-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Great/inspirational quotes
- Thread starter Lanora115
- Start date
When people talk of worshiping in some building on earth, and think of a ritualistic service as worship, and talk of worshiping God in music, it simply shows that they do not understand what is involved in the rending of the veil. The worship that is acceptable to God is the music that rises up to Him as His Spirit touches the heart-strings of His redeemed people and we bow before Him, the Holiest of All, singing and making melody in our hearts unto the Lord.
That is the place where we should be abiding in spirit constantly. In every moment of the believer’s life, he is sitting in Heavenly places in Christ Jesus. The place of our abiding is inside the veil, in the immediate presence of God with nothing between. All that once shut God in and shut man out has been removed in the death of Christ.
H. A. Ironside (1876-1951)
Charge That to My Account
That is the place where we should be abiding in spirit constantly. In every moment of the believer’s life, he is sitting in Heavenly places in Christ Jesus. The place of our abiding is inside the veil, in the immediate presence of God with nothing between. All that once shut God in and shut man out has been removed in the death of Christ.
H. A. Ironside (1876-1951)
Charge That to My Account
"Hearts have as many changing moods as the face has expressions. To capture a thousandd hearts demands a thousand devices."
Ovid
The Erotic Poems: The Art of Love
Ovid
The Erotic Poems: The Art of Love
The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796
George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796
Treaties are negotiated and ratified by the Senate and signed into official Treaty by the President. Treaty of Tripoli was signed by President John Adams in 1797, undoubtedly at the direction of Washington. Scrubbing the mention of Christianity in our founding is the holy grail of secularists, atheists and anarchists. It is the thumb-in-the-eye by those who insist that we did it all without the aid of The Almighty. You Christian type people are not all that influential, they would asssert.
My response is the other influential nation, Russia, (versus America) and the national trajectory each has gone. One is decidedly Humanist and NOT God following. Freedoms are not born of humanism nor secularism.
My response is the other influential nation, Russia, (versus America) and the national trajectory each has gone. One is decidedly Humanist and NOT God following. Freedoms are not born of humanism nor secularism.
Old notions of every kind, and most of all religious notions, are hard to dislodge from the mind. It does not matter how unscriptural they may be, or illogical, or even absurd, if only they have been believed for generations, if only they have been entertained by good and learned men, if only they have found a way into the current versions of the Bible, they are reverently received, and become “fixed” ideas.
The original Scriptures were divinely inspired, and therefore all their statements on a given subject are in full accord one with another; but the translations of the Scriptures, like the ecclesiastical systems which produced them, were not inspired, and the peculiar reverence frequently given to their opinions is not grounded in reasons, and would often be amusing if it were not sad. Traditions of good men and current versions (even though “authorized”) are broken reeds to lean upon, and those relying thereon are certain to experience disappointment.
Vladimir Gelesnoff (1877-1921)
Unsearchable Riches, vol. 5
The original Scriptures were divinely inspired, and therefore all their statements on a given subject are in full accord one with another; but the translations of the Scriptures, like the ecclesiastical systems which produced them, were not inspired, and the peculiar reverence frequently given to their opinions is not grounded in reasons, and would often be amusing if it were not sad. Traditions of good men and current versions (even though “authorized”) are broken reeds to lean upon, and those relying thereon are certain to experience disappointment.
Vladimir Gelesnoff (1877-1921)
Unsearchable Riches, vol. 5
Do you see how this could be construed to give carte blanche permission to dismiss any if not all english versions of scripture? Have we NOTHING to lean on without a working knowledge of greek and hebrew? Us poor shmucks are believing something akin to fairy tales according to the educated class or worse yet, we believe what we are TOLD to believe! Is there no anchor for the barely literate? Can a person have a glimmer of hope of Heaven if we read the wrong (read that "English") Bible? Better yet, is God so powerless as to be unable to grant to a society His Word and they believe in a hope impacting eternity? What about that darkened class of humanity void of an english Bible prior to the "AV" or Wycliff or even Gutenberg's press? Or the child with little to no knowledge of the loftier things to believe in something- ANYTHING!?
I am not defending all common english renderings of scripture nor the translators with a bias or prejudice but would not a Just and Omnipotent and Omniscient Creator have the ability to give common man a legitimate hope of truth? Does humanity need the "whole counsel" of God or is the simple truth contained in a 2 cent "Chick Tract" enough to garner faith leading to Heaven? I am reminded of the unnamed criminal who found the smile of a savior as he asked, "remember me when you come into your kingdom." Am I so crazy or mad as to believe this Jesus and the words of eternal life? Perhaps.
It's not an Hegelian dialect, @Maddog. Gelesnoff isn't suggesting that one should throw the baby out with the bath water -- rejoice about the baby, and live confidently with the knowledge that the overall essence of the baby is a Gift from God, but also recognize that, before one concludes that the baby is a full manifestation of God and somehow free from the potential to behave in some ways in completely nefarious manners, be willing to do some deep diving into the background of the particular Version one prefers to limit one's Bible study to, in order to be able to learnedly throw out the bath water and bring in some new soap and water to prevent coming to global conclusions about minutiae in proof texts.
Would a person be better off with just one English translation, taking every single word at face value, than one would be if one had absolutely no exposure to His Word? Absolutely.
But don't forget that, just as being limited to just that polluted text (with the #1 most polluted Bible of all time being the one in most people's hands -- the KJV) gives each individual the opportunity to rightfully divide the Truth, so also does promoting reliance on just one Version give organized-religion corporate Churches (i.e., Religious Deep State) the power to hypnotize congregants by directing their focus to certain individual passages that the fully-educated clergy within those organizations know full well based on their own study of Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic were substantively mistranslated. In fact, whole Denominations make their bread and butter by keeping their members in the dark about the actual originally-intended messages -- substituting instead utter bullshit that scares people into the pews and shakes the tithes out of their pockets.
“The beginning of divine joy is found in freedom from domination in the arena of faith: freedom from being manipulated, pressured, and coerced into someone else’s own personal belief system. We are the helpers of others’ joy by assisting them in their freedom from religious faith-domination.”
Clyde Pilkington, Jr. (1959 - )
Author, The Great Omission
Clyde Pilkington, Jr. (1959 - )
Author, The Great Omission
Are you say in rephrase, our ultimate goal in evangelizing is to free people from evangelizing? Or to eliminate the rules (or even protocol) of scripture in favor of a rule unto themselves? I thought that was the textbook definition of "iniquity". If every rule was then "done away" or thrown out as not applicable, then everything is permissible including activity formerly known as sin. No religious system will allow such a devolution into anarchy, heck even Anarchists have some moral parameters. Where oh where did they attain such a thing? The name Pilkington rings a bell but I havent read his work.
And you may address it by quoting it in a new thread. A single post here linking to the new thread would be entirely reasonable and would not clutter this one.
In the same spirit:
Everyone has a plan 'til they get punched in the mouth.
- Mike Tyson
“One man esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.”
Romans 14:5
Romans 14:5
Luka Gocharov, from Season Three of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan:
“Jack, we have done our jobs, and done them well. This fight was passed down to us and will continue on, with or without us. But we will always be better than the institutions we serve. And that is what matters when it matters most. There are no heroes in our profession. But, occasionally, there are good men. Men who act on what is right. Not simply doing what they are told. I’ve not always lived my life with honor. But perhaps I have done enough to die with it. I hope the same for you.”
“Jack, we have done our jobs, and done them well. This fight was passed down to us and will continue on, with or without us. But we will always be better than the institutions we serve. And that is what matters when it matters most. There are no heroes in our profession. But, occasionally, there are good men. Men who act on what is right. Not simply doing what they are told. I’ve not always lived my life with honor. But perhaps I have done enough to die with it. I hope the same for you.”
“You can never ever understand the amount of love that God has for you until you have broken bread with Judas.”
Tore Maras
Tore Maras
I wish he had said, "You can never understand what love is until you can break bread with Judas." Because love doesn't come in amounts the way desire does, which the word "love" is unfortunately confused with. Love comes only from God, and you either have it or you don't, just as you either have or don't have the Spirit. You don't possess either in varying degrees, although our sinful nature can inhibit the expression of either and cause the appearance of variation. This confusion is what leads to the erroneous thought that a man's love will be divided if he takes another wife. That error of thought is so bad, I know of women who are even adamantly refusing to give birth to more than one child because they are afraid they will be taking love away from the first child. That ain't love. That's not how it works. Love changeth not.
The intention of the quote is still great, however, and it does a good job of alluding to the indomitable nature of love, a quality which is antithetical to the nature of desire, which should help some see how love is supernatural, powerful, undeserved, and totally not the fuzzy feeling which they've been calling "love".