Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
That’s right.Well, I know that in the US particularly there is very much a "rights culture".
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
That’s right.Well, I know that in the US particularly there is very much a "rights culture".
The extent to which a "rights culture" blends with following the Humble Servant Who was obedient unto death (Philippians 2), is something which has doubtless exercised a lot of Christians down the years.That’s right.
Guess the question should be do you want to be right or happy?The extent to which a "rights culture" blends with following the Humble Servant Who was obedient unto death (Philippians 2), is something which has doubtless exercised a lot of Christians down the years.
...and another aspect is, Is our conduct God honoring if we are always asserting our theoretical rights?Guess the question should be do you want to be right or happy?
I believe the only thing we’re authorized to do is love, despite the cost....and another aspect is, Is our conduct God honoring if we are always asserting our theoretical rights?
Certainly the love and purposes of God should inform all we do, among the complexities we often face.I believe the only thing we’re authorized to do is love, despite the cost.
Well, SG, here are two comments:We had to deal with someone acting in an official capacity do something wrong. I wasn't sure whether to "turn the other cheek" or "have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but rather expose them." There seem to be dueling Scripture verses. Another example is when Scripture commands us to love our enemies, yet David prayed for harm to befall his enemies in the imprecatory psalms. Another example is when Scripture states that "no one has ever seen God" and yet Moses is said to have seen God face to face.
How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
All scripture can be and must be reconciled with all scripture.We had to deal with someone acting in an official capacity do something wrong. I wasn't sure whether to "turn the other cheek" or "have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but rather expose them." There seem to be dueling Scripture verses. Another example is when Scripture commands us to love our enemies, yet David prayed for harm to befall his enemies in the imprecatory psalms. Another example is when Scripture states that "no one has ever seen God" and yet Moses is said to have seen God face to face.
How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
The two do not contradict.Here’s the one I’m wrestling with currently
Psalm 146:3 KJV
[3] Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
John 3:14 KJV
[14] And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Tecarta Bible
Tecarta Bible
Tecarta Bible
No conflict.I like it, but then there’s the conflict with
Genesis 5:2 KJV
[2] Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Tecarta Bible
Again, this is revealed in marriage, wherein it is explained that Christ is the Bridegroom, making a union between God and mankind, a union that was broken but now made One again in Christ.The thing I’m struggling with is numerous times He refers to himself as the son of man, but that makes no sense, because mans not involved in his conception?
When Peter is asked, he says Son of God, Jesus responds(blessed) this can only be given of His Father
We had to deal with someone acting in an official capacity do something wrong. I wasn't sure whether to "turn the other cheek" or "have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but rather expose them." There seem to be dueling Scripture verses. Another example is when Scripture commands us to love our enemies, yet David prayed for harm to befall his enemies in the imprecatory psalms. Another example is when Scripture states that "no one has ever seen God" and yet Moses is said to have seen God face to face.
How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
I think many people simply read the Bible in a different way than you do.Few seem to grasp this. Why people don't understand such a basic understanding of the bible is beyond me...
When did Moses see God face to face?We had to deal with someone acting in an official capacity do something wrong. I wasn't sure whether to "turn the other cheek" or "have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but rather expose them." There seem to be dueling Scripture verses. Another example is when Scripture commands us to love our enemies, yet David prayed for harm to befall his enemies in the imprecatory psalms. Another example is when Scripture states that "no one has ever seen God" and yet Moses is said to have seen God face to face.
How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
We had to deal with someone acting in an official capacity do something wrong. I wasn't sure whether to "turn the other cheek" or "have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but rather expose them." There seem to be dueling Scripture verses. Another example is when Scripture commands us to love our enemies, yet David prayed for harm to befall his enemies in the imprecatory psalms. Another example is when Scripture states that "no one has ever seen God" and yet Moses is said to have seen God face to face.
How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
That is exactly why context is critical.How do you handle dueling Scripture verses? What do you do if you have a decision to make about a course of action and yet Scripture seems to oppose itself?
How do you know this is a qualifying point, and not just a statement?The two do not contradict.
In Psalm 146:3 there is a qualifying point "in whom there is no help." Thus, the statement indicates that there is a son of man in whom there is no help, but also that there is a son of man in whom there is help.
As for John 3:14, this is Moses in prophetic utterance indicated that 1) salvation is of God (and not of men), and 2) it is only through the Son.
Several times. But it was really the pre-incarnate Christ who was seen face to face (by Moses and others). No man has seen God the Father, who is Spirit. Yet He is shown as the Ancient of Days in Daniel, and resembles the appearance of Christ in Revelation 1.When did Moses see God face to face?
I've always known that God Father does not have a body...He is spirit.Several times. But it was really the pre-incarnate Christ who was seen face to face (by Moses and others). No man has seen God the Father, who is Spirit. Yet He is shown as the Ancient of Days in Daniel, and resembles the appearance of Christ in Revelation 1.
I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days [God the Father] did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire...
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of Heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days [God the Father], and they brought Him [God the Son] near before Him [God the Father]. (Dan 7:9,13)
If we keep in mind that this is a VISION to show Daniel how God the Father hands over His Kingdom to God the Son, then there is no conflict. In reality, Daniel only saw the Son, as noted below.
Then I lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a certain Man clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz: His body also was like the beryl, and His face as the appearance of lightning, and His eyes as lamps of fire, and His arms and His feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of His words like the voice of a multitude... (Dan 10:5,6)
This corresponds to Christ's appearance when He appeared to John in Revelation 1.
I simply used the term "qualifying point" to explain that it is part of the "statement" being made, and must be included and understood: "every word that proceeds from the mouth of God."How do you know this is a qualifying point, and not just a statement?
I do appreciate your insight, the question I have now is the phrase son of man a reference to the flesh?I simply used the term "qualifying point" to explain that it is part of the "statement" being made, and must be included and understood: "every word that proceeds from the mouth of God."