Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'theology'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Worthy Pavilion
    • Worthy Welcome
    • Seekers Lounge
  • Outer Court
    • Outer Court Discussion Hall
  • Inner Court (For Christians who agree with our Statement of Faith)
    • Study Group
    • General Discussion
    • Do you want to just ask a question?
    • Theology
    • Apologetics
    • Prophecy
    • Controversial Issues
  • Upper Room (For Christians who agree with our Statement of Faith)
    • Prayer Requests
    • Praises
    • Absolutely Positive!
    • Testimonies
  • Community Center (For Christians who agree with our Statement of Faith)
    • Fellowship Hall
    • Legacy Lounge
    • Humor! Need a good laugh?
    • Sports, Hobbies, Entertainment, and other interests
    • What's the latest with the Worthy Ministries?
  • Videos
    • General
    • Comedy
    • Biblical Topics
    • Christian Music
  • Current News
    • Worthy Briefs
    • Most Interesting News Developments
    • World News
    • Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
    • U.S. News
    • Christian News
  • Worthy Fantasy Football League's Discussions
  • Who's on the Lord side?'s Topics
  • Cooking club's What's your favorite recipe?
  • Cooking club's Bread
  • Cooking club's About Multi-cookers - features, tips, recipes
  • Gardening.'s Gardening Club Forum
  • Photography How To (tips and tricks)'s Photography Club Topics
  • Maker's Club's So, what do you make, what have you made?
  • Maker's Club's Club News
  • Bible 365's The Daily Reading
  • Bible 365's Misc. Things of interest
  • Bible 365's Bible Topics - Looking at the Bible Topically
  • Reading Club's Topics
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Quizzes
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Index to Bible Trivia and Answers
  • Puzzle Club's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Resources
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's Forums
  • Drone Club's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's 12 Steps and Biblical Comparison
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Testimonies
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Lessons
  • Worthy Book Club's Forums

Christian Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

  • WCF Events
  • Worthy Fantasy Football League's Calendar of Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 19 results

  1. masonlandry

    The Nature of Idolatry

    This is a topic that relates to the nature of God (specifically the father), and something I've been pondering over for months. I thought it would be nice to get insight from others. I don't want to get so much into the realm of the morality of the topic, but rather to explore what it means to have an idol of God or an image of God. When I say image, I don't mean a picture or a drawing on paper or a statue. Not a visual image, but a conceptual image. Naturally, we must have some concept of something to have any understanding of it at all or to be able to talk about it. But I'm wondering what is the line at which our conceptual image of God becomes an idol that pulls us away from who/what God really is? We can go by the Bible, but even if we can agree on the attributes of God - he is Just, he is merciful, he is love, he is Good - how does our understanding of justice, mercy, love, or good limit our understanding of God if we are too firm in conflating God with our limited understanding of what these attributes are? I'll start with the idea of an idol in the form of the golden bull created by the Hebrews while Moses was on the mountain with God since we are all probably fairly familiar with that story. I wonder what was the nature of the worship of that idol, and how the Israelites conceptualized it. Surely they weren't worshipping the atomic element of gold or the shape of a bull, but worshipping what the figure represented to them. I don't know if there are any contextual clues as to what the bull did represent - whether it was some made-up god they came up with on the spot, or if they were using it as a proxy for YHWH because they felt disconnected from him when Moses was away. Or perhaps some third possibility. Then I wonder about the connection between what they were doing there and how the spirit of the commandment to have no idols is paralleled with the other sins of thought that Jesus spoke about. For example, that lusting after a woman in your heart is as sinful as actually sleeping with her, or wishing to murder someone is as sinful as actually murdering them. It makes sense to me that the same line of teaching - of keeping to the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law like the Pharisees - would apply to conceptual idolatry. Which brings me to the question of what conceptual idolatry would look like. And there are multiple things I think are worth considering regarding the question. Like I said before, you do need to have some conception of a thing in order to think or talk about it, and surely we do want to think and talk about God. Also, I consider that I don't really understand how important, or even how possible, it is to understand what God is because he is necessarily so much more than a human can imagine. One of the things that most people can agree on about God is that he is infinitely [insert any aspect of God here]. A phrase I find usefully encompassing is that God is "the which than which there can be no whicher." So he would be the love than which there could be no more loving, perfection than which there can be no more perfect, and so on. If that is the case, then anything we put in our minds about god will necessarily not even be the first step toward how much of that characteristic he actually embodies if he is infinitely great. Again, I don't want to get into the morality of it, because I don't think it's my place nor my concern, but I do think about what might be the harm in having an "image" or an "idol" of God, just in a practical sense. Take just a denominational difference in the conception of God. Of course, not all Christians subscribe exactly to the teachings of the denomination they feel most connected to, and even if they do, they probably don't share the exact same understanding of God in all his attributes, but most people do have something in the way of an anthropomorphized version of God in their heads. We talk about God as a father, which involves his metaphorical relationship to us as well as a gendered concept. These concepts are useful, in that it is probably best to regard our relationship with God as like a parent and child if we are to treat it like anything we know, and we see God as masculine rather than feminine because God represents order, structure, and authority, among other things, which are all things we associate with masculinity rather than femininity, and we gender things that are not living because male and female is one of the oldest dichotomies we have ever known, existing at least as long as humans have, and unless you are opposed to a scientific view, for billions of years longer than that. But of course we understand that God is not biologically a father, nor does he have a sex/gender, as he is immaterial and has no body. I feel like if one gets too attached to the metaphorical images we use to think about god, however useful they are, we run the risk of missing out on a better understanding of who God really is. Perhaps that's the only risk, but I feel it's significant, especially if you see God as the ultimate judge against which you compare yourself and others. What you see as the ultimate good and the ultimate being is how you set your aim, and if you limit your conception of God to an idol restrained by human categories, you limit the good you can aim at. One of the catalysts that started me thinking about this was learning about "negative theology", which is the practice that attempts to more closely approach God by defining him, not by what God is, but by eliminating what a Perfect God cannot be, and its counterpart of "cataphatic theology", which attempts to reach God through the positive affirmations about his nature (like God is Good, God is Love). The two together form Apophatic theology, which often results in seemingly paradoxical understandings, but which may be the most accurate, least constricted way of understanding something beyond our understanding. For example, God is knowable, yet God is unknowable, and both can be and are true at the same time. This is in line with "apophatic" imagery in the Bible, such as "the silence of the perpetual choir in Heaven," as you cannot literally be both silent and perpetually singing at the same time. Perhaps the best way to approximate a closer understanding of God is through seemingly paradoxical understandings, because if we can understand how both can be true at once, we can begin to understand how our common sense understanding of the world limits our understanding of a God who is so far above and beyond what we would ever conceive as "common." For those of you who were able to bear with me while I worked that out, thank you. More importantly, what do you think about this? Is there any real risk to holding to a false, or just a limited conception of God? Is there perhaps as much or more danger in letting go of the conceptions we hold to? IF either of these things were the case, would there be anything we could do about it? Edit: It seems I'm not able to reply to this post or in this forum, so I can't address the replies I get. I appreciate them and wish I could engage with them for further discussion and understanding. If you just want to post a passage for me to read, I appreciate that as well. It would help me a lot in the way of understanding if you could also post with the verses how they relate to the post and what you think the passage means. I'm sorry if that should be obvious to me, but often times what I get from it is very different from what another person does, so the explanation helps me, even if it seems obvious to you.
  2. I'm a former Oneness Pentecostal, also known as Apostolics or Jesus Only; I was involved with them in London, England in the last 1980s. Would anyone like to ask me some questions about them? I've studied their doctrines for almost thirty years now. My YouTube channel (Christian Comedy Channel) has a Oneness playlist with 99 videos and my channel has well over 7 million hits.
  3. Five Minute Theology 6/17/2015 Close to ready - One page was particularly labor intensive, - it is finished now, but I want to add on more feature to this project, which I started working on today. Soon will have an announcement of when this all begins, and will add it to the calendar area as well, thanks for your patience. 5/20/2015 Further updates will be placed here in this 1st post, so check back if interested. You may have to refresh your browser to see updates. 7/4/2015 Here is the Date and Time of the 1st Chat Session of Five Minute Theology. Here is a countdown timer to it. More can be . The verses in conjunction with session 1 are here. 7/7/2015 I am working on a sign up sheet where you can be registered to get email notifications of future 5 Minute Theology Sessions and Events, not Sure when that will be operational. It will be automatic, and you will be able to pot yourself out at any time. I may also create a page or site where people may go to catch up on previous sessions they have missed. I recently purchased a small book entitled "Concise Theology - A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs" by J.I. Packer I think the book is excellent, and it is what is describes itself as. Each topic in the book is only a page, or a page and a half, so it is truly concise. The topics also cite scripture verse addresses to support the conclusions. The book is also easy to understand for most people I think, assuming that they have normal capacity for understanding, and God's grace of the Holy Spirit to enable them to understand and accept spiritual truths. I was calling this, "Five Minute Theology, because that is about how much time it takes to read each topic. Those who are not born again, might have difficulty accepting it, as they do many things of God, and of course, even believers have trouble accepting and understanding the things of God at times. If that were not true, then all believers would agree on all doctrines, and likely denominations would be far less common or important. Copyright issues will keep me from posting the entire book online, but I thought perhaps, some people might be interested in reading a chapter at a time, so I thought perhaps I could quote small amounts of it at a time, in the Bible Study room of the Arrow Chat feature of Worthychat. For those who choose to participate, they will not receive a seminary level degree of instruction on Christian theology, but they will come away knowing the basics of historic Christian theology, which in my estimation, would bring them easily into the upper 5% of believers, in terms of knowing what the church as believed and accepted, as the teaching of the bible, concerning faith and practice. This amounts to, essentially, an elaborate statement of faith. My idea is to paste quotes of this book, into the room, and those present may read these quotes. Then afterward, if people have questions, or want to comment or otherwise discuss what was posted, they are of course, welcomed to do so. Now, of course theologians and lay Christians alike, disagree over so details or peripheral theology, and that will be no different here, so there may be some debate, some disagreement on some points discussed. This is okay, that can be done as long as people are willing and able to be civil and respectful in their discussions. For those who do not care to attend this event, or do not want to participate in the discussion and or just hate debate and disagreement, the regular section of Worthychat is open for them, without be disturbed by the activities in the Bible Study room. My hope and goal here, is that this will prove to be both instructional, and edifying, and that the discussion of these topics, will add a dimension of depth for our chatters, that is too often absent at times. I have not decided on times and dates for these readings and discussions (nor am I sure at this point that they will even occur, I am sort of testing the waters with this post). Our chatters come from every time zone, and some have schedules which will keep them from participating no matter what time is chosen. This is a problem for which I know no solution. Possibly, it can be reduced by doing this at more that one day of the week, or hour of the day, we'll have to see. There are 94 topics, so as you can see, if we did this once a week, this would take about one year and 9 and a half months to finish. That is a big commitment for those who would want to attend, and for the one leading. Of course, chatters do not have to commit to attendance, but I do not think there is a chatter who would not benefit from attending. Of course, if you are interested, you can always just purchase and read the book, but my thinking is, that we would or could benefit, from the discussion of the topics. Perhaps, we could even do more than one topic per week, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts and suggestions - about if you would be interested in participation, and best of good times to do this, etc.
  4. CoramDeo

    Favorite Quotes

    "We cannot spread our sin further than He can spread His grace.” Sinclair B. Ferguson from The Trinitarian Devotion of John Owen The message of the gospel is that God's justice has been satisfied by the sacrifice of Christ. It is the realization that because of the imputed righteousness of Christ - that is his goodness credited to our account - we can come boldly before the throne with the knowledge that we will be welcomed and accepted. (Steve Brown) ___________________ Feel free to add your own favorites......
  5. “Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.” (John 20:34-35, NIV). Jehovah’s Witnesses will claim that Jesus was crucified on a stake with his arms placed directly above his head and a single nail piercing through both wrists. They make this claim, as they have for approximately fifty years, also rejected the belief that Christ was crucified with his hands spread apart. However, Thomas at John 20:25 uses two plural words; ‘nails’ and ‘hands,’ to imply that Jesus had more than one hand and that he also more than one nail piercing these two hands. It’s inconceivable that the plural word ‘hands’ could imply that Jesus only had one hand, likewise, the plural ‘nails’ implies two nails in a ‘spread apart’ position, which was how the Romans traditionally crucified people.
  6. Watchtower Craziness: The Jehovah's Witnessess used to teach that false governments and religion would be destroyed in October 1914. Oh dear, that got that wrong! Here is a scan from their book: "The Battle of Armageddon" (Aka Studies in the Scriptures volume 4), 1924 edition, page 616.
  7. Today, Jehovah's Witnesses will tell you from their current literature (What Does the Bible Really Teach, page 85), that Jesus Christ began to reign in the year 1914 when his invisible presence also took place at the very same time: so according to them he became a king in that specific year and not before. This despite his having "all authority" from his resurrection (Matthew 28:18), his having a kingdom Colossians 1:13 when Paul wrote Colossians in the mid 50s, and his being called a King in Hebrews again after his resurrection (Hebrews 1:9). However, looking at the older Watchtower literature, in a book titled: "The Battle of Armageddon" (also called Studies in the Scriptures, volume 4), the 1924 edition, on page 621, we read that Christ's invisible presence dates from 1874 and his reign as King from April 1878.
  8. The Watchtower used to teach that Jehovah (who was a physical being just like us), lived on a star called Alcyone, in the Pleiades star constallation. The scan below is from the book Thy Kingdom Come (Studies in the Scriptures, volume 3, 1913 edition), page 327.
  9. Revelation 14:13. Soul Sleep. The Jehovah's Witnesses teach "soul sleep" i.e. that a person ceases to exist at the point of death, until their recreated by Jehovah God on the paradise earth. That being so, why the dead said to be "happy" when they have no existence? However even their own (false) Bible reads at Revelation 14:13: "Happy are the dead who die in union with the Lord from this time onward."
  10. Robert xxxxxx xxx xxxx House xxxxx Street Plymouth xxxx xxxx thebagge2@yahoo.co.uk Dear Robert, How are you? I hope that you are keeping well. I was wondering if I could please ask a small favour of you. I’m after a copy of the July 2008 Watchtower (an article on faith – or is it July 2007?) as well as page 14 from the 15th Sept 2002 Watchtower. I hope that you don’t mind me asking you this; I enclose some stamps to cover the cost. Feel free to pass my details onto whoever you see fit, if for instance you know of someone in my area who might have these Watchtowers. I’m also very interested in the Watchtowers position on Jehovah. I believe that they teach that Jehovah isn’t omnipresent: 5th Feb 1981 page 6. So I was wondering if somebody could please help me with a study re his other attributes – is Jehovah (Father) almighty (i.e. omnipotent), creator, omniscient etc. If Jehovah isn’t omnipresent but he is almighty then how can this be? For if the Holy Spirit is omnipresent but ‘it’ isn’t almighty, then wouldn’t that make the Holy Spirit in one sense be more almighty (with regard to the attribute of Omnipresence) than the Father (Jehovah)? So how can the Father be almighty (which literally means all power) and yet Jehovah lacks the power to be omnipresent; just as the Holy Spirit is omnipresent? Is anyone able to help me with this? Thank you Robert for your kind help, I’m extremely grateful to you. Yours Faithfully XXXXX XXXXXXX
  11. Ed Dingess

    What is a Seeker?

    What is a seeker? Ordinarily I think people mean someone who is seeking God. But when I read Romans 3:10-18, Paul rejects the idea that there genuine seekers. So, when we say "Seekers" what do we mean?
  12. ‘I and my Father are one.’ (John 10:30, KJV). ‘ego kai ho patar ev esmen: (John 10:30: The Nestles Greek text). ‘I ((Subject)) and ((conjunction)) my Father ((object)) are ((verb 1st-person-plural)) one ((adjective)).’ (John 10:30, KJV). Oneness Pentecostals (Apostolics), and I used to be one back in the 1980s, would need to explain the use of the verb ‘to be,’ which a first person plural at John 10:30; ‘I and my Father (we) are one.’ This verse does not record Jesus as saying; ‘I am the Father,’ for such a direct claim by Jesus to be God the Father, would have included the verb ‘to be’ in the first person singular: ‘I am.’ But Jesus at John 10:30 instead applies a plural verb to both the Father and also to the Son; ‘are’ as in ‘we are,’ which is the verb ‘to be,’ (esmen) a present tense, in first person plural. This is why he specifically claimed to be God’s Son, and not God the Father himself at John 10:36; ‘Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?’ Secondly, why is the Greek neuter word ‘hen’ for ‘one’ used at John 10:30 rather than the masculine Greek word for “one,” which is the Greek ‘heis?’ This masculine word is always used in the Greek, to describe God as ‘one’ in the strictly numeric sense, and so logically it would be the only word which Jesus could use to claim that he is himself really God the Father in an absolute and literal sense. So the neuter word ‘hen,’ just means to be ‘one in agreement’ or to be ‘one in unity’ with another person, it’s used that way at 1st Corinthians 3:8, where Paul planted and Apollos watered so that were one (hen), which doesn’t mean that Paul is claiming that he was Apollos! Paul is just saying that they worked together as a team, but not that they were both the same one person! As a former Oneness Pentecostal, allow me to warn people against this error, which is sweeping through and taking over nominally Trinitarian Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches around the world. I do have a video on my own YouTube channel of me explaining this verse, however, I do not know if I am permitted to post this here, possibly the admins could help me with the rules.
  13. Admins: could we have a separate forum for non-Trinitarian sects, so that we could discuss their particular false doctrines. If any Jehovah's Witness, Mormon or Oneness Apostolic were to join these forums, then we could evangelize them and help them to see the truth of the Trinity and Christ's full humanity and deity. I've made cult evangelism as specialization for many years, my having come out of the Oneness (Apostolic - Jesus Only) movement in 1989. A separate chat room for such cults might attract a few brave souls to come and visit us, please don't argue about people being corrupted or their faith compromised, as there are more than enough people who can give a good Trinitarian witness to these cults, I myself although not a DD or an expert, nonetheless do have 28 years experience in evangelizing cults.
  14. Psalm 138:7,8 - "Though I walk in the midst of trouble, You will revive me; You will stretch out Your hand against the wrath of my enemies and Your right hand will save me. The Lord will perfect that which concerns me." God has promised to revive you in the midst of trouble. He promised to perfect that which concerns you. That means your recovery from your adverse circumstances, from the schemes of the devil, your victory, and all that God has destined for you has been planned out in heaven. Pain is merely a passage to a miracle. Failure cannot happen in your life without your permission! Affirmations: SINCE I DO NOT ACCEPT WHAT I KNOW TO BE TRUE IN THE NATURAL AND ACCEPT WHAT I KNOW TO BE TRUE IN THE SPIRITUAL, THE NATURAL CHANGES. I DO NOT DEPEND ON WHAT I CAN DO, BUT ON WHAT THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD WILL DO THROUGH MY SITUATION. Zechariah 4:6 - "Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." Isaiah 43:18,19 - "Do not remember the former things; neither consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs forth; do you not perceive and know it and will you not give heed to it? I will even make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert." Your enemy is anyone who would rather discuss your past than your future. When Jesus stood at the scene of the woman caught in adultery, revelation exploded. Men were present, obsessed with her mistake, ready to stone her. But, Jesus was looking at her future. With one single stroke of mercy, He removed her past: "Neither do I condemn thee"(John 8:11). Then in a masterful stroke of the Master Artist, He painted a portrait that would lead her to Her Kingdom future: "Go, and sin no more". John 5:19 - "The Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever He does, that the Son does likewise." Jesus told us the secret for His life -- "I only do what I see my Father doing." Our attention is on what God is doing or has done. If we dwell on what God hasn't done we create an occasion for offense. If we dwell on what God has done we create an occasion for thankfulness. A kingdom mind-set doesn't accuse God. A kingdom mindset doesn't gain information to support accusation against God. Because it burns with the conviction that He is good. With that as the cornerstone of our theology, we work from there towards the issues of life. Anything that you think you know about God that you can't find in the person of Jesus, you have reason to question. Jesus Christ is perfect theology -- He is the exact image of the Father. That is our message. He is not part of the message -- He is the message. ALBERT FINCH MINISTRY
  15. Jesus said of his body: “destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19). “But He was speaking of the temple of his body.” (John 2:21). So in the light of this I would believe that God the Father raised Jesus from the dead (1st Thessalonians 1:10), but then I’d also believe that Jesus raised himself from the dead (John 2:19-21 and also 10:17-18), and finally I’d also believe that the Holy Spirit (together with the Father and Son) also raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 8:11).
  16. 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way. At Ephesians 1:20, we read that God the Father seated Christ at his own right hand in the heavenly realms, which implies that in some sense Christ was made or appointed as King at the time of his ascension, in a spiritual (not literal sense), over his deceased saints (in heaven). Notice the use of the word “rule” at verse 21, Christ was ruling as King, in some sense according to Paul at the time of his writing this book of Ephesians. Now I am not denying that as Yahweh God himself, Christ is eternally King and has eternally been so due to his innate divinity. Also, at the time of the second coming, Christ’s kingdom will then be extended from heaven, unto to this earth, with the entire universe being under his Kingdom rule, which then becomes both a universal rule (i.e. without any challenge or opposition), and also an eternal rule. So please don’t misquote me, as I am not claiming that Christ’s rule is currently physical or upon this earth, I believe that his kingly rule is currently a spiritual rule over the “souls” of his deceased saints in the intermediate state and is from (or in) heaven. However, Revelation 11:15 states that one day (possibly in the very near future), we shall hear voices in heaven proclaiming that the kingdom of this present world has become the kingdom of Christ, and that He (Christ) will then reign forever and ever, in a greatly expanded kingdom rule which will now be physical, and earthly. I would believe that this expansion from spiritual to physical rule happens at the second coming of Christ, others will disagree, and claim that it will happen one thousand years later, at the conclusion of the ‘millennium.’ However, it will happen, at some time in the future. The title “King of Kings” is used of Christ twice at Revelation 17:14 and 19:16, to convey the fact that at some time in the future, his rule shall be both universal and completely unopposed, as his enemies will be this time be defeated.
  17. “42And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.” (Luke 23:42, KJV). The repentant thief asks Jesus to remember him when he came into his kingdom, please notice that this noun is a singular. To which Jesus replies that today (that very day), the thief would accompany Christ in his kingdom, which he called "paradise" implying that at that very time God’s kingdom was then a present event, Christ ruling over both the faithful dead saints, as well as his faithful servants then living upon the earth. So notice that the thief assumes, and Christ's reply accepts, that there is only one single Kingdom, over which the thief hopes, and Christ then confirms that he will then become a part of this single Kingdom. Christ didn't tell the thief that there are actually two different kingdoms, as in some more extreme dispensational theology; firstly the Kingdom of God and secondly the Kingdom of Heaven, and that Christ will place him into one of these two (plural) kingdoms. There is only one Kingdom! My theology is on the whole mostly covenant theology (reformed). I mean no disrespect to the dispensationalists, but can those of the more extreme flavour prove their claim to multiple Kingdoms?
  18. I was once a Oneness Pentecostal (Apostolic), way way back in the later 1980s, I left and became a Trinitarian after I had written a tract for them, promoting the Oneness view of Water Baptism and offering £1,000 if anyone could disprove the Oneness claim that you must be baptised with the formula: Lord Christ Christ in order to be saved. I live in the south-west of the UK (Plymouth) and no longer attend any fellowship, as that would be too painful to me, but I see the main Oneness claims (i.e. that Jesus is God the Father, and that the baptismal formula is Lord Jesus Christ), taking over so many individual believers in local fellowships, which nominally are Trinitarian, but within which elders and other leaders teach exactly as they choose, which is often anti-Trinitarian! The church situation here in the UK is so bad as to be dire beyond belief, you can't even sit down and discuss the Bible with religious people, they switch off the moment you try to discuss scripture. GOD TV has had a big part to play in this.
  19. Omegaman 3.0

    5 Minute Theology

    Five Minute Theology (updated from May 8, 2015) I recently purchased a small book entitled "Concise Theology - A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs" by J.I. Packer. I think the book is excellent, and it is what is describes itself as. Each topic in the book is only a page, or a page and a half, so it is truly concise. The topics also cite scripture verse addresses to support the conclusions. The book is also easy to understand for most people I think, assuming that they have normal capacity for understanding, and God's grace of the Holy Spirit to enable them to understand and accept spiritual truths. I was calling this, "Five Minute Theology, because that is about how much time it takes to read each topic. Those who are not born again, might have difficulty accepting it, as they do many things of God, and of course, even believers have trouble accepting and understanding the things of God at times. If that were not true, then all believers would agree on all doctrines, and likely denominations would be far less common or important. Copyright issues will keep me from posting the entire book online, but I thought perhaps, some people might be interested in reading a chapter at a time, so I thought perhaps I could quote small amounts of it at a time, in the Bible Study room of the Arrow Chat or Comet Chat feature of Worthychat. For those who choose to participate, they will not receive a seminary level degree of instruction on Christian theology, but they will come away knowing the basics of historic Christian theology, which in my estimation, would bring them easily into the upper 5% of believers, in terms of knowing what the church has believed and accepted, as the teaching of the Bible, concerning faith and practice. This amounts to, essentially, an elaborate statement of faith. My idea is to paste quotes of this book, into the room, and those present may read these quotes. Then afterward, if people have questions, or want to comment or otherwise discuss what was posted, they are of course, welcomed to do so. Now, of course theologians and lay Christians alike, disagree over so details or peripheral theology, and that will be no different here, so there may be some debate, some disagreement on some points discussed. This is okay, that can be done as long as people are willing and able to be civil and respectful in their discussions. For those who do not care to attend this event, or do not want to participate in the discussion and or just hate debate and disagreement, the regular section of Worthychat is open for them, without be disturbed by the activities in the Bible Study room. My hope and goal here, is that this will prove to be both instructional, and edifying, and that the discussion of these topics, will add a dimension of depth for our chatters, that is too often absent at times. We had the first chat session in July of 2015. I cannot commit to the frequency of these events, but I hope to make them a regular feature. This is still a bit of an experiment. Our chatters come from every time zone, and some have schedules which will keep them from participating no matter what time is chosen. This is a problem for which I know no solution. Possibly, it can be reduced by doing this at more that one day of the week, or hour of the day, we'll have to see. There are 94 topics, so as you can see, if we did this once a week, this would take about one year and 9 and a half months to finish. That is a big commitment for those who would want to attend, and for the one leading. Of course, chatters do not have to commit to attendance, but I do not think there is a chatter who would not benefit from attending. Of course, if you are interested, you can always just purchase and read read the book , but my thinking is, that we would or could benefit, from the discussion of the topics. Perhaps, we could even do more than one topic per week, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts and suggestions - about if you would be interested in participation, and best of good times to do this, etc. I am going to disable comments on this post here in my "Thoughts and Rants Blog" - I put this here for the exposure. If you want to comment, I suggest that you do so in the Worthychat section of the forum. You can see more of my blog entries here.
×