dream of hope, the child of a wish.”
Of things (πραγμάτων)
Πρᾶγμα is, strictly, a thing done; an accomplished fact. It introduces a wider conception than ἐλπιζομένων things hoped for; embracing not only future realities, but all that does not fall under the cognizance of the senses, whether past, present, or future.
Vincent
Similar threads
