Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
7 Pages « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 LYN Christian Fellowship V14 (Group)

views
     
thomasthai
post Nov 11 2018, 08:22 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(Roman Catholic @ Nov 11 2018, 07:39 PM)
Whether it's believing only or by works only or by both especially in my situation, does it really matter, as long one is born of the Spirit ?
*
This is exactly why Paul wrote the book of Galatians:
QUOTE
I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
Galatians 1:6‭-‬9 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/gal.1.6-9.NASB

A works gospel is not the gospel of Christ, it is an assault on Christ, His work, His death on the cross. To say that you can be saved by your own works is to say Christ died in vain on the cross

You are basically saying it doesn't matter what God says is true.

You need to understand the seriousness of this matter, friend.
thomasthai
post Nov 11 2018, 08:38 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
Salvation is by faith alone (part 2)

To further understand why is salvation by faith alone, we need to dig deeper in Galatians 3. The Abrahamic covenant is a covenant of faith, but the Mosaic covenant is a covenant of works.

QUOTE
Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness . Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, " All the nations will be blessed in you. " So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.  For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, " Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them ." Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, " the righteous man shall live by faith ."
Galatians 3:6‭-‬11 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/gal.3.6-11.NASB


Paul forseeing that the judaizers will argue that the Mosaic covenant has superseeded the Abrahamic covenant, plucked a verse from Habbakuk 2:4 "the righteous man shall live by faith ."

Habbakuk lived hundreds of years after Moses. So Paul is making his point that salvation was by faith before AND after Moses. God had never changed the means of salvation.

The Mosaic covenant ended at the death of Christ, for Christ had come to fulfil all the law, and the covenant of faith of Abraham has been ratified (penalty for sin has been paid), and is a standing covenant. We are under the Abrahamic covenant of faith.

Salavation is still by faith alone!

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Nov 11 2018, 09:06 PM
thomasthai
post Nov 11 2018, 09:32 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(Roman Catholic @ Nov 10 2018, 11:49 PM)
I strongly believe if by hearing the message was only needed for Salvation without any good works whatsoever, then Scriptures would be extremely short indeed.

Finally having said that, out of all my extensive limited experience, if our loving Father wishes to grant salvation to those who only believes without doing any good works whatsoever ALTHOUGH THEY ARE CAPABLE OF SUCH GOOD WORKS, is there anything else I would dare add ?

*
Now to answer this, we can still look at Galatians for the answer.

The Galatians were trying to sanctify their lives by obeying the law:
QUOTE
Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?
Galatians 3:3 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/gal.3.3.NKJV


Since your salvation was initiated by the Spirit, are you trying to sanctify by your flesh? Answer of course is a rhetorical no!

So what was the solution Paul gave them? How do we live our Christian lives?

Jump to chapter 5:
QUOTE
I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
Galatians 5:16‭-‬18 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/gal.5.16-18.NKJV


And if you walk in the Spirit, you will produce fruits:
QUOTE
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. And those who  are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Galatians 5:22‭-‬25 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/gal.5.22-25.NKJV


Walk in the Spirit and let the Spirit lead you!

But how do we walk in the Spirit?

Let's see if we can get a clue from other books.

Paul told the Ephesians:
QUOTE
but be filled with the Spirit,
Ephesians 5:18 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/eph.5.18.NKJV


To the Romas:
QUOTE
But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill  its lusts.
Romans 13:14 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/rom.13.14.NKJV


To the Colossians:
QUOTE
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom
Colossians 3:16 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/col.3.16.NKJV


Put all together:
Walk in the Spirit = be filled with the Spirit = put on Christ = let the word of Christ dwell in you

Jesus prayed to the Father in John 17:17
QUOTE
Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.
John 17:17 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/jhn.17.17.NKJV


We are sanctified by God's word!

The scripture is also for us to equip us for every good work:
QUOTE
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
II Timothy 3:16‭-‬17 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/2ti.3.16-17.NKJV

because it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Only the Spirit can guide you by His words in everything that you do.

That is the missing piece between legalism and antinomianism.

QUOTE
For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
Ephesians 2:10 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/eph.2.10.NKJV


We are not saved by good works, we are saved for good works!

Ok very sleepy edi, dunno if i make any sense now, good night

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Nov 11 2018, 09:36 PM
thomasthai
post Nov 12 2018, 04:21 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(Roman Catholic @ Nov 11 2018, 09:51 PM)
I don't know about other Christian denominations but growing up as a Roman Catholic, doing good works is a must. In fact, if my memory serves me right it's written in Scriptures too that we must out do each other in good works, right ?

So I dont understand the need to desensitized others of doing good works really. It's written in Scriptures God alone is good and it's true, anyone who does good works must come from God via the Holy Spirit.

*
We are not saying you shouldn't do good works, but the problem is in the church (evangelicals and RC alike) there are many people who thinks that because the give a tithe, prayed a prayer, take the sacraments, donate to the poor, but live an unbelief life from monday to saturday, they are under the delusion that they are saved.

A gospel that tells you you can do something to save yourself is a false gospel. That's the danger of a false gospel. It damns people to hell.

This is what Jesus taught in this parable:
QUOTE
"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.  The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: 'God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.  I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.'  But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, the sinner!'  I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."
Luke 18:10‭-‬14 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/luk.18.10-14.NASB


This post has been edited by thomasthai: Nov 12 2018, 04:50 AM
thomasthai
post Dec 10 2018, 01:17 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
What is Justification by Faith alone?

I think many people misunderstand the meaning of justification by faith alone.

Modern churches preach a simple gospel we call 'easy believism', misrepresenting the gospel to include as many people as possible, where there are professing christians believing that by raising their hands during the altar call, or praying the sinner's prayer, their salvation is secured forever, regardless of what happens after that.

And then on the other hand, we have Roman Catholicism, which believes that by the Grace of God, righteousness is infused unto the believer by faith. But the believer is not fully righteous yet, he has to contribute half of his righteousness until God can declare him Justified. That is why the Catholics have to invent the doctrine of purgotory to accomodate that in case a believer dies before he get justified, he can go to the purgortory to be purged of his remaining sins. (happy for catholics to correct me on this).

The Latin vulgate which the RC church used translated the word justification as iustificare, which carries the meaning to make righteous.

But the reformers went back to the greek manuscripts where justification in them was to declare righteous , dikaiosune. It was a legal term, like in a court setting where the accused would be acquitted from all charges.

So we understand justification is the act which God declares the sinner righteous, when he believes in what God says about his sin and turn from it, believes in the righteousness of Christ the saviour and Lord imputed to him, and his sins imputed to Christ on the cross, believes in the ressurection of the body etc.

It is never something you can contribute to your salvation. Or else, you will be saying that the death and righteousness of Christ wasn't enough to save the sinner.

thomasthai
post Dec 30 2018, 07:20 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(socialforumer @ Dec 28 2018, 05:33 PM)
Hi can anyone share how to read the books of proverbs?
*
Feel free to ask here if there's anything you don't understand. Im sure some of us will be able to help out smile.gif
thomasthai
post Jan 14 2019, 08:47 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
Many anti-faith alone and Roman Catholic critics will point to the book of James to support the argument that there has to be more than faith (ie obedience) for salvation.

In other words, faith + obedience = salvation.

So, question is, was James preaching a different kind of gospel to Paul?

Can I suggest that while Paul was defending the gospel against the legalistic Jews, James was defending gospel against the antinomians/easy believism's.

Apparently there were people professing faith in Christ but does not manifest anything in their outward lives.

QUOTE
But someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works."
James 2:18 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/jas.2.18.NASB


Here James challenges these people in this way;

1) They were saying to James, you have the works but I have the faith.

2) James challenged them, ok, so you've got the faith, show me your faith (if you can)

3) By James' work, he can show them his faith.

He then quotes Abraham in Genesis 22:

QUOTE
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
James 2:21 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/jas.2.21.NASB


We also see Paul quoting Abraham in Romans and Galatians:
QUOTE
Abraham believed God and was counted to him as righteousness


So how was Abraham justified by works or faith?

We see while Abraham was justified (counted as righteous) in Genesis 15, his works came in Genesis 22.

Abraham did nothing but believed in God before he was justified, and manifested his belief later.

You have to believe in God before you can obey, what is obedience without belief? Legalism.

Faith = salvation + works

Genuine faith will always produce works and salvation.
thomasthai
post Jan 29 2019, 07:58 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
Hi guys,

I'm still being harassed by sylar, who claims I've reported his posts.

I would appreciate if the person who reported him to go tell him the truth, so I will not fall into his eternal condemnation. Or can a moderator help me out?

Thanks.
thomasthai
post Jan 31 2019, 10:21 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
I feel that there is a need to share something very important that will contribute to your Christian lives in defending your faith in the authenticity of New Testament scripture.

It is my hope that you will be equipped to answer sceptics and address misconceptions and errors that anyone may have regarding the scriptures, and have the confidence that what you hold in your hand is the very word of God.

I do not claim to be a scholar, but I've bought books to learn about biblical textual criticism and how we got our New Testament today. Paleography (the study of ancient writings) and textual criticism (the reconstruction of original texts) are very specialised and involved fields, but we need to understand the basics of them to understand how our scripture came to being.

How did we get our New Testament?
- Straight off the bat, we have to recognise that we do not have the original copies of the scripture (Autographs).
- We have (by latest count) 5800+ of Greek manuscripts which are copies of the originals. (fragments and codices)
- The earliest manuscript (papyrus 52) which contain parts of John's gospel dates back to 110-125 CE.

Are there errors in the manuscript copies?
- Because the manuscripts are copied by hand by scribes (copyists), and by the way of transmission over generations of Christians all over the mediterranean world, there exist variants in the readings in all the manuscripts.

- Inevitably, there are also slips of pen, different spellings of words, different word orders and also we recognise there were well meaning scribes trying to "correct" what they thought were errors in the manuscripts in their hands.

- But with the collection of the 5800+ manuscripts, we can compare, analyse and reconstruct what the original authograph actually said. This is the field of Textual Criticism.

- We are now certain that we have 99.95% of the original inspired texts of the New Testament.

Continued..
thomasthai
post Jan 31 2019, 11:35 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
KJV-Only-ism

There is a minority of Christians who think that God preserved His word in the KJV bible. Therefore they think that all other translation of the English bibles are corrupt.

- Scholars have classified the 5800 manuscripts into a few text type families.

- For the sake of brevity we will only consider 2 of them in this discussion, they are the Alexandrian text type and the Byzantine text type (also called the Majority texts)

- While the Byzantine text type manuscripts form the majority of the Greek manuscripts, the earliest copy that has Byzantine influence we have is from the 5th century

- No early church fathers (ante-nicene) demonstrated that they knew about the Byzantine manuscripts.

- Byzantine text type copies are also found to have paraphrases and conflation readings.

- The KJV translation was based on the Textus Receptus critical text, which was compiled by Erasmus in the 16th century who only had 6 predominantly Byzantine Greek manuscripts available to him

- On the other hand, the earliest papyri manuscripts (the P52 and P75 being in 2nd century, within decades of the apostle John's writing Revelations) are Alexandrian in nature.

- The most reliable manuscripts that contain the whole bible (the codex vaticanus and sinaiticus, 350AD) is almost identical to the earliest papyri, and Alexandrian in nature. They were copied by professional scribes.

- We know that Alexandria was a place that appreciated literature, the early church fathers also set up scriptoriums to produce the scriptures. (Origen)

- Scholars of the past 300 years (Tischendorf, Wescott and Hort, Nestle- Aland, Bruce Metzger) and their work in the field produced the critical Greek texts called the Novum Testamentum Graece.

- The english bible we have today (NASB, ESV etc) were translated from the critical Greek texts.

- There is simply no empirical data to suggest that the KJV is purer than the rest of the english bibles.

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Jan 31 2019, 11:52 AM
thomasthai
post Feb 1 2019, 04:05 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(sylar111 @ Jan 31 2019, 02:50 PM)
Snip
*
Just because Byzantine is majority of the scripture doesn't mean it is authentic. A mistake copied over and over again doesn't make it right.

The reason we have less Alexandrian manuscripts is simple, christians have been persecuted in the first 3 centuries after Jesus died. The romans have been burning christian scriptures by the thousands. I believe God preserved His word despite all these. We still have scriptures today.

I did not make any of those things up. Ask any legit new testament scholars.

For your reference:

https://www.amazon.com/Text-New-Testament-T...n/dp/019516122X
Bruce Metzger was one of the most respected textual critic in this field.

You'd think Erasmus who had 6 inferior manuscripts could produce a perfect critical text?

Anyway I think it is pointless reasoning with you. You deny all reality and all evidence.

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Feb 1 2019, 04:11 AM
thomasthai
post Feb 1 2019, 09:43 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(prophetjul @ Feb 1 2019, 07:07 AM)
Romans burnt lots of the original scripts while persecuting the Jews.

Do you think the NT was originally written in Hebrew?

There are scholars who have said when the Greek texts are translated back to Hebrew, the sentences in their right syntax and forms make more sense than in their Greek forms.
*
I think all evidences suggest the autographs were in Greek.

Any examples of the translated Hebrew texts?
thomasthai
post Feb 1 2019, 09:49 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
There are efforts being made to digitise all the manuscripts so scholars from all over the world can study them.

http://csntm.org/Manuscripts.aspx

There is no conspiracy or someone trying to hide anything.

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Feb 1 2019, 09:52 AM
thomasthai
post Feb 13 2019, 08:04 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(Roman Catholic @ Feb 13 2019, 04:48 PM)

The Roman Catholic Church says that our Pope is infallible in terms of faith & morals. Now, that I believe without a doubt, because that's in line with Sacred Scriptures.

*
Where in scripture?
thomasthai
post Feb 13 2019, 08:28 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
I feel there is a need to defend the credibility of Wescott and Hort.

The KJV Onlyist are pretty good in manufacturing lies of their own in slandering others, especially opponents of the Byzantine text.

QUOTE
Out of all of the lies perpetrated against those two men, the most outlandish are the charges they were heavily involved in the secret occult in London. A good portion of Mrs. Riplinger’s book is her absurd conspiracy theory that attempts to tie together in a piecemeal fashion her fevered speculations as to how Westcott and Hort were members of all sorts of sinister, Lucifarian organizations. Her charges, however, are products of her warped imagination and have no basis in reality.

In one instance, she foolishly misidentifies B.F. Westcott with a W.W. Westcott, a man who was involved with occultic organizations, but has no relation to the NT scholar and Bishop of Durham. I noted that ridiculous comparison in my introductory article to this series, so I direct the reader to it.


There is a 4000 page document somewhere inside to examine the orthodoxy of Dr Wescott, if anyone is interested.

https://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2013/08/3...state-heretics/

Since the TS has requested to not argue about this subject anymore, I will respect that request. I will only lay out evidence to counter any lies and not respond to any attacks.

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Feb 13 2019, 08:29 PM
thomasthai
post Feb 13 2019, 09:00 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
Let's do a simple exercise in comparing Alexandrian texts and Byzantine texts.

Take Mark 16:9-20. This is called the long ending of Mark.

Throughout history, there has been many different endings to this portion of Mark. You will find the long ending in the KJV bible, in the other english bibles you may see this portion in brackets of some explanation in the footnote.

Quite simply, internal and external evidences suggest that Mark ended his gospel at 16:8. All other endings were added by scribes who thought that Mark ended his gospel too abruptly.

QUOTE
They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.
Mark 16:8 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/mrk.16.8.NASB


Internal evidence 1: Mark ends his chapters the same way throughout the whole book.

Read through the book, you will find "they were amazed" "they were astonished" "they were frightened".

Internal evidence 2: Verses 9-20 were plucked from the rest of the bible:

QUOTE
verse 9 is taken right out of Luke 8:1 to 3. Verse 10 is taken from John 20, verse 18. Verse 12 is taken from Luke 24:13 to 32, the road to Emmaus account. Verse 13 is taken from Luke 24. Verse 14 is taken from Luke 24:36 to 38.

Verse 15 is taken from Matthew 28:19, Verse 16 is taken right out of John 20:23, and verses 17 and 18, with all the signs and things, are drawn from a lot of sources.


External evidence: Both codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus ends at verse 8.
thomasthai
post Feb 21 2019, 04:25 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(yeeck @ Feb 20 2019, 03:21 PM)

Genesis 3:14-15
“And the LORD God said unto the serpent … I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” KJV

*
Sorry just needed to interject here on why we don't think 'the woman' here is Mary.

First of all, the context here is only Adam and the woman.

The woman here did not have a name until after God pronounced the curse.

Adam named the woman Eve right after God's curse.

QUOTE
Now the man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.
Genesis 3:20 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/gen.3.20.NASB


Adam knows that God, by 'the woman' meant Eve, that's why he named her Eve the mother of all living. This showed that Adam believed what God said from then on.

In Genesis 4:1, we see Eve had a child, and she thought the child was the Redeemer;

QUOTE
Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, "I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord ."
Genesis 4:1 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/gen.4.1.NASB


Eve knew that 'the woman' was meant to be her.

She believed in what God said.

So clearly, both Adam and Eve knew that God meant Eve by 'the woman'.

Cheers.

thomasthai
post Feb 22 2019, 07:24 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(yeeck @ Feb 21 2019, 02:29 PM)
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

*
When we study how to interpret scriptures, one of the most important principle is scripture is the only interpreter of scriptures.

The objective truths in scripture cannot be drawn externally.

Besides the church fathers, you can't really find anything in scriptures that suggest that the woman is really Mary.

Even if you are talking about type prophecies, Jesus said the all scriptures predicted Him, not Mary.

All the epistles mentioned (almost, if any) nothing about Mary. The RC doctrines about Mariology were really drawn from really obscure texts, and built on error upon errors from church fathers.

If we interpret scriptures like that, you can really make scriptures say whatever you wanna say.

But of course, the RC church just make their interpretation infallible to avoid any scrutiny.

thomasthai
post Feb 27 2019, 07:53 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(alexkos @ Feb 26 2019, 10:06 PM)
What's all your take on female taking preaching role and assuming the pastoral office in violation of 1 Tim 2, 3; Titus 1, 1 Cor 11, 14?
*
Hi alex.

Your question will hurt many liberal christian ladies who heard God tell them to go into ministry and be a pastor.

I am speaking from experience.
thomasthai
post Feb 27 2019, 08:11 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
321 posts

Joined: Apr 2012
QUOTE(alexkos @ Feb 27 2019, 08:02 AM)
'God told me....'

Yes, speaking from experience, it hurt to confront. I also diam diam better.
*
Hehe i know you don't mean that.

There are just too many people throwing this around. I hear people say this all the time, God told me this and that.



7 Pages « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.1063sec    0.08    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 7th December 2025 - 04:30 AM