Unprofitable Servant wrote: What the Bible does not say, is let woman keep silent and then end the sentence. This forum is not a church. Wanting to silence opposing viewpoints ...
Certainly the full biblical text goes as: "Let your women keep silence *in the churches* " and "it is a shame for women to speak *in the church* "
Yet we may be witness cult-like lordship of male or female individuals, who personally infuriated by differing views to their own, invariably in irritated angry bee-like nature, rank a following.
Acting for righteousness and truth, as commendable practice this is, should not be confused with such 'pope-like' behaviour, neither should be reinforced as a plausible trait.
The principle of 'live and let live' is biblical, (see parable of the wheat and tares), because we can trust an all-sufficient God who said "vengeance is mine I will repay"
This means we are not to exercise obsessive lordship of any setting for our own personal gratification as if all depended on man
As it may be easily understood, warning and exhorting excluded here, by definition of mutual support, concern and admonition, which constitute legitimate biblical practice in the context of personal, or media interaction.
Christopher000 wrote: Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. ... interpret this verse
The whole context of Scripture lines up understanding for any particular verse.
See, spiritual singing is not a work of the flesh, or something we manufacture out of our own steam, talent, or nature, neither is something independent of the work of God in us, as modern inspirational singing makes it out to be. Actually spiritual singing is always the product of Godâ€™s work in us, or/and for us.
Compare this with Psalm 126: "When the LORD turned again the captivity of Zion, we were like them that dream. *Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing*: then said they among the heathen, The LORD hath done great things for them"
They sang when the Lord had turned their captivity; so only the saved walking in the Spirit, not pleasing the flesh, produce spiritual God-honouring music that refreshes the soul, but it does not rely on the 'tones'/vibes of the style.
King regards, Penned and IE
Another Michael The song writing is governed by the same rationale as the singing abov
The Quiet Christian wrote: The Gettys are very popular in our household due to their deep theological content and Celtic overtones. Some of their music is deeper than the hymns in our hymnals. While this is a heated topic, it is important to note that a sizable percentage of the tunes in the standard hymnal were redeemed from taverns (i.e. Greensleaves) or from horribly unredeemed composers (i.e. Ode to Joy). This is a tough topic to discuss on this forum, and I appreciate the restraint that all have shown toward each other thus far.
Sorry, perhaps there is much more than this to defend a sensual style of music. Often those defending such styles of music, do so with flippant arguments and flawed or inconsistent rationale, yet one thing you indirectly point out to is true: The topic of music, as with the issue of personal standards of holiness, is often one of those untouchable 'sacred cows' people reckon as subject to personal preference or taste, at the expense of principle.
Dave wrote: Not having a crack at ya, but the comments need to be explained to the intended person in a way that he can comprehend.
Fine However, given the parrot-like mentality apparently lacking the real appetite for better understanding, one can only attempt to stimulate yearning for better things
Say by engaging a baby with baby talk, babes never learn to speak properly.
On the other hand as much as explanations have been offered already, understanding never seems to develop. For this reason refutation is the advisable course in due, rather than discussion or further explanations, and this only for the sake of truth and the testimony of God.
John Yurich USA wrote: If I attend both the Catholic Church and Baptist Church then I am both Catholic and Baptist. I am Baptist because of having been Baptized via immersion on 21 May as a public profession of faith that I surrendered my life to Christ at that Baptist Church I attend on Sunday mornings.
No one can in all earnesty, hold true two systems which affront/contradict each other in concepts about faith, sin, expiation, and appropriation of pardon.
The biblical approach for all these throughout the OT and NT is by the covering / propitiation of sin, while the Roman way is by the merit of sacramentalism.
Useful lecture The doctrine of preservation of Scripture intrinsically derives from the very nature of God. It is consistent with his plans, purpose and character. It goes along with how he does things, what he is, and the reasons why he exists. If he upholds *all things* by the word of his power, (Heb.1:3), how some think his Word escapes the sphere of his absolute control and it is left to man's personal twick, or to random preservation?
Such notion is foreign to his revelation; but sadly, this is the case of the humanistic view of Scripture preservation sustained by many today.
John Yurich USA wrote: Where is the circular reasoning in stating that if I attend a Baptist Church on Sunday mornings that I am committed to the truth? I am very involved in the church activities of that Baptist Church from going to Adult Sunday School before worship to being a substitute usher on Sundays when needed to going to soup lunches and other free meals after worship.
Please, read and reconsider against a clean conscience the verses cited in the post of 10:26 am below to find your own answer
John Yurich USA wrote: If I attend a Baptist Church on Sunday mornings then I have committed myself to truth.
Please, allow the weight of the full facts to guide and dictate sound logic. Flawed circular reasoning is your main game, which is miles apart from fair, serious and earnest reasoning, searching, or discussion
Christopher000 wrote: ... I renounced the false religion long ago without any fear, but only freedom from Satan's grasp.
Well, that is the proof of the cake ... which comes displayed in Scripture as this: "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren."
Let's notice that there is a full stop after the word 'brethren'. It does not say we love/entertain brethren and foe, but only brethren.
Any walking the Christian walk looking both ways is like putting the hand on the plough and looking back ... Jesus said such are not fit for the kingdom: "Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God"
The purpose of God is to translate us from darkness into light. Those seeking to abide in the twin light of compromise are not his, because Christ stated that "he that *gathers* not with me scatters abroad." Mat. 12:32 So, any entertaining a system of error is gathering thorns and briers against Christ.
The commands are clear cut: ".. let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light."
"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."
One of the marks characterizing the true sheep of Christ is that they do not follow 'strangers', which Christ defines as false leaders
"And when he puts forth his own sheep, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. *And a stranger will they not follow*, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers."