Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment! Algorithm free!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereReligion Forum › Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke? (Read 304 times)
Seawolf
LNF Moderator
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 24,569
Joined: Oct 31st, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #30 - Sep 24th, 2018 at 9:53pm
Print Post  
EF wrote on Sep 24th, 2018 at 8:31pm:
At the risk of beginning a theological discussion in which I will not continue to participate, "free will" is not what most people think it is.  Theologically speaking, our "free will" became impaired at the Fall.  It is now under bondage, and remains so until one's spirit is reborn.  The spirit is what died at the fall, not the body, not the soul.  The spirit. And it remains that way until God supernaturally restores it to life. And he does that when it pleases him to do so for his own good reasons. 

The reason I will not continue to participate in any discussion that might arise is I have finally realized that such a discussion is above my pay grade.  Many years ago I developed a 13 week course I called "Reformation and the Doctrines of Grace."  I had a blast developing it, and enjoyed leading it the two times I led it.  But I realized after the second time that I was probably doing more harm than good, though one fellow did compliment me (I think it was a compliment) by saying "you know, I disagree with about 95% of what you have said this 13 week period but it has caused me to spend more time reading the Bible than I have ever spent previously."

Take it as a compliment, you changed his life.

Same reason I will not get into a debate about Oneness or Trinity.  Neither are in the Bible but the Godhead is.  It is something difficult for me to completely grasp but I am not required to grasp it completely.
  


"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."

Charles Carroll, signer of the DOI
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 10,905
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #31 - Sep 24th, 2018 at 10:23pm
Print Post  
Seawolf wrote on Sep 24th, 2018 at 9:53pm:
Take it as a compliment, you changed his life.

Same reason I will not get into a debate about Oneness or Trinity.  Neither are in the Bible but the Godhead is.  It is something difficult for me to completely grasp but I am not required to grasp it completely.


No, I did not change his life.  God had already done that. 

I am not sure that "oneness" is not in there.  "I and the Father are one" and "when you have seen me, you have seen the Father" are statements I am reasonably sure Jesus is recorded as saying. 

But debates between believers and non-believers on certain issues (the Trinity being Exhibit A) are not productive, and I think are even discouraged.  Discussion is okay, but the word debate implies a pro and a con type of interchange. 

It boils to down to these two primary things, seems to me:

If the Creation does not convince a person there is a Creator, there is not much anybody can do to convince that person.  Whether that Creator is the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus is another matter.  I believe that's who the Creator is, but  that is not a necessary part of belief in a Creator.

Divine intervention is required for conversion to Christianity, and the Book is pretty clear that God does that to whom he pleases when he pleases so that no man or woman can boast that he or she (the man or woman) had anything to do with it.  See Romans 9 for more information. 

That they are converted is all of God.  That they are not is all of their own "free will."  I cannot reconcile those two statements, but neither could Charles Spurgeon.  (I bet Limey knows who that is, too.)
  

non sumus stulti
but
accidit stercore
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey.
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 19,294
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #32 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 3:17am
Print Post  
Didn't he play bass with the Particulars?
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 19,710
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #33 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 5:22am
Print Post  
Seawolf wrote on Sep 23rd, 2018 at 5:45pm:
sorry, those remarks are purely b.s.. 


That's the truth. Have the honesty to admit to it for once in your life.
  

When Q hears gallop noises he doesn't think zebras; he thinks there's a Democrat behind a curtain, making gallop noises.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seawolf
LNF Moderator
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 24,569
Joined: Oct 31st, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #34 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 6:42am
Print Post  
EF wrote on Sep 24th, 2018 at 10:23pm:
No, I did not change his life.  God had already done that. 

I am not sure that "oneness" is not in there.  "I and the Father are one" and "when you have seen me, you have seen the Father" are statements I am reasonably sure Jesus is recorded as saying. 

But debates between believers and non-believers on certain issues (the Trinity being Exhibit A) are not productive, and I think are even discouraged.  Discussion is okay, but the word debate implies a pro and a con type of interchange. 

It boils to down to these two primary things, seems to me:

If the Creation does not convince a person there is a Creator, there is not much anybody can do to convince that person.  Whether that Creator is the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus is another matter.  I believe that's who the Creator is, but  that is not a necessary part of belief in a Creator.

Divine intervention is required for conversion to Christianity, and the Book is pretty clear that God does that to whom he pleases when he pleases so that no man or woman can boast that he or she (the man or woman) had anything to do with it.  See Romans 9 for more information. 

That they are converted is all of God.  That they are not is all of their own "free will."  I cannot reconcile those two statements, but neither could Charles Spurgeon.  (I bet Limey knows who that is, too.)
My point is that there is no difference, in my opinion between the two.  Sometimes people get into the weeds and do not see the same picture.  I had a gentleman who thought I was not saved because I went to a church that believed oneness.  Oneness, Trinity, Godhead...  My salvation is not based on a thorough understanding of it.  I get it but it is still a concept my mind can not fully grasp.  I understand it is simply based on my limited understanding of my Creator who made me.  I simply take him at his word and will get a complete understanding when I am with him. 
  


"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."

Charles Carroll, signer of the DOI
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 10,905
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #35 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 11:23am
Print Post  
Limey. wrote on Sep 25th, 2018 at 3:17am:
Didn't he play bass with the Particulars?


Yup.
  

non sumus stulti
but
accidit stercore
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 10,905
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #36 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 12:54pm
Print Post  
Seawolf wrote on Sep 25th, 2018 at 6:42am:
My point is that there is no difference, in my opinion between the two.  Sometimes people get into the weeds and do not see the same picture.  I had a gentleman who thought I was not saved because I went to a church that believed oneness.  Oneness, Trinity, Godhead...  My salvation is not based on a thorough understanding of it.  I get it but it is still a concept my mind can not fully grasp.  I understand it is simply based on my limited understanding of my Creator who made me.  I simply take him at his word and will get a complete understanding when I am with him. 


I think there IS a difference between the two. 

Observation tells me there is a Creator.  It told the founders of our country there is a Creator.  Some of them did not believe Jesus was the Son of God, yet they did believe in a Creator.

Divine intervention is required to believe Jesus is the Son of God.  You can tell all you want (and are, indeed, instructed to do so) and you can walk through scripture all you want (and, again, are instructed to do so), but until God acts, on his own and for his own purposes, nothing is going to happen. 
  

non sumus stulti
but
accidit stercore
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seawolf
LNF Moderator
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 24,569
Joined: Oct 31st, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #37 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 3:45pm
Print Post  
Correct but blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the unforgivable sin according to scripture.  Refusing the prompting of the Holy Spirit in your life can not be reversed after life.
  


"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."

Charles Carroll, signer of the DOI
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 10,905
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #38 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 3:52pm
Print Post  
Seawolf wrote on Sep 25th, 2018 at 3:45pm:
Correct but blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the unforgivable sin according to scripture.  Refusing the prompting of the Holy Spirit in your life can not be reversed after life.


That's true, but I am not sure that constitutes blasphemy.  Here's a link:

http://www.biblestudy.org/question/what-is-blasphemy.html

and here's a cut and paste of what's in that link since it's so short:

Definition of BLASPHEMY

QUESTION: What exactly is the definition of blasphemy in the Bible? Can a person accidently commit this sin? Does it automatically lead to the lake of fire?

ANSWER: The word blasphemy is mentioned fourteen times in the King James Bible. It is used only twice in the Old Testament and twelve times in the New. Two of the main Scriptures that use the word are found in the books of Matthew and Revelation. In Matthew, Christ uses the word to warn the Pharisees who accuse him of using the power of the devil to cast out demons. In Revelation, the word is used in reference to the Beast power that will soon take control of the entire world and force the worship of Satan onto all people.

31. Because of this, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men except the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; that shall not be forgiven to men. 32. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age nor in the coming age (Matthew 12:31 - 32, HBFV throughout).

1. And I stood on the sand of the sea; and I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy (Revelation 13:1, see also 13:6 and 17:3).

My understanding:  blasphemy is attributing an act of God to Satan.  It cannot be committed without malice aforethought.
  

non sumus stulti
but
accidit stercore
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 19,710
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?
Reply #39 - Sep 25th, 2018 at 4:16pm
Print Post  
EF wrote on Sep 25th, 2018 at 12:54pm:
I think there IS a difference between the two. 

Observation tells me there is a Creator.  It told the founders of our country there is a Creator.  Some of them did not believe Jesus was the Son of God, yet they did believe in a Creator.
....


So, I take it that you like the word "creator"... How do you feel about "accordion"? I think it's a nice word... Observation tells me that there is an accordion... The founders all believed in an accordion... Even the ones who didn't believe that a trumpet was like an accordion, believed in an accordion...

Sounds better doesn't it?
  

When Q hears gallop noises he doesn't think zebras; he thinks there's a Democrat behind a curtain, making gallop noises.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereReligion Forum › Historical Differences In The Accounts Of Jesus Birth according to Matthew/Luke?

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
A1 News Page
David Limbaugh
Political Frog
Conservatives Directory
President Trump Approval Poll
Presidential Party Election Poll News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules