DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 334--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: Ezra Date: December 9, 2014, 11:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=33.msg325#msg325
date=1418127069]
I wonder why Luke consulted eyewitnesses.[/quote]
Only God knows why Luke cosusulted eye-witnesses.
However, the Gospel of Luke is Scripture, and ALL SCRIPTURE is
God-breathed (theopneustos) -- the breath of God, the product of
the activity of the Holy Spirit. Ultimately every word written
by every prophet and apostle is a word of God. That is
"plenary verbal inspiration" and if we cannot believe it, we can
never be sure which is man's word and which is God's Word.
Please note these words carefully (2 Pet 1:21):
"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but
holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".
That word "moved" is the Greek word pheromenoi, which means to
be carried or borne or driven. The writers of inspired
Scripture were controlled completely by the Holy Spirit in every
word that they wrote. For further understanding of this please
consult The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible by B. B.
Warfield.
#Post#: 336--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: Kerry Date: December 9, 2014, 12:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=33.msg334#msg334 date=1418145919]
Only God knows why Luke cosusulted eye-witnesses. [/quote]I
would say he learned from them. That shouldn't be a mystery.
[quote]However, the Gospel of Luke is Scripture,[/quote]How do
you know it is? Because the Catholic Church said it is?
[quote] and ALL SCRIPTURE is God-breathed (theopneustos) -- the
breath of God, the product of the activity of the Holy Spirit.
Ultimately every word written by every prophet and apostle is a
word of God. That is "plenary verbal inspiration" and if we
cannot believe it, we can never be sure which is man's word and
which is God's Word. Please note these words carefully (2 Pet
1:21):
"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but
holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".
That word "moved" is the Greek word pheromenoi, which means to
be carried or borne or driven. [/quote]
Moved means moved. It does not mean that God dictated things
word by word. The Jews say that Moses wrote the Torah that way
but that the other prophets did not. They base that on:
Numbers 12:6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a
prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in
a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not
in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he
behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my
servant Moses?
You seem to be asserting that all the prophets were like Moses,
speaking with God face to face, mouth to mouth. Paul showed
modesty when he admitted that his vision was "dark."
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but
then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know
even as also I am known.
[quote]The writers of inspired Scripture were controlled
completely by the Holy Spirit in every word that they wrote.
For further understanding of this please consult The Inspiration
and Authority of the Bible by B. B. Warfield.[/quote]This is an
empty assertion. If it were true, we would have God Himself
making mistakes by inspiring four different things written above
Jesus on the cross. Warfield is not someone I would count as an
authority. Shall we discuss the contradictions in the book of
Acts? The speech of Stephen by itself contains several
mistakes. Like how many souls went down into Egypt? Seventy
five as Acts says, or seventy as the Torah says? Did Abraham
wait until his father died to leave as Acts states, or did he
leave while his father was alive as the Torah says? Who bought
the sepulchre -- Abraham as Acts says, or Jacob as the Old
Testament says? Let me start a thread about Stephen's
problematical speech.
A further objection is that while the Old Testament prophets
often tell us that they were inspired by saying so, few books
in the New Testament make that claim. It was centuries after
they had written that the Catholic Church began to say they were
inspired Scriptures on a par with the Torah and the Prophets.
I can also tell you that Luke said he talked to eyewitnesses to
let his readers know he was not relying on rumors but had gone
to people who had been there and seen these things.
#Post#: 341--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: Ezra Date: December 9, 2014, 3:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=33.msg336#msg336
date=1418148089]
Danger Mouse,
I am getting the impression that your sole objective is to
challenge everything that I am posting. If that satisfies your
ego, so be it. But I am posting for the edification of all,
therefore I am going to strongly refute what you say here. But I
will not get into endless disputes with someone whose sole
purpose is to dispute everything, whether true or false.
Therefore I will not respond to any further responses from you.
We're not playing "debating games" here.
[QUOTE] How do you know it is? Because the Catholic Church said
it is? [/QUOTE]
How do you know that this was not established before the
Catholic Church was established? Do you know anything about the
Muratori Canon? If you did, you would not have challenged this.
And the very fact that it is an intergral part of the New
Testament is sufficient proof (unless you do not believe that
the NT is the Word of God).
[QUOTE] Moved means moved. It does not mean that God dictated
things word by word.[/QUOTE]
That is how a "natural man" would respond, not how a "spiritual
man" would respond to Scripture. So now you should ask yourself
seriously if you are still a natural man, or are you really a
spiritual man. The natural man does not receive the things of
the Spirit, because they are foolishness to him (1 Cor 2:14).
[QUOTE] You seem to be asserting that all the prophets were like
Moses, speaking with God face to face, mouth to mouth. Paul
showed modesty when he admitted that his vision was
"dark."[/QUOTE]
I have not suggested that all the prophets spoke "face to face"
with God. Some did and some did not. I have given you
Scripture to establish that every word they wrote was a word
from God and a word of God. We are not told about the process.
We are told about the product.
[QUOTE] 1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass,
darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then
shall I know even as also I am known.[/QUOTE]
Don't misapply Scripture. This is an entirely different issue.
And you can ignore Warfield if you want, but if you are willing
to learn from others, you would be willing to learn from
Warfield, since he has much to say which is helpful.
[QUOTE] A further objection is that while the Old Testament
prophets often tell us that they were inspired by saying so,
few books in the New Testament make that claim.[/QUOTE]
That is hardly an objection. We are not told in Genesis that
Moses wrote that book. However, there is absolutely no one who
disputes it, and Christ Himself quoted from "Moses" when He
quotes from the Torah. You are free to disregard the whole
Bible as Scripture (as do theological liberals) but that does
not change what Scripture is, and what has been accepted as
Scripture for over 3,500 years.
[QUOTE] It was centuries after they had written that the
Catholic Church began to say they were inspired Scriptures on a
par with the Torah and the Prophets. [/QUOTE]
You have failed to do your research diligently. Please do so
and then respond.
[quote] I can also tell you that Luke said he talked to
eyewitnesses to let his readers know he was not relying on
rumors but had gone to people who had been there and seen these
things. [/quote]
Luke was not relying on either eyewitnesses or rumors. When you
read the phrase "from the very first" in Luke 1:3 in the KJV,
that is the Greek word anothen which literally means "from
above". Check Strong's Concordance. And what else does "from
above" mean other than "from Heaven"? So once again, do your
proper research and then respond.
#Post#: 349--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 10, 2014, 1:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=33.msg341#msg341 date=1418161494]
How do you know that this was not established before the
Catholic Church was established? Do you know anything about the
Muratori Canon? If you did, you would not have challenged this.
And the very fact that it is an intergral part of the New
Testament is sufficient proof (unless you do not believe that
the NT is the Word of God).
That is how a "natural man" would respond, not how a "spiritual
man" would respond to Scripture. So now you should ask yourself
seriously if you are still a natural man, or are you really a
spiritual man. The natural man does not receive the things of
the Spirit, because they are foolishness to him (1 Cor 2:14).
I have not suggested that all the prophets spoke "face to face"
with God. Some did and some did not. I have given you
Scripture to establish that every word they wrote was a word
from God and a word of God. We are not told about the process.
We are told about the product.
Don't misapply Scripture. This is an entirely different issue.
And you can ignore Warfield if you want, but if you are willing
to learn from others, you would be willing to learn from
Warfield, since he has much to say which is helpful.
That is hardly an objection. We are not told in Genesis that
Moses wrote that book. However, there is absolutely no one who
disputes it, and Christ Himself quoted from "Moses" when He
quotes from the Torah. You are free to disregard the whole
Bible as Scripture (as do theological liberals) but that does
not change what Scripture is, and what has been accepted as
Scripture for over 3,500 years.
You have failed to do your research diligently. Please do so
and then respond.
Luke was not relying on either eyewitnesses or rumors. When you
read the phrase "from the very first" in Luke 1:3 in the KJV,
that is the Greek word anothen which literally means "from
above". Check Strong's Concordance. And what else does "from
above" mean other than "from Heaven"? So once again, do your
proper research and then respond.
[/quote]
Some of us are not impressed by those who use circular arguments
(scripture is true because it says so of itself) and post as if
they alone have seen the light.
However this forum exists for such people to vie with others,
and for those who accept that they have no divine access to
'absolute truth' to listen with saddened hearts.
#Post#: 352--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 8:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ezra link=topic=33.msg341#msg341 date=1418161494]
I am getting the impression that your sole objective is to
challenge everything that I am posting. [/quote]Don't be silly.
I disagree with you, that is all. [quote]If that satisfies your
ego, so be it.[/quote]
This wild remark makes me wonder if perhaps maybe your ego has
been wounded. I care not about my own ego, so why should I care
about yours? We should be concerned about trying to find truth
than about egos.
[quote]But I am posting for the edification of all, therefore I
am going to strongly refute what you say here.[/quote]This is
the second time, I believe, I've seen you use this phrase. So
you think you're posting "for the edification of all," do you?
Now who has the ego? You are going to take the stage and
speak, and edify everyone else, and no one should stand in your
way. Is that it? What vanity!
[quote] But I will not get into endless disputes with someone
whose sole purpose is to dispute everything, whether true or
false. Therefore I will not respond to any further responses
from you. We're not playing "debating games" here.[/quote]Your
accusation is a bit crazy to me. I'm not playing debating games
here. I think you're wrong. It seems to me you're frustrated so
you're resorting to making personal remarks. And knowing too
that you lack sensible remarks to refute me, now you say you
won't be responding to me anymore.
So you want to be seen as a teacher, do you? You should first
be willing to be a pupil. I have had an open mind for years. I
have learned from many people. I have learned from ants and
lilies. I've had angels teach me a few things too. If I am
intelligent, it is because I am wiling to admit when I don't
know something and wiling to learn too. One day I was about to
kill ants and then Solomon's words came ringing in my ears, "Go
to the ants, thou sluggard." How right he was! The ants were
right and I was wrong. And I thanked God for using them and
Solomon to teach me. When I read, "Consider the lilies of the
field," I did it. If Jesus advised thinking about lilies,
that's what I should do.
I was never told to be a teacher so it doesn't matter to me if
people learn from me or not. It's not my job; and I feel
confident too that God never told you to be a teacher. If you
think He did, then I tell you you're deceived. You need to do
exactly what you hypocritically told me to do: Study and
research before presuming to speak.
[quote]Do you know anything about the Muratori Canon? If you
did, you would not have challenged this. And the very fact that
it is an intergral part of the New Testament is sufficient proof
(unless you do not believe that the NT is the Word of
God).[/quote]I've researched the topic. There are various
lists, some compiled by Bishops, some by councils. Now what
about the Muratori canon?
Do you reject the book of Hebrews since it's not on that list?
It also says there are two epistles from John. Which two do you
think are genuine and which one not? Are any of the epistles
of Peter on the list? There are also on that list books which
many today reject: The Wisdom of Solomon and the Apocalypse
of Peter. Do you accept those as inspired?
Source: earlychristianwritings.com
HTML http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/muratorian-latin.html.<br
/>
[quote]That is how a "natural man" would respond, not how a
"spiritual man" would respond to Scripture. So now you should
ask yourself seriously if you are still a natural man, or are
you really a spiritual man. The natural man does not receive
the things of the Spirit, because they are foolishness to him (1
Cor 2:14).[/quote]
If you are trying to insult me, you failed. You made me laugh.
Anyone losing an argument could say this trying to win. And if
you knew more about me, I doubt you would have said such a
frivolous thing. Not wanting to boast, but I have met and
talked to Jesus, Mary and others. I have seen some of the
things described in the Bible. Does that make me "spiritual"
enough for you? I wonder if you pray, "I thank thee God I am
not like that carnal man Danger Mouse."
[quote]I have not suggested that all the prophets spoke "face to
face" with God. Some did and some did not.[/quote]You said they
all received their messages the same way. [quote] I have
given you Scripture to establish that every word they wrote was
a word from God and a word of God. [/quote]By your
interpretation. I'm still waiting for you to tell me which of
the four Gospels got Pilate wrote right. If God inspired all
of them to write different things, then God inspired errors.
[quote]We are not told about the process. We are told about the
product.[/quote]
Oh my. Have you really read the Bible? We are told a great
deal. The various prophets tell us quite a bit.
And notice the reversal. First you were pretending to know
exactly how the prophets received their messages; and now you're
saying we're not told. Which way is it? [quote]Don't misapply
Scripture. This is an entirely different issue. [/quote]The
similarity is so stunning, I have to think Paul was thinking of
Numbers 12:8 when he wrote that.
[quote]And you can ignore Warfield if you want, but if you are
willing to learn from others, you would be willing to learn from
Warfield, since he has much to say which is helpful.[/quote]I've
read enough stuff from Presbyterians. I think I know what they
teach, and much of it is based on a tradition of men started by
Calvin who was 1 spiritually blind murderer.
[quote]That is hardly an objection. We are not told in Genesis
that Moses wrote that book.[/quote]I do not believe I said every
book in the Old Testament had an overt claim to have been
written by divine inspiration by so-and-so. I said many of
them did, and we do not find that claim in the New Testament
except perhaps John's Revelation.
What is astonishing, really, is that the Jews do not claim
inerrancy for all their books; but along come Christians and
take books Jews say do contain errors and proclaim them
inerrant. The Jews say only the Torah, the five books of
Moses, are without error -- and they call them "the Word of
God." Then there are the books they call "the Prophets."
They include books however like Joshua as well as books like
Jonah. These contain a few errors. The Jews will even point
them out! Consider this passage from Joshua -- Young's Literal
Translation here:
Joshua 15: 21 And the cities at the extremity of the tribe of
the sons of Judah are unto the border of Edom in the south,
Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur,
22 and Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah,
23 and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan,
24 Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth,
25 and Hazor, Hadattah, and Kerioth, Hezron, (it [is] Hazor,)
26 Amam, and Shema, and Moladah,
27 and Hazar-Gaddah, and Heshmon, and Beth-Palet,
28 and Hazar-Shual, and Beer-Sheba, and Bizjothjah,
29 Baalah, and Iim, and Azem,
30 And Eltolad, and Chesil, and Hormah,
31 and Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah,
32 and Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon; all the cities
[are] twenty and nine, and their villages.
Anyone who can count can see there's more than 29. (The same
problem with numbers in a list holds true in the New Testament
when counting the generations given by Matthew -- clearly there
is a number problem.)
[quote]However, there is absolutely no one who disputes it, and
Christ Himself quoted from "Moses" when He quotes from the
Torah. You are free to disregard the whole Bible as Scripture
(as do theological liberals) but that does not change what
Scripture is, and what has been accepted as Scripture for over
3,500 years. [/quote]
You are pretending to know more about me than you should. What
makes you say or think I want to "disregard the whole Bible as
Scripture"? What drew this wild remark?
[quote]You have failed to do your research diligently. Please
do so and then respond. [/quote]
Ha, I'd say you're the one who failed doing the research. You
may have heard of the Muratori canon and you may sling that term
around; but have you read it? Did you know there are books on
that list that aren't in our Bibles today and there are books in
our Bibles today that aren't on that list? Did you know that
before lecturing me about it?
I urge you to start thinking twice before posting. If you feel
like lobbing off an insult to me, ask yourself if perhaps you
might not be guilty of what you are so eager to accuse me of.
I feel a little sorry for you to tell the truth. You have
written rashly and in a confrontational manner. Perhaps you
will feel embarrassed by being shown to be so informed while
wanting to pretend you are and others are not.
[quote]Luke was not relying on either eyewitnesses or rumors.
[/quote]He mentions them, and you can't say why.
The Epistle of John also makes a claim, but not one of divine
inspiration.
John 21:24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these
things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony
is true.
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the
which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even
the world itself could not contain the books that should be
written. Amen.
Did John need to be divinely inspired if he wrote down things he
had seen and heard? I find him a credible witness. If he says
Jesus said something, I believe him. If he says Jesus died and
was resurrected, I believe him. I believe he saw these things.
[quote] When you read the phrase "from the very first" in Luke
1:3 in the KJV, that is the Greek word anothen which literally
means "from above". Check Strong's Concordance. And what else
does "from above" mean other than "from Heaven"? So once again,
do your proper research and then respond.[/quote]
Again I feel sorry for you. You adopt this condescending tone
as if you're so superior -- a Mr. Know-It-All. While Strong's
isn't always right, I've no quarrel with it on this word.
Briefly:
ανωθεν anothen {an'-o-then} from
507; TDNT - 1:378,63; adv AV - from above 5, top 3, again 2,
from the first 1, from the beginning 1, not tr 1; 13 1) from
above, from a higher place 1a) of things which come from heaven
or God 2) from the first, from the beginning, from the very
first 3) anew, over again
Got that? It can mean from above, top, from the first, from the
beginning, etc. It does not have to mean what you want it to
mean. The context -- always remember the context! -- tells us
which it is.
Luke 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect
understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto
thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
The key to understanding this is "in order." He's going to
begin at the beginning and tell us events in chronological
order. If we read Matthew and Mark, we see they contain much
of the same material found in Luke; but they occur in a
different order. Matthew and Mark are not organized by
chronological order. They appear to follow some other order.
The KJV is right on this. "The very first" is what is intended.
Luke got his information from eyewitnesses and not "from
Heaven." Was he also guided by Heaven? I think that likely,
but I can't believe he channeled the book word by word. I would
say he could have been "moved" to include some things and omit
others.
However I think we can see a trace of his personality too.
Notice the difference in what Marks says and what Luke says:
Mark 5:26 And had suffered many things of many physicians, and
had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather
grew worse,
Ha! Mark must not have had a high opinion of physicians. They
took this woman's money, abused her, and she still didn't get
better. Luke has his own spin.
Luke 8:43 And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years,
which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be
healed of any,
It wasn't the physicians' fault! They tried their best. Does
this shake my faith in anything? Not at all. If anything, it
tells me it was Luke the physician who wrote the book that bears
his name. I've no doubt about it.
I believe I have shown you how wrong you are. I also believe
this shows the truth of what Solomon wrote that pride goes
before a fall. Instead of refusing to talk to me, perhaps you
should thank me for showing you how your pride has misled you
into thinking you know things when you do not. After all, it
is written:
Romans 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good
to them that love God, to them who are the called according to
his purpose.
#Post#: 353--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 10, 2014, 9:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=33.msg336#msg336
date=1418148089]
Moved means moved. It does not mean that God dictated things
word by word.
[/quote]
Another objection to the idea that God controlled every word is
seen in the progression of theology that can be seen in Paul's
writings. If it were God controlling the thoughts and words,
the progression would not be there as God already knows it all.
Plenary verbal inspiration leads towards dictation. The 3rd
main evangelical view of Biblical inspiration is "Dynamic
inspiration" - which is that the thoughts contained in the Bible
are inspired, but the words used were left to the individual
writers.
What I wonder is why is it so wrong to hear what the likes of
Peter, Paul and John had to say. John - the disciple who Jesus
loved - must have something to say that the others don't have
because of his relationship with Jesus. Paul certainly has
something to say worth hearing, as does Peter.
I'd like to hear things from their perspective - and I think
that is what we have in the Bible - inspired by God and useful
for teaching the truth, rebuking error, correcting faults and
instruction for right living.
But what do I know, I'm a heretic :D
Mike HM
#Post#: 355--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 9:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HereticMouse link=topic=33.msg353#msg353
date=1418224463]
Another objection to the idea that God controlled every word is
seen in the progression of theology that can be seen in Paul's
writings. If it were God controlling the thoughts and words,
the progression would not be there as God already knows it all.
Plenary verbal inspiration leads towards dictation. The 3rd
main evangelical view of Biblical inspiration is "Dynamic
inspiration" - which is that the thoughts contained in the Bible
are inspired, but the words used were left to the individual
writers.
What I wonder is why is it so wrong to hear what the likes of
Peter, Paul and John had to say. John - the disciple who Jesus
loved - must have something to say that the others don't have
because of his relationship with Jesus. Paul certainly has
something to say worth hearing, as does Peter.
I'd like to hear things from their perspective - and I think
that is what we have in the Bible - inspired by God and useful
for teaching the truth, rebuking error, correcting faults and
instruction for right living.
But what do I know, I'm a heretic :D
Mike HM
[/quote]Maybe not as heretical as some may think. I think Paul
himself would agree with you.
2 Corinthians 8:8 I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of
the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your
love.
9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though
he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through
his poverty might be rich.
10 And herein I give my advice: for this is expedient for you,
who have begun before, not only to do, but also to be forward a
year ago.
This passage says it's a mixture -- some commandments are from
Jesus, some things are advice from Paul himself.
1 Corinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission, and not of
commandment.
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let
not the wife depart from her husband:
25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet
I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord
to be faithful.
Even more startling is how he ends the chapter:
40 But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I
think also that I have the Spirit of God.
He thinks it? So he said. My favorite line from Paul is when
he said he was persuaded:
Romans 8:38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life,
nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present,
nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able
to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus
our Lord.
Was he right? I think so. I can't say I know for sure, but I
think so.
#Post#: 357--------------------------------------------------
Re: Did Christ go to Hell ?
By: HappyHeretic Date: December 10, 2014, 11:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Nice work, Danger Mouse, I like it.
Mike HM
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page