We really CAN'T answer some of these

[Willie T]

Curious: How many times is the phrase "1,000 year reign of Christ" mentioned in the Bible?

 

[Willie T]

The answer:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???

 

[tzcho2]

Yez I'm asking which ones you have watched or read I don't think you've even read any of these guys tell me what books you've read I want you to tell me two or three things they teach and why you claim they're unbiblical that's what I'm asking you

Btw, phonetically it is pronounced "Doh-Minion-ists" coincidentally, and they need to back up their unbiblical beliefs with the accompanying scripture to show it is what the Bible teaches , but of course they cannot.
Dominion Theology isn't called "reconstructionist" for nothing, that's an apt description.

Proverbs 26 : 16
"Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.Thinking themselves wise ---they became Fools."

 

[Stranger]

First realize that ALL the promises of God are yes in Jesus. This means they are NO to the broken off unbelievers. Based on this you need to reconsider that Pharisaic interpretations of the OT which is popular today. Also, Jesus refuted any physical kingdom ideas teaching a spiritual kingdom only. This means many of the literal prophecies are actually symbols of a greater reality. More to follow if interested.

(Rev. 20:1-7)

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

The Bible itself claims that every word in the Bible came from God

The Bible also says that scribes will corrupt it, so maybe a different definition of Bible, which we obviously do not read in the original, or without human help somewhere along the way iow.

 

[Enoch111]

Curious: How many times is the phrase "1,000 year reign of Christ" mentioned in the Bible?

Six times in seven verses. But not exactly how you have worded it (and not with numbers but with words). Even if it had been mentioned once, that would be sufficient for any Christian who holds to the divine inspiration of Scripture.

 

[Willie T]

Btw, phonetically it is pronounced "Doh-Minion-ists" coincidentally, and they need to back up their unbiblical beliefs with the accompanying scripture to show it is what the Bible teaches , but of course they cannot.
Dominion Theology isn't called "reconstructionist" for nothing, that's an apt description.

Proverbs 26 : 16
"Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.Thinking themselves wise ---they became Fools."

So true. I doubt anything has begged for reconstructing as badly as the mess we have made of modern-day "Religion". We have mixed so much of humanism into it that you can hardly find God's laws in it anymore.

 

[bbyrd009]

You sound like a blab it grab it kinda guy here Mark, and I know you are not...and neither am I! As far as leaving it...just how does one do that unless they physically die? I understand that we are to be IN the world but not OF it...

ah well good question, imo that is up to you. Which I know is not what ppl wanna hear mostly, but prolly lots of ways to leave the habits of the world I guess?

Jesus did leave explicit instructions also though, and those might literally be followed

 

[bbyrd009]

Six times in seven verses. But not exactly how you have worded it (and not with numbers but with words). Even if it had been mentioned once, that would be sufficient for any Christian who holds to the divine inspiration of Scripture.

in my experience things don't have to be mentioned at all for a Christian to believe them? So no offense but i guess every word God says is a lie to most ppl, particularly those who feel they can predict the future from it. Jesus is almost surely never returning literally to put a crown on His Head and reign an earthly kingdom from Davids throne; and has even said as much I guess

 

[Enoch111]

The Bible also says that scribes will corrupt it...

You won't find that in the Bible. The scribes were a class by themselves, and they were tasked with faithfully transcribing copies of the Scriptures. Since approximately 1,500 years transpired between the time the Torah was written and Christ's ministry on earth, and over 2,000 years since the book of Job was written, those who do not believe in the divine preservation of the Bible (such as the Muslims who claim that it was all corrupted) would assert that the Bible had been corrupted.

But the proof that the Old Testament was totally reliable, and faithfully transmitted, are in the words of Christ Himself (who is God):
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses [Torah], and in the prophets [Neviim], and in the psalms [Ketuvim], concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures [the Tanakh]... (Luke 24:44,45)

If Christ had had any concerns about the corruption of the OT, he could never have said what He did above. So forget about what you stated there, since it is more nonsense from the enemies of Christ and Christianity.

 

[Enoch111]

...and has even said as much I guess...

Keep on guessing, and you will just keep on deceiving yourself. And self-deception is the worst kind of deception. I see you on this forum as a saboteur behind enemy lines, dropping bombs (IEDs) all along the way, hoping to do as much damage as he can.

So let's hear you identify your true beliefs so that everyone will know whom they are dealing with. As Jesus said, he that is not with us is against us.

 

[Willie T]

Six times in seven verses. But not exactly how you have worded it (and not with numbers but with words). Even if it had been mentioned once, that would be sufficient for any Christian who holds to the divine inspiration of Scripture.

So anything and everything we find mentioned in perhaps only one place in the Bible should be considered equally weighted for becoming doctrine? Jesus rode on a donkey...…. and he cooked some fish (In fact, He ate food and took drink in several places.) Should we build doctrine around those passages?

 

[Willie T]

No, the word "hate" means to "prefer less" as when Jesus said if we don't "hate" father, mother, son or daughter, etc., we cannot be His disciple. Yes, the statement "God hardened his heart" doesn't mean God forced him to act a certain way, it is a statement of how Pharaoh RESPONDED to God, in the same way the clay hardens or butter melts in the sun. No, because that predestination is predicated on His foreknowledge of those who would respond to His grace and those who would not. Works has nothing to do with either: it is our POWER OF CHOICE by which we receive or reject, retain or dismiss the gift of salvation. It is not God who guarantees a sinless eternity, it is the choice of the redeemed to choose not to ever sin again, which choice is now difficult for us now seeing that our nature is to sin, but in eternity when our nature is to do right, we'll have no problem at all staying faithful to our Redeemer. Not possible, for "God is love" and His love in unconditional...however, His redemption is conditional - we can't be redeemed unless we surrender ourselves to Him. Christ's intercession is only for those who are actively seeking forgiveness, not for those who choose to turn back to the world or never choose to seek it. If we're constantly getting our butt kicked by Satan when he re, yes, but if we take hold of Christ's victorious power whenever temptation comes and conquer it, well...
9. Doesn't God Make "Vessels Fitted for Destruction"?
10. When Did God Decide to Give Us Eternal Life?
11. Isn't Our Heavenly Inheritance Fully Guaranteed?
12. Aren't Our Good Works Predestined?
13. Didn't Jesus Deliberately Hide His Message so People Wouldn't Repent?
14. Could Judas Have Refused to Betray Jesus?
15. Don't Evil Men Also Glorify God?
16. Can Satan Repent and be Saved?
17. Aren't Men Ordained in Advance to Eternal Life?
18. Doesn't God Compel Men to Believe in Jesus?
19. Didn't God Choose Us Long Before We Accepted Him?
20. How Can an Unregenerate Man Accept Christ?
21. Could the Authorities Have Acted Righteously and Released Jesus?
22. Isn't God's Grace Irresistible?
23. Isn't the Will of God Absolutely Sovereign?
24. Isn't Faith in Christ the Gift of God?
25. Did Christ Die for All Men?
26. Isn't it Immoral for People to Have Sex with Animals?
27. How Can We Love God But Ignore God's Law?
28. Is Profession of Faith Enough, or Do Our Acts Also Count?
29. If Men Won't Obey God's Law, Are They Saved?
30. Are We "Once Saved, Always Saved"?
(to be continued)

I gave up when I read "Isn't it immoral for people to have sex with animals?"

Why help him undermine the faith of "weak" Christians with this textbook example of the satanic error of "Higher Criticism"?[/QUOTE]
YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ONE WORD ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT THOSE QUESTIONS AS THE AUTHOR DEVELOPED THE ANSWER.

 

[Willie T]

Keep on guessing, and you will just keep on deceiving yourself. And self-deception is the worst kind of deception. I see you on this forum as a saboteur behind enemy lines, dropping bombs (IEDs) all along the way, hoping to do as much damage as he can.

So let's hear you identify your true beliefs so that everyone will know whom they are dealing with. As Jesus said, he that is not with us is against us.

I don't think Jesus said that.

I believe you will find that in Mark 9, He told the disciples that anyone who is not against US (as a group), is for US.

Whereas in Matthew 12, He said (speaking of Himself) He who is not with ME, is against ME. (About v.30, I think)

(It is so easy to twist His words just a little, and give them a different meaning than He did.)

 

[Phoneman777]

I gave up when I read "Isn't it immoral for people to have sex with animals?"

Why help him undermine the faith of "weak" Christians with this textbook example of the satanic error of "Higher Criticism"?

YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ONE WORD ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT THOSE QUESTIONS AS THE AUTHOR DEVELOPED THE ANSWER.[/QUOTE] The adage, "The only stupid question is the one not asked" is proved wrong by questioning whether beastiality is immoral.

 

[Willie T]

YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ONE WORD ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT THOSE QUESTIONS AS THE AUTHOR DEVELOPED THE ANSWER. The adage, "The only stupid question is the one not asked" is proved wrong by questioning whether beastiality is immoral.

*******************************
Since you don't seem to be able to think much beyond your immediate reactions, here is the very valid reason this non-dispensationalist included that question in the quite serious list.


Question 28: Isn't it Immoral for People to Have Sex with Animals?

Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion (Leviticus 18:23).

What Christian wouldn't affirm the immorality of such an act? Why even include it in this book? Simple: the New Testament doesn't mention bestiality. It's an Old Testament prohibition. So the question now arises: Is Old Testament law still morally and legally binding on church members?

There are many Christians who say that Old Testament laws no longer apply to Christians unless the New Testament reaffirmed a particular Old Testament law. But the New Testament doesn't mention this Old Testament prohibition. Are we to conclude that this issue is morally an "open question"? But God says that bestiality requires the death penalty: "Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death" (Ex. 22:19).

On the other hand, if we accept the principle of biblical interpretation that all Old Testament laws are still completely binding on Christians unless a New Testament passage has released us from the obligation, then we can say in confidence that such an act is an "abomination." "Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants" (Leviticus 18:24-25).

Questionable Answer:
"Everyone knows that such an act is immoral. The New Testament writers assumed that Christians would know this. The light of redeemed wisdom shows this to all Christians. The Spirit would not lead Christians to do such things. We are morally bound, not legally bound, to obey such a prohibition."

My Reply: Are we bound to obey this law because it is a universally recognized evil practice? It certainly was not recognized as evil by the Canaanites. And if Christians should gain political influence, shouldn't they make such practices illegal, so as not to have the land vomit out an entire population?

Are we bound by this law? If so, why? Because it is "logical"? Logical for whom? By what standard? Or because "all righteous men know not to practice such acts"? But how can we measure righteousness apart from the prohibition?

If we are bound by this law, then why are we supposedly not bound by all Old Testament laws? What about marrying your sister or brother, or an aunt or uncle? The Old Testament prohibits such marriages (Leviticus 18:6-18); the New Testament doesn't. If God's word isn't authoritative, both Old and New Testaments, then what is? The temporary morality of some temporary nation or church? The temporary morality of mankind? How can we understand right and wrong if we exclude the Old Testament's legal precepts? How can we avoid humanism's "situation ethics"? How can our nation avoid God's judgment?

For further study: Lev. 22:31-33; Matt. 5:17-20; 23:23; Rom. 8:3-4.

 

[Willie T]

You see, the author is trying to address the insane idea that many "Christians" hold to that "The Law" is only binding if it is repeated again in the New Testament.

 

[Phoneman777]

*******************************
Since you don't seem to be able to think much beyond your immediate reactions, here is the very valid reason this non-dispensationalist included that question in the quite serious list.

There is that tendency of some to think themselves far more intellectual than what they are based on their willingness to question that which has already been firmly established as truth.

When the world was astonished at Einstein's revolutionary formula "E = MC^2" and they asked him what in the world could possibly have inspired him to produce such a thing, he responded by saying, "I decided to challenge an axiom".

Sadly, there are countless amateur intellectuals who think challenging self evident truths invests them with an air of dignity and sophistication and although they are able to impress some (usually fellow idiot liberals), there will always be those of us who see right through their bulldookey.

 

[Nancy]

ah well good question, imo that is up to you. Which I know is not what ppl wanna hear mostly, but prolly lots of ways to leave the habits of the world I guess?

It's up to me how I physically leave this world...I'm thinking you meant Spiritually?
As the "world" in this sense meaning the "unsaved" (as some of us see as? without the only WAY?)
...stop smoking cigarettes, stop using drugs, stop having fornication's, stop gluttony, gossip, lying, drunkenness...so on and so forth. So yes, many ways to "leave the habits of the world" ♥

 

[Phoneman777]

Curious: How many times is the phrase "1,000 year reign of Christ" mentioned in the Bible?

Revelation 20:4 and Revelation 20:6.