Wow, everybody's got their pet doctrines here, don't they.
Yep, but I do not desire or pray to God to kill those who disagree with me.
I think desiring the death of those who differ with our pet doctrines is a worse sin than having a wrong doctrine.
For this is the inner desire for murder, which breaks the Law of loving our neighbors as ourselves. If we love our neighbors as ourselves, would we really desire their death?
__________________
**Original Matthew 28:19 Restored**
Yep, but I do not desire or pray to God to kill those who disagree with me.
I think desiring the death of those who differ with our pet doctrines is a worse sin than having a wrong doctrine.
For this is the inner desire for murder, which breaks the Law of loving our neighbors as ourselves. If we love our neighbors as ourselves, would we really desire their death?
I pray that you have not construed anything that I've stated concerning the difference in opinions between myself and Segraves, to imply or infer that I would pray for God to slay him simply because of that disagreement. If so, then that is absolutely absurd!
I was simply, and only, quoting the explicit words expressed by the Lord Himself concerning any man that would cause a "stumbling-block" (that is what the word "offence" means, you know) to be placed before another, which might cause another of God's chosen people, or many, to place their confidence in that which maketh for a lie (read about the fate of the prophet Hananiah, found recorded in Jeremiah 28, for having committed such a thing).
I intentionally mis-spelled his name, and for this reason:
Seeing that, IMHO, his position concerning "soul sleep" is amiss, and that as such he, being a teacher in several Bible schools, has elected, of his own volition, to take upon himself the burden of indoctrinating many new converts in the elementary principles of the doctrine of Christ, then I am persuaded he fits the "mold" of that man whom our Lord referenced when He said,
"It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone wee hanged about his neck, and he cast into the SEA, than that he should offend one of these little ones" (Luke 17:1-2, KJV).
Did you get it? "SEA," for that should be his "grave" for placing an "hindrance, a stumbling-block" in the pathway of God's little "lambs" as they seek to "grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" by teaching them that there is no such thing as "soul sleep"!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafon
I pray that you have not construed anything that I've stated concerning the difference in opinions between myself and Segraves, to imply or infer that I would pray for God to slay him simply because of that disagreement. If so, then that is absolutely absurd!
I was simply, and only, quoting the explicit words expressed by the Lord Himself concerning any man that would cause a "stumbling-block" (that is what the word "offence" means, you know) to be placed before another, which might cause another of God's chosen people, or many, to place their confidence in that which maketh for a lie (read about the fate of the prophet Hananiah, found recorded in Jeremiah 28, for having committed such a thing).
Please explain to us exactly what that verse means. How literal is it to be taken, if at all?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Please explain to us exactly what that verse means. How literal is it to be taken, if at all?
Timmy, the English word ”offence” in the KJV Bible derives from the Greek words ”skandalon, and skandakizo,” meaning, ”to entrap, snare, or entice to fall; a stumbling-block” (see Strong’s Concordance #4624 & 4625)
Please note that in Jesus’ statement He did NOT command that the one found guilty of having committed an ”offence(s)” is to be forcibly taken, a heavy obstacle hanged about his neck, and then he be cast into the sea to drown. He simply said that ”It were better for him” that such punishment be inflicted upon the one who is found to be guilty of having “snared, entrapped, or enticed” another to fall; implying that they have committed an act against another which is worthy of such punishment as that which He described (I suspect that drowning in the sea, if it be that it were an option, is preferable than being compelled to experience eternal torment in a lake of fire).
So, regarding your question whether we are to take Jesus’ words “literally”? Of course not! We are not the one who determines the punishment, or fate, of our fellow who may be guilty of having committed an “offence” against us, that is, they’ve done or said something that (might) serve as the “stumbling-block” that cause us to fall and thereby lose out on the wondrous eternal redemption that God has made possible for all mankind.
Concerning my remarks about Dan Segraves which prompted my reference to our Lord’s statement, it came about because I challenged his stand on the matter of “soul sleep,” and rather than enter into a dialogue with me about it, he replied that he did not believe that such was a scripturally sound teaching, and proceeded to counsel me to consult with a man whom I knew had refuted even Segraves’ teachings, calling the UPCI a cult.
That act by Segraves, to me at least, was considered as an “offence,” and served, not as something which might enhance my understanding of the matter, but could, had I accepted both Segraves and the defrocked Baptist minister’s opinions rather than that which the Bible states, served as a “snare” that would prevent me from enjoying an eternal reward which God has made possible for me.
Did Segraves’ act authorize, or give me the right to hang a heavy weight around his neck and forcibly throw him into the sea? Of course not! However, I would not want to “stand in his shoes” when he appears before the Lord on the last day, for it will be then that he MUST answer to Him, who is the Judge of all mankind, for the “offence” which he committed against me, and perhaps countless others as well.
Did Segraves’ act authorize, or give me the right to hang a heavy weight around his neck and forcibly throw him into the sea? Of course not! However, I would not want to “stand in his shoes” when he appears before the Lord on the last day, for it will be then that he MUST answer to Him, who is the Judge of all mankind, for the “offence” which he committed against me, and perhaps countless others as well.
I hope this explanation will suffice.
__________________ "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
Sir, I do have in my possession, on an official document with the CLC letterhead, Dr Dan Segraves’ signature, bearing witness to the things I have written about this incident.
If you will carefully note, our Lord’s statement of Luke 17:2 explicitly states ”that he should offend one of these little ones.”
Perhaps you understand those words somewhat differently than I, and if so, then that is your right, however, as for me, I interpret it to mean that when one does something, whether by word or deed, that “offends” another, especially ”one of these little ones” (i.e., a “babe in Christ”), then the “offender” is also guilty of having committed an “offence” against the Lord, and will reap the "just" rewards of his deed.
To me, that is an extremely serious “offence,” for it mirrors, in a manner of speaking, the same “offence” which Job was guilty of having committed, to wit, by his own admission, he readily admitted:
”Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge? Therefore HAVE I UTTERED THAT I UNDERSTOOD NOT; THINGS TOO WONDERFUL FOR ME, WHICH I KNEW NOT” (see Job 42:3, KJV).
Seeing that God allowed physical “chastisement” to befall Job (inferred) for his having stated things to others which he wasn’t knowledgeable about, is it not possible that He (might) do the same to Dr Dan Segraves for his having committed the SAME “offence”?
It is my prayer that He does not, rather that Segraves come to an understanding of the severity of that “offence” which he committed against me, and which I am reasonably confident that he has also committed against others as well.
Whether you concur with anything I have written here, well, I’ll let that be between you and God, for its not within the scope of my God given privileges to render judgment against you for your opinion of my statements about the matter.
Therefore I see no benefit to be gained by me doing, or saying things which might, in any manner whatsoever, be interpreted as ridiculing your understanding of this matter, as you seem to be so inclined to do because you find yourself in disagreement with my expressed views.
Timmy, the English word ”offence” in the KJV Bible derives from the Greek words ”skandalon, and skandakizo,” meaning, ”to entrap, snare, or entice to fall; a stumbling-block” (see Strong’s Concordance #4624 & 4625)
Please note that in Jesus’ statement He did NOT command that the one found guilty of having committed an ”offence(s)” is to be forcibly taken, a heavy obstacle hanged about his neck, and then he be cast into the sea to drown. He simply said that ”It were better for him” that such punishment be inflicted upon the one who is found to be guilty of having “snared, entrapped, or enticed” another to fall; implying that they have committed an act against another which is worthy of such punishment as that which He described (I suspect that drowning in the sea, if it be that it were an option, is preferable than being compelled to experience eternal torment in a lake of fire).
So, regarding your question whether we are to take Jesus’ words “literally”? Of course not! We are not the one who determines the punishment, or fate, of our fellow who may be guilty of having committed an “offence” against us, that is, they’ve done or said something that (might) serve as the “stumbling-block” that cause us to fall and thereby lose out on the wondrous eternal redemption that God has made possible for all mankind.
Concerning my remarks about Dan Segraves which prompted my reference to our Lord’s statement, it came about because I challenged his stand on the matter of “soul sleep,” and rather than enter into a dialogue with me about it, he replied that he did not believe that such was a scripturally sound teaching, and proceeded to counsel me to consult with a man whom I knew had refuted even Segraves’ teachings, calling the UPCI a cult.
That act by Segraves, to me at least, was considered as an “offence,” and served, not as something which might enhance my understanding of the matter, but could, had I accepted both Segraves and the defrocked Baptist minister’s opinions rather than that which the Bible states, served as a “snare” that would prevent me from enjoying an eternal reward which God has made possible for me.
Did Segraves’ act authorize, or give me the right to hang a heavy weight around his neck and forcibly throw him into the sea? Of course not! However, I would not want to “stand in his shoes” when he appears before the Lord on the last day, for it will be then that he MUST answer to Him, who is the Judge of all mankind, for the “offence” which he committed against me, and perhaps countless others as well.
I hope this explanation will suffice.
Yes, thank you.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I pray that you have not construed anything that I've stated concerning the difference in opinions between myself and Segraves, to imply or infer that I would pray for God to slay him simply because of that disagreement. If so, then that is absolutely absurd!
I was simply, and only, quoting the explicit words expressed by the Lord Himself concerning any man that would cause a "stumbling-block" (that is what the word "offence" means, you know) to be placed before another, which might cause another of God's chosen people, or many, to place their confidence in that which maketh for a lie (read about the fate of the prophet Hananiah, found recorded in Jeremiah 28, for having committed such a thing).
This was not directed at you, however I have heard of those who desire the death of those who disagree with them and of some that have even asked God to remove (kill) those who disagree with them.
God knows who is teaching false doctrine and he has warned us to stay away from false teachers, but the desire to kill those who are in error is what led to the many massacres of early Christianity (Christians killing Christians). All in the name of correct (Orthodox) doctrine.
I may disagree with the Trinitarians, Morons, Jehovah's witless and other deluded folks, but I would never once will ask or desire their destruction or even their hurt.
God will remove false teachers in his own time, without any prodding from us.
__________________
**Original Matthew 28:19 Restored**
Hybrid Mode
