SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Abrahams Boosm

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 )
PosterThread
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4499


 Re:

Hello Stever...

Quote:
If you feel the way that you do on this issue, then it is best for you to be silent.

:-?

Did you even happen to [i]read[/i] what I wrote? It is my personal opinion that everyone is completely entitled to state and discuss their beliefs concerning any subject. But if a matter is not absolutely clear from the Scriptures, then a person should refrain from stating their belief as a [u]fact[/u]. Rather, they should let people know that what they believe is their own personal conclusion. I truly feel that none of us know with absolute certainty the fullness of this issue. Therefore, we shouldn't go about pretending like we do.
Quote:
I feel that Scripture supports the position that I have taken. This is not alegory, as I have stated previously. Alegories never mention specific names of people or specific locations. These Words are from Chist himself.

Again, I [u]never[/u] stated that "Abraham's bosom" is an allegory. Perhaps you are simply misunderstanding what I wrote, or perhaps you simply desire to raise some issue that you would like to bring up? Unfortunately, I just don't feel that there is enough evidence in the Scriptures in order to base some sort of concrete or absolute judgment on this issue.

I believe that it is possible that "Abraham's bosom" was simply [i]that[/i] -- Lazarus was standing next to Abraham. Remember, the rich man called out to Abraham. Why would Abraham have his own personal paradise? What about Noah? What about Enoch or Abel? They preceded Abraham in this life. Of course, I don't believe that there is anything in the Word (including anything that you have presented) that would make me become totally convinced that there was a [u]location[/u] in the afterlife called "Abraham's bosom." Please don't misinterpret me (again), but I do believe that Lazarus was standing in paradise next to Abraham. But to state that there was a section of eternity physically called "Abraham's bosom" seems strangely speculative. Indeed, it is possible that your theory is correct. But since there is so little written on this matter in the Word of God, your theory is still only a speculation.

Stever, I feel that it is important for you to remember that there are alot of individuals that might not agree with all of your positions. Would you enjoy it if other believers simply treated you as if your beliefs count for nothing because they feel that they can "hear God" or "understand the Word" better than you? Of course not! But that is what often happens. A believer sometimes feels so secure in his belief that he feels that all others that disagree are lacking the same sort of spiritual knowledge on the subject. Like I keep stating, there are some doctrines that are indisputable. Those are the issues that we should contend for. But something like this simply doesn't fall into that category.

It is sad when the conclusions of some believers are quickly disregarded by others who feel bold enough to state their own conclusions as fact. In my opinion, this sort of behavior is what leads to the greatest divisions in the Body of Christ. Entire denominations are sometimes formed and churches are sometimes split over petty opinions. We shouldn't view those with whom we disagree with some sort of suspicion or haught. Rather, we should embrace those that know Christ and agree on the fundamental doctrines of the faith. Thankfully, our particular theory about "[i]Abraham's bosom[/i]" is not one of those "funadmental doctrines."

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2006/6/7 3:30Profile









 Re:

Stever responds to ccchhhrrriiisss;

The difference between us is probably 40 years in age. The gulf between us is as far as the east is from the west. I grew up at a time when Believers that had the Holy Bible in their hands knew that it was the very "Spirit Breathed" Word of God, passed down from the Disciples to the early Church, and finally in the form of the Protestant Bible, the King James Version. The teaching that took place then was dynamic and on fire, as the word of God that we studied was Spirit-Breathed.

Today, we have an entirely new generation. A generation raised on the belief that God, who created everything out of nothing, by the word, did not have the power to PRESERVE his Scriptures and they were lost and so now, in these last days has required the intellect and wisdom of sinful man, that has been able to RESTORE the scriptures. The Word of God that they read--the NIV, NASB, and all of the newer versions is changed or lacking from the Protestant Bible that was passed down to us and PRESERVED for us by the Soverign power of God.

We have gone head to head on Sermonindex since the first time I posted. That is fine with me, as I think everything that takes place in this regard glorifies God.

Like I have said to you on this thread (Abrahams Bosom), what I have presented here amounts to the teaching that was in the Churches 30-40 years ago. The Scripure that I have quoted SUPPORTS THE POSITION that I have taken.

As usual, you are the one that has not bothered to read this thread. If you would go back to the beginning, you would see that this has been a very interesting subject, with lots of input by Logic, IRONMAN, Christinyou and others. You are the only one that has come here with a "sky is falling", wringing your hands, hysterical attitude.

I would suggest that you examine yourself in this regards as to what you are trying to accomplish by your input on this thread.

If you have scripture to post that would add more light on this subject (Abraham's Bosom) --that would be very helpful. If you have scripture to quote that would modify our understanding of this issue (Abraham's bosom), that would be helpful as well.

If you have nothing to add to this thread, other than what you have posted to date, then I stand by my prior post. Silence.

God bless,

Stever :-D

 2006/6/7 11:58









 Re:

ccchhhrrriiisss posted:

"It is sad when the conclusions of some believers are quickly disregarded by others who feel bold enough to state their own conclusions as fact. In my opinion, this sort of behavior is what leads to the greatest divisions in the Body of Christ"

Stever responds:

There will be nothing BUT DIVISION in the body of Christ until he comes to rule and reign during the millennium.

There will be, and there is a movement, starting with Roman Catholocism, that is working hand in hand with the World Council of Churches to unite all religions into one. The way this is brought about is that everyone of those Churches will compromise on the Truth presented in God's word, so that they can all get together and "GET ALONG" (As Rodney King said--"Why can't we all just get along!").

When they accomplish this feat, and they will, the Church that is created, the Great Whore, will be ready to march into the Tribulation, led by the False Prophet.

God bless,

Stever :-D

P.S. I posted this reponse to you once before about "division within the body of Christ", but you never answered it. That shows me that you probably never even read the response. If you disagree with what I have posted, please respond to this issue of "division within the body Christ".

 2006/6/7 12:20
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4499


 Re:

Hello Stever...

I don't hold any animosity for you, brother. I simply believe that it is not wise to believe that your opinions are beyond reproach, and to state them accordingly. It would be much better, in my opinion, if you were to state your beliefs as such -- rather than as indisputable fact. Otherwise, you seem to have a tendency to believe that every idea contrary to your own is wrong, and the people who believe contrary to you are deceived. Hopefully, I am wrong in this perception of the intentions of your posts.

Quote:
The difference between us is probably 40 years in age.

12 Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.
13 Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.
[i]I Timothy 4:12-13[/i]

Quote:
The gulf between us is as far as the east is from the west. I grew up at a time when Believers that had the Holy Bible in their hands knew that it was the very "Spirit Breathed" Word of God, passed down from the Disciples to the early Church, and finally in the form of the Protestant Bible, the King James Version. The teaching that took place then was dynamic and on fire, as the word of God that we studied was Spirit-Breathed.

Today, we have an entirely new generation. A generation raised on the belief that God, who created everything out of nothing, by the word, did not have the power to PRESERVE his Scriptures and they were lost and so now, in these last days has required the intellect and wisdom of sinful man, that has been able to RESTORE the scriptures. The Word of God that they read--the NIV, NASB, and all of the newer versions is changed or lacking from the Protestant Bible that was passed down to us and PRESERVED for us by the Soverign power of God.

We have gone head to head on Sermonindex since the first time I posted. That is fine with me, as I think everything that takes place in this regard glorifies God.

I suppose that this is our major source of contention. I do not take issue with your own personal beliefs concerning your [i]KJV-only[/i] position. You are fully entitled to such an opinion. But I don't believe that it is wise to proclaim an opinion as an indisputible fact. In some of your posts, you have openly slandered all modern versions of the Bible -- including some that many of us hold with respect. It would be good to remember that SermonIndex is "[i]KJV-perferred[/i], but [u]not[/u] [i]KJV-only[/i]. As I have stated many times, I [u]prefer[/u] the KJV. But I also accept the NIV as a legitimate translation from the other source texts. It is interesting that the translators of the KJV did not hold your own beliefs of translation infallibility. My issue is that you state your opinions and conclusions as completely indisputable [u]fact[/u].
Quote:
Like I have said to you on this thread (Abrahams Bosom), what I have presented here amounts to the teaching that was in the Churches 30-40 years ago. The Scripure that I have quoted SUPPORTS THE POSITION that I have taken.

You may be correct in your position. I simply do not know. But again, is it wise for anyone to state a doctrinal opinion as an indisputable fact? I believe that it is good to distinguish between our opinions and conclusions from what is clearly established in the Word.
Quote:
As usual, you are the one that has not bothered to read this thread. If you would go back to the beginning, you would see that this has been a very interesting subject, with lots of input by Logic, IRONMAN, Christinyou and others. You are the only one that has come here with a "sky is falling", wringing your hands, hysterical attitude.

First of all, you are incorrect in stating that I did not bother read the thread. I did read it with great interest. I have also interjected my opinion about the subject, just as you, Logic, IRONMAN, Christinyou, and the others have. However, I simply felt a need to interject that this is merely our own personal opinions on a subject that does not seem abundantly clear from the Scriptures. And what is your response to me? I need to be [u]silent[/u]. Again, I am simply trying to interject that we should be careful to distinguish (particularly for less mature believers) the difference between fact and opinion.
Quote:
I would suggest that you examine yourself in this regards as to what you are trying to accomplish by your input on this thread.

I do examine myself daily. If you notice, I have been on Sermonindex for a long time, yet my post counts are not as large as some who have been here for only a fraction of that time. Sometimes, I begin to write a post, but then save it and pray about whether or not I should post it. Many times, I decide not to post it. I feel that this is a much better way to post. I have my own deeply embedded and well-studied beliefs (many of which totally agree with your positions on various subjects). But I value the opinions of others as well. I do not want to come across as having doctrinal or intellectual supremacy or beliefs that are beyond reproof.
Quote:
If you have scripture to post that would add more light on this subject (Abraham's Bosom) --that would be very helpful. If you have scripture to quote that would modify our understanding of this issue (Abraham's bosom), that would be helpful as well.

If you have nothing to add to this thread, other than what you have posted to date, then I stand by my prior post. Silence.

I have stated my opinion on this subject. But this is exactly my point. We don't have any Scriptures that point to an indisputable conclusion in this matter other than the short passage found in Luke 16. And those verses do not necessarily agree with your opinion on this matter.

.....
Quote:

There will be nothing BUT DIVISION in the body of Christ until he comes to rule and reign during the millennium.

Wow -- do you have any Scripture to hold such a position? I believe that we will always have differences in opinion about doctrine -- but the true Body of Christ can all agree on the major tenets of the faith (such as are written in Hebrews 6:1-2).
Quote:
There will be, and there is a movement, starting with Roman Catholocism, that is working hand in hand with the World Council of Churches to unite all religions into one. The way this is brought about is that everyone of those Churches will compromise on the Truth presented in God's word, so that they can all get together and "GET ALONG" (As Rodney King said--"Why can't we all just get along!").

When they accomplish this feat, and they will, the Church that is created, the Great Whore, will be ready to march into the Tribulation, led by the False Prophet.

We shouldn't simply reject any attempt to come together as an effort by the devil. I am not a Catholic (and I consider the religion to be just as profanely cultish as the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses). But I fellowship with believers from a wide-range of doctrinal persuasions. I would consider myself to be a classic Pentecostal (raised in the Assemblies of God and Calvary Chapels), but I also break bread with Presbyterians, Methodists, Southern Baptists, Independent Baptists, non-denominationals, etc... While we may not agree on the details -- we can all agree on the major doctrines of the Word.
Quote:
P.S. I posted this reponse to you once before about "division within the body of Christ", but you never answered it. That shows me that you probably never even read the response. If you disagree with what I have posted, please respond to this issue of "division within the body Christ".

Often, Stever, I have answered your questions in my previous posts. However, you never seem to mention those posts. Perhaps my posts were simply overlooked. But your answer is typically compelling. You often state that I ignore or even do not read your posts, or that I have not provided any sort of answer to your statements. Ironically, such answers have caused me (for the most part) to ignore answering your posts. However, sometimes I feel compelled to post a rebuttal just so that it is clear that there are also thoughts, beliefs and opinions that are contrary to your own.

Brother Stever, I deeply value your opinions. I simply believe that we all might want to consider more clearly distinguishing what is our opinions and conclusions from what is completely and indisputably established by the Word of God.

We are all on various stages of maturity in our spiritual pilgrimage. I thank God that I am not at the place that I was just four or five years ago. I pray that you understand that I am a true brother in the faith even if I do not necessarily agree with all of your own opinions or conclusions. I pray that there will not be any animosity between us at all.

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2006/6/7 13:42Profile









 Re:

Ccchhhrrriiisss:

We will just have to agree to disagree. The Scripture that I have quoted backs up my position on what I have posted. Whether you agree or disagree with my style or lack of style is of no interest to me. God’s Word and the doctrine found in it, and the teaching that it provides to those willing to study it is what motivates me to post here. I am responsible to God, and will answer to Him and Him alone on this matter.

We have gone over the issues before on various posts. It really is never going to change.

You have opinions, and have expressed them here. However, you never support your opinions with specific examples from my posts, only conclusions.

Your posts on this thread have provided no value in regards to the subject matter—Abrahams Bosom.


God bless,

Stever :-D

 2006/6/7 22:15









 Re: Division or Union?

Stever posts:
There will be nothing BUT DIVISION in the body of Christ until he comes to rule and reign during the millennium.
-----------------------------------------

Ccchhhrrriiisss responds:

Wow -- do you have any Scripture to hold such a position? I believe that we will always have differences in opinion about doctrine -- but the true Body of Christ can all agree on the major tenets of the faith (such as are written in Hebrews 6:1-2).

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Stever responds to ccchhhrrriiisss:

Division is not always bad! These are the very Words of Jesus Christ:

Matthew 10:
"34. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. 37. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. 39. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."

This is what A W Tozer had to say about DIVISION:

Division Is Not Always Bad
A W Tozer
When to unite and when to divide, that is the question, and a right answer requires the wisdom of a Solomon.
Some settle the problem by rule of thumb: All union is good and all division bad. It's that easy. But obviously this effortless way of dealing with the matter ignores the lessons of history and overlooks some of the deep spiritual laws by which men live.

If good men were all for union and bad men for division, or vice versa, that would simplify things for us. Or if it could be shown that God always unites and the devil always divides it would be easy to find our way around in this confused and confusing world. But that is not how things are.

To divide what should be divided and unite what should be united is the part of wisdom. Unions of dissimilar elements is never good even where it is possible, nor is the arbitrary division of elements that are alike; and this is as certainly true of things moral and religious as of things political or scientific.

The first divider was God who at the creation divided the light from the darkness. This division set the direction for all God's dealings in nature and in grace. Light and darkness are incompatible; to try to have both in the same place at once is to try the impossible and end by havng neither the one nor the other, but dimness rather, and obscurity.
In the world of men there are at present scarcely any sharp outlines. The race is fallen. Sin has brought confusion. The wheat grows with the tares, the sheep and the goats coexist, the farms of the just and the unjust lie side by side in the landscape, the mission is next door to the saloon.

But things will not always be so. The hour is coming when the sheep with be divided from the goats and the tares separated from the wheat. God will again divide the light from the darkness and all things will run to their kind. Tares will go into the fire with tares and wheat into the garner with wheat. The dimness will lift like a fog and all outlines will appear. Hell will be seen to be hell all the way through, and heaven revealed as the one home of all who bear the nature of the one God.

For that time we with patience wait. In the meanwhile for each of us, and for the church wherever she appears in human society, the constantly recurring question must be: What shall we unite with and from what shall we separate? The question of coexistence does not enter here, but the question of union and fellowship does. THE WHEAT GROWS IN THE SAME FIELD WITH THE TARES, BUT SHALL THE TWO CROSS-POLINATE? The sheep graze near the goats, but shall they seek to interbreed? The unjust and the just enjoy the same rain and sunshine, but shall they forget their deep moral differences and intermarry?

To these questions the popular answer is yes. Union for union's sake, and men shall be brothers be for a' that. Unity is so devoutly to be desired that no price is too high to pay for it and nothing is important enough to keep us apart. Truth is slain to provide a feast to celebrate the marriage of heaven and hell, and all to support a concept of unity which has no basis in the Word of God.

The Spirit-illuminated church will have none of this. In a fallen world like ours unity is no treasure to be purchased at the price of [u][b][color=FF0000]compromise[/color][/b][/u]. Loyalty to God, faithfulness and truth and the preservation of a good conscience are jewels more precious than gold of Ophir or diamonds from the mine. For these jewels men have suffered the loss of property, imprisonment and even death; for them, even in recent times, behind the various curtains, followers of Christ have paid the last full measure of devotion and quietly died, unknown to and unsung by the great world, but known to God and dear to His Father heart.

In the day that shall declare the secrets of all souls these shall come forth to receive the deeds done in the body. Surely such as these are wiser philosophers than the religious camp followers of meaningless unity who have not the courage to stand against the vogues and who bleat for brotherhood only because it happens to be for the time popular.
"Divide and conquer" is the cynical slogan of Machiavellian political leaders, but Satan knows how to unite and conquer. To bring a nation to its knees the aspiring dictator must unite it. By repeated appeals to national pride or to the need to avenge some past or present wrong the demagogue succeeds in uniting the populace behind him. It is easy after that to take control of the military and to beat the legislature into submission. Then follows almost perfect unity indeed, but it is the unity of the stockyards and the concentration camp. We have seen this happen several times in this century, and the world will see it at least once more when the nations of the earth are united under Antichrist.

When confused sheep start over a cliff the individual sheep can save himself only be separating from the flock. Perfect unity at such a time can only mean total destruction for all. The wise sheep to save his own hide disaffiliates.

Power lies in the union of things similar and the division of things dissimilar. Maybe what we need in religious circles today is not more union but some wise and courageous division. Everyone desires peace but it could be that revival will follow the sword.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Stever concludes:

[u][b][color=FF0000]There will always be division between Conservative and Liberal Christians. There will always be division between Conservative Christianity and Liberal Christianity ![/color][/b][/u]

God bless,

Stever :-D

 2006/6/7 22:47
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re:

Goodness ...

Is this really necessary?


_________________
Mike Balog

 2006/6/7 23:44Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy