-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What are your views on various doctrines?
- Thread starter banana
- Start date
- Status
Yet another assertion of fake theology. If the faith was instilled, God would have no need to credit it (or not) as righteousness.
God alone puts us in Christ, the sanctification (setting apart) by the Holy Spirit based on crediting our faith in the truth. Biblical doctrines are not based on what scripture does not say, but on what scripture actually says.
God alone puts us in Christ, the sanctification (setting apart) by the Holy Spirit based on crediting our faith in the truth. Biblical doctrines are not based on what scripture does not say, but on what scripture actually says.
What offerings? That system (Old Covenant sacrifices) has been replaced with the once for all sacrifice of Christ.
That is an interesting question.
'"I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in My name, saying, "I have dreamed, I have dreamed!" How long will this be in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies? Indeed, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart, who try to make My people forget My name by their dreams which everyone tells his neighbour, as their fathers forgot My name for Baal. The prophet who has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat," says the LORD. "Is not My word like a fire?" Says the LORD, "And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?"' (Jeremiah 23:25-29. Read the whole chapter).
That worked well for David, didn't it?
'"I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in My name, saying, "I have dreamed, I have dreamed!" How long will this be in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies? Indeed, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart, who try to make My people forget My name by their dreams which everyone tells his neighbour, as their fathers forgot My name for Baal. The prophet who has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat," says the LORD. "Is not My word like a fire?" Says the LORD, "And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?"' (Jeremiah 23:25-29. Read the whole chapter).
That worked well for David, didn't it?
If Jeremiah is saying that all dream interpretation is false, why does Matthew record Joseph's dream?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was no interpretation needed for Joseph's dream. It was a straightforward command from God.
You're claiming that dreams, from Jeremiah onwards, are false. Hey, even your own quotation condemns your view. Jeremiah doesn't disapprove of dreams like you do:
The prophet who has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully (verse 28).
You, not I, need to read the whole chapter, let alone the very quotation you referenced.
That worked well for David, didn't it?
Your point?
And that would be faith in God's Grace now wouldn't it?
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Unsure of what this means. Can you (or someone) elaborate?
When asked what I put alongside, or ahead of scripture, I said dream interpretation. You quoted Jeremiah's passage that condemns and also condones dreams and dream interpretation. And to further prove what your view actually was (since you just simply quoted without stating whether you condemned or condoned dreams and dream interpretation), you claimed that dream interpretation is condemned in your Joseph and Matthew comment.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
I don't think such a thing exists. False dream interpretation, however, does exist.
First, I am not against dreams. How could anyone be so? They happen. As a matter of fact, God seems to be speaking to many Moslems about the Lord Jesus Christ in dreams. But these Moslems are then coming to Christians to find out about Christ from the Bible.
What I am against, and what God is against, is people placing dreams on anything like the same level as Scripture, claiming to have received an authoritative word from God in a dream, or trying to bind people's consciences by anything other than Scripture.
Your interpretation of Jeremiah 21:28 is typically appalling. You ignore the context of verses 25-32. God clearly says that the dreams that these false prophets are telling are the 'deceits of their own heart.' "So let these prophets carry on with their nonsense," says God. But "He who has My word, let him speak My word faithfully." The dream is the chaff, and the word is the wheat, and those who push dreams upon people, "Cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send of command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all" (v.32).
Jung and Freud figured out that dreams can be turned into a science. A person who dreams of a brick house, for example means something specific, no matter what person is dreaming of a brick house. Symbols mean the same thing regardless of who is dreaming of the symbol. "But if the analyst who is confronted by this dream material uses Freud's original technique of 'free association,' he finds that dreams can eventually be reduced to certain basic patterns" (Carl Jung, Man and His Symbols, p. 26).
"Freud made the simple but penetrating observation that if a dreamer is encouraged to go on talking about his dream images and the thoughts that these prompt in his mind, he will give himself away and reveal the unconscious back-ground of his ailments, in both what he says and what he deliberately omits saying. His ideas may seem irrational and irrelevant, but after a time it becomes relatively easy to see what it is that he is trying to avoid, what unpleasant thought or experience he is suppressing..." (ibid., p. 27).
"Sigmund Freud was the pioneer who first tried to explore empirically the unconscious background of consciousness...Before the beginning of this century, Freud and Josef Breuer had recognized that neurotic symptoms — hysteria, certain types of pain, and abnormal behavior—are in fact symbolically meaningful. They are one way in which the unconscious mind expresses itself, just as it may in dreams; and they are equally symbolic. A patient, for instance, who is confronted with an intolerable situation may develop a spasm whenever he tries to swallow: He 'can’t swallow it.' Under similar conditions of psychological stress, another patient has an attack of asthma: He 'can’t breathe the atmosphere at home.' A third suffers from a peculiar paralysis of the legs: He can’t walk, i.e., 'he can’t go on any more.' A fourth, who vomits when he eats, 'cannot digest' some unpleasant fact.
I could cite many examples of this kind, but such physical reactions are only one form in which the problems that trouble us unconsciously may express themselves. They more often find expression in our dreams" (ibid., p. 24-6).
And just to give you an idea of how scientific and reliable psychoanalysis and dream interpretation is:"Sigmund Freud was the pioneer who first tried to explore empirically the unconscious background of consciousness...Before the beginning of this century, Freud and Josef Breuer had recognized that neurotic symptoms — hysteria, certain types of pain, and abnormal behavior—are in fact symbolically meaningful. They are one way in which the unconscious mind expresses itself, just as it may in dreams; and they are equally symbolic. A patient, for instance, who is confronted with an intolerable situation may develop a spasm whenever he tries to swallow: He 'can’t swallow it.' Under similar conditions of psychological stress, another patient has an attack of asthma: He 'can’t breathe the atmosphere at home.' A third suffers from a peculiar paralysis of the legs: He can’t walk, i.e., 'he can’t go on any more.' A fourth, who vomits when he eats, 'cannot digest' some unpleasant fact.
I could cite many examples of this kind, but such physical reactions are only one form in which the problems that trouble us unconsciously may express themselves. They more often find expression in our dreams" (ibid., p. 24-6).
"Freud worked in the laboratory of Ernst Brucke, one of a group of physiologists who had attempted to found a science of biology on thoroughly materialistic grounds. In his autobiography, Freud described Brucke as the person 'who carried more weight with me than anyone else in my whole life'" (Armand Nicholi Jr, The Question of God, p. 20).
"You may be surprised to learn that in Europe we have heard very frequently judgments passed on psychoanalysis by persons who knew nothing of its technique and had never practised it, but who demanded scornfully that we show the correctness of our results. There are among these people some who are not in other things unacquainted with scientific methods of thought, who for example would not reject the result of a microscopical research because it cannot be confirmed with the naked eye in anatomical preparations, and who would not pass judgment until they had used the microscope" (Sigmund Freud, The Origin & Development of Pscyhoanalysis, pp. 44-5).
“Christians often ask why God does not speak to them, as he is believed to have done in former days. When I hear such questions, it always makes me think of the rabbi who was asked how it could be that God often showed himself to people in the olden days while nowadays nobody ever sees him. The rabbi replied: 'Nowadays there is now longer anybody who can bow low enough.'
This answer hits the nail on the head. We are so captivated by and entangled in our subjective consciousness that we have forgotten the age-old fact that God speaks chiefly through dreams and visions. The Buddhist discards the world of unconscious fantasies as useless illusions; the Christian puts his Church and his Bible between himself and his unconscious; and the rational intellectual does not yet know that his consciousness is not his total psyche. This ignorance persists today in spite of the fact that for more than 70 years the unconscious has been a basic scientific concept that is indispensable to any serious psychological investigation” (Jung, Man and His Symbols).
This answer hits the nail on the head. We are so captivated by and entangled in our subjective consciousness that we have forgotten the age-old fact that God speaks chiefly through dreams and visions. The Buddhist discards the world of unconscious fantasies as useless illusions; the Christian puts his Church and his Bible between himself and his unconscious; and the rational intellectual does not yet know that his consciousness is not his total psyche. This ignorance persists today in spite of the fact that for more than 70 years the unconscious has been a basic scientific concept that is indispensable to any serious psychological investigation” (Jung, Man and His Symbols).
Last edited:
- Status