Conjecture

[marks]

Should we think God did not give this command to a man, since we don't find the command in the OT? Or vice versa too, actually.

This one is easy, since we have Scriptural authority. But because God spoke to Paul, and spoke to Ananias, which we know He did, that doesn't mean that God spoke to me, or spoke to you.

Much love!

 

[Nancy]

Such wisdom sister! :)

IKR????!

 

[marks]

So why would Gods overseer be trying to justify me by the deeds of the law?

That's pretty much the crux of the matter.

But then, since we're on an online forum, we don't really see each other's works, only what we present on this little bit of type.

So it really comes down to being condemned over disagreeing with the doctrine, and this gets equated to that you must be carnal, and therefore you don't have any good works, so you need to learn to be humble, and to be afraid, but what it really means is that you should forsake the love of your Lord in favor of trying to curry favor with better behavior.

Of course the problem with that is it turns our eyes off of Jesus, and onto us. Bad move!

Preachin' to the choir!

Much love!

 

[marks]

Why must you perceive me to be void of the Spirit or immature spiritually just because I see the Bible as the written Word of God? What is the basis of that assumption?

Yes, I see what the Bible says in (Deut 5:24). So what is your point?

Stranger

In a word, marginalization.

Much love!

 

[marks]

For the very reason of me starting this thread...that many cannot perceive that the bible can be taken many different ways...by design...in order to trap men by revealing their true natures which brings them into a worse place by denial...(or after repentance of course into a better place by the Spirit)...since people will make the truth into something evil...as men do. So we get things exactly backwards if we come at the bible from ourselves. Taking the bible at face value...carnally...leads to the inversion of the truth because of a human understanding.

Could you be a bit more clear? What does any of this have to do with Stranger?

Much love!

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I'm not sure exactly what your point is (since your post is not directly connected to what you quoted) but the Bible is very clear that the elders were also overseers, hence the term episkopos or bishop.

Which means that you should not be dismissing human overseers even though Christ is indeed the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls (1 Peter2:25). And there is no need to talk about "overseer of the flesh", since it is essentially meaningless. If you mean "human" say "human".

At the same time the poster who has the user name *episkopos* is far from being any kind of overseer, since he has invented his own theology. It is called *Conjectural Theology*.

Episkopos gave the verse speaking of overseers ...yes. Agree with you I was wrong.

 

[marks]

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

And how exactly are we to know who those are?

Is it anyone who claims that for themself?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Do you see that God also works with another part of men...the part of us that cries out to Him....

It sounds like you say that God works to improve the flesh, is that correct?

Much love!

 

[marks]

You are trying to make your own points and opinions to be superior to any other consideration. I explained the deeper truth...or tried to...of the bible and how it may be easily misused by we humans who tend to try understanding things without the help of God.

Don't you actually mean, he takes his own opinions over yours?

Much love!

 

[marks]

I explained the deeper truth...or tried to...of the bible and how it may be easily misused by we humans who tend to try understanding things without the help of God.

God is against our interpretations...

And your reconciliation of this is? These are your interpretations, are they not?

Much love!

 

[marks]

To whom? To the one who lives in pride...

To anyone who disagrees, evidently.

 

[marks]

Precedence: the Pharisees, for one.
Whose discernment: indeed!

You're saying Stranger is a Pharisee? that's your discernment?

 

[marks]

Hate to do it but I will have to place you on ignore, marks. No fruitfulness will come from further discussion at this time.

OK, I understand. I've been thinking the same.

Much love!

 

[Stranger]

Precedence: the Pharisees, for one.
Whose discernment: indeed!

Explain. You like to quote yourself alot. Why? I don't know.

So, what do you mean by the Pharisees being the precedence. And, you never answered the second question.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Hate to do it but I will have to place you on ignore, marks. No fruitfulness will come from further discussion at this time.

What a coward. It is easy to place someone on ignore and not have to answer. When you say, 'no fruitfulness will come from further discussion' you are saying you can't respond to their position.

Stranger

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Explain. You like to quote yourself alot. Why? I don't know.

So, what do you mean by the Pharisees being the precedence. And, you never answered the second question.

Stranger

I quote myself to show that something else occurred to me and to expand on my thought.

Going off memory here, but you asked something like...why would you think someone who thinks the bible is the word of God is not spiritual?

I answered that there was some precedence for Some men believing the bible was the word of God but they were not spiritual. In other words, it has happened.

Then you asked for the precedent and I gave it to you - the Pharisees.

I answered the second question best I could.

 

[Episkopos]

What a coward. It is easy to place someone on ignore and not have to answer. When you say, 'no fruitfulness will come from further discussion' you are saying you can't respond to their position.

Stranger

That's no way to speak to a lady. What ever happened to the "southern gentleman" approach...let alone a Christian brotherly approach? Certain posters here are just like trolls who bait and then attack. Passive aggressive types. We are not to accept just any treatment by just anyone. There are they who speak seemingly brotherly and gently...but their words are like daggers seeking to attack...

Ps. 55 Because they have no changes, therefore they fear not God.
20 He hath put forth his hands against such as be at peace with him: he hath broken his covenant.
21 The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart: his words were softer than oil, yet were they drawn swords.

I personally have a dozen or so people on ignore. It makes getting through the day much less oppressive. :) Why seek for difficulties? The ignore feature is way cool.

 

[Philip James]

And how exactly are we to know who those are?

Is it anyone who claims that for themself?

Much love!

Hello marks,

As it has always been in the Church, Overseers and presbyters must be ordained, through the laying on of hands, by other validly ordained bishops.

No one can ordain himself, neither can one ordain another without the valid authority to do so.

Peace be with you!

 

[Episkopos]

Hello marks,

As it has always been in the Church, Overseers and presbyters must be ordained, through the laying on of hands, by other validly ordained bishops.

No one can ordain himself, neither can one ordain another without the valid authority to do so.

Peace be with you!

Let's speak on the validity of this succession of bishops. Now the Catholics claim they have an unbroken succession of said bishops.

But the missing piece is the Lord and His say. The laying on of hands has become symbolic whereas before it contained miraculous power...to heal and raise the dead. So then unless THAT kind of power in there to be conferred what we have is simply a ceremonial passing of the torch...much like any other human institution.

No, it must be by appointment by the Holy Spirit.

How was authority conferred on the original church in Jerusalem? Was this not done at Pentecost? Yet people today don't believe in such an intervention and empowerment from God...and this among "believers."

People tend to put God in a box and then seek to follow Him from a safe distance in their own ways...rather than looking to God and His empowerment (grace).

So I'll leave it at that. :)

 

[Stranger]

I quote myself to show that something else occurred to me and to expand on my thought.

Going off memory here, but you asked something like...why would you think someone who thinks the bible is the word of God is not spiritual?

I answered that there was some precedence for Some men believing the bible was the word of God but they were not spiritual. In other words, it has happened.

Then you asked for the precedent and I gave it to you - the Pharisees.

I answered the second question best I could.

Well, do you think the Bible is the Word of God or not? If you do, does that mean you are a Pharisee?

As to the second question involving 'discernment', whose discernment are you trusting. Your's? Mine? Whose?

If the Pharisees believed the Scriptures they had, the Old Testament, were the Word of God, why did they not receive Jesus Christ as their Messiah? Isn't this what Jesus was saying to them? See (John 5:39,46).

They didn't believe in Christ because they didn't believe the Scriptures.

Stranger