For by Him (Jesus!) all things were created, both in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. Col 1:16Every ruler, every person, every tree--all for Him! Jesus did not create anything or anyone for any other but Himself. Then it should be no surprise to us that it is his pleasure "...to reconcile all things to himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say whether things on earth or things in heaven." (Col 1:19-20).
But there will be a season when some "things" are not "reconciled" to Jesus.
Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry. For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience... (Col 3:5-6)Tradition has often held that these consequences will be eternal in nature. Yet this ignores the surety of God's clearly stated purpose that "all things" were created for Him and will be reconciled to Him! Yes, we should fear the consequences of our disobedience, yet rejoice that He has made us for Himself and will draw all men to himself!
For he who does wrong will receive the consequences of the wrong which he has done, and that without partiality. (Col 3:25)
And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.
John 12:32
91 comments:
The longer we go, the surer I am of this: Your error begins and ends in the pit of Calvinism. God ultimately controlling the will of all beings, which is completely contrary to Scripture.
In which case none of this matters anyway . . . we are but His playtoys . . . pretend sins (He could make us not sin, but He, who controls our will, makes us sin) . . . for His amusement . . . Jesus death was a trifle, for it never really mattered . . . God could have avoided the mess of sin, had He chosen. It is all cold fate . . . any response of love is mechanical, by His will . . . it is all a grand story He has written, of every chapter He is the author, such that, again, every sin is written in by His pen. You DO believe that, you told me so . . .
Plus, since the death of Christ is specifically for humans only (Hebrews 2:9), you insist on sins being paid for by suffering, since this is the only way the devil and crew could get out of hell. So that Jesus really never had to die, since we can each suffer our way to salvation. You DO believe that too, I know . . .
The real threat of eternal hell is what makes this all matter. Had He limited salvation to only a few you might have cause to contend with the Lord, but it is not so. To make us truly alive He gave us the ability to truly choose . . . The terror, the anguish, the love, the invitation, the blazing glory of a soul being saved are all real, alive. You are caught in the catatonic stupor of determinism . . . where it just really doesn't matter . . . the trap of gnosticism as well as the heresy Paul dealt with, that the resurrection was already over: "It really, trully doesn't matter what you do". The trap which suddenly, when sprung, opens the door to the unbridled pleasures of sin.
Scripture Alfred, supports predestination, omnipotence, foreknowledge and the fact that God knows everything. But we are far from Calvins error. You and Calvin share the same error. You both believe that God hates his enemies. We believe He loves His enemies.
As for your illusion that sin brings unbridled pleasure, think again my friend.
Ga 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life "aionios".
Joh 17:3 And this is life "aionios", that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Tim,
As I re-read your post, after responding to Alfred, I realized how you had eloquently addressed the very issue of judgment for sin.
I don't think Alfred even reads our posts. It seems as if he just sees that there is a post and he must refute us.
Alfred, is it true, you don't read what we are saying?
Isn't it true that before this discussion began, you already decided we cannot possibly be right?
Isn't it true that you have not allowed a single verse we have presented to influence your thinking because you already assumed that we MUST be incorrect?
Isn't it true that we have made some very valid points supported by Scripture, that you have not been able to answer?
The more you argue against the truth without logic, the more the truth gets exposed, if your goal is to protect others from what we believe and are proclaiming to be true, you probably should rethink your strategy. I would suggest that you will be far more effective if you actually read our posts and respond to the valid points we have been proclaiming.
O boy! What can I say, you are too funny Alfred. You throw around red herrings like a man feeding the seals. Calvinism, suffering for salvation, pleasures of sin--such accusations, such little logic! Never been a Calvinist, never believed I could suffer my way home. But you know!
Well, I rest in Him and I know one day you will too, Alfred. Though you daily face the same thing I do, trials & challenges God uses to perfect us, its suffering for salvation for me and something else for you. Silly! What God is doing now to stretch and grow us he will continue to do. You want to name it something else because of the barrier of death. Jesus will put death under his feet--no more barrier! He will pursue His own until He has everyone.
Another example of you not reading the post:
Plus, since the death of Christ is specifically for humans only
and you give Heb 2:9 as a proof! I include the text here:
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Tim had included this text in his post:
to reconcile all things to himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say whether things on earth or things in heaven." (Col 1:19-20).
All things includes much more than just humans! It was right there already in Tim's post. Did you not read it? Or do you just fail to see the logic in words that contradict your preconceived ideas?
Oh, no . . . I read the posts . . . it is hard when assumption after assumption violates Scripture after Scripture, things we have dealt with over and over.
1) "Reconcile all things" means Satan himself gets saved to you. I asked some time ago as to how he was to be saved, given that God has clearly stated that only by the shedding of blood is remission of sins (Heb. 9:22) That was met by silence from Tim, and "We don't have to answer that because you won't answer us" type of answer from Jack. It is pretty important, because if the devil can't be saved, then "reconcile" in the Scripture you quoted clearly can't mean "saved". Do I get an answer now?
2) As to Calvinism, this, Tim, is slightly "disingenuous" because I am quite sure you know what I mean. I used the word "determinism" in the past to describe the error of Calvin, which was met with some degree of confusion. Calvinism is the term commonly associated with "Everything we do, God makes us do it" type of Biblical fatalism. If you can find a better term, please put it forward. Until then, I will probably invoke Calvin's name to mean this.
For the record, Jack has stated unequivocally that he believes that all sin is by God's will when I cornered him on the implications of this determinism . . . He wants us to sin for His higher purposes, both to us and to others. If I have misstated your position(s), please correct me.
3) As to suffering our way out of hell, Jack, at least, has stated as much. Quotes:
"Whether Jesus chooses to release upon repentance, or chooses to exact full payment is really not mine to say. (It seems there is scriptural support for both.) "
No blood payment there . . . punishment = release, "Arbeit macht frei"
"All His judgments are for purifying." Why, then, did Jesus die, if His judgments purify us?
I know that he also said this:
"To answer your question more directly, Suffering in Hell is not what saves us, it only works together for our good. Jesus is our only Saviour. There is no other anything, by which we can be saved.Ac 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
OK . . . Scriptures I like. What does that mean? Does His blood pay the penalty for sin or not? Or is He our Savior in that He sovereignly uses pain and suffering to deliver us from sin, which is the fundamental Catholic perspective? The fire burns out sin . . . do you believe that, fundamentally?
And if this is so, how does the devil get out? Does Jesus blood cover him? You better have a clear, Scriptural answer . . . I only need one exception and I have proven your premises wrong.
4) "What God is doing now to stretch and grow us he will continue to do." That stretching and growing is for living things. I understood that we become alive - "born of God" - when we trust Christ and His blood cleanses away our sins, THEN we - a living spiritual being - are "streched and grown" through He discipline. Explain how the ones in hell are "stretched and grown" through suffering. HOW does the suffering of hell get a person saved?
5) As to the pleasures of sin . . . I point to the other instances where the distilled doctrine comes down to, "When all is said and done, nothing I do in this life will really matter", unbridled pursuit of pleasure always follows. For the gnostics it was "life is an illusion and it cannot affect the real spiritual world" (sort of a Matrix perspective) . . . for the heretics Paul dealt with it was, "You missed the resurrection - no life after death for you" . . . From all I have seen, the Universalists of today fair no better. I have made this point severals times . . . curious about your response.
Alfred, your logic baffles me. Your proofs and imaginatory "I got you's", somehow satisfy you, but from my perspective, they are like leaky siv's.
God created Satan to do His will. Satan never acts apart from God's direction, never outside His limitations. Read Job.
Why do assume that Satan can't be refined by God to dwell in harmony with all of creation after time?
He certainly is one of God's creatures. Did God make a mistake when He created him? Did Satan rebel apart from God's design and foreknowlege? Of course not! God works ALL things after the counsel of His own will.
"Calvinism" is a system of belief that includes the hatred of most of mankind by the Creator. You are far more Calvinistic than any Universalist on that account, while I grant you that as a Christian who believes in God's sovereignty, Omnipotence, Omniscience and Agape Love for all mankind, I do share some Scriptural ground so to speak with Calvinists, I would never be considered as a Calvinist by anyone who understands Calvinism.
As for "determinism", if that implies God determines some to go to eternal Hell and some to go to eternal Heaven, then the shoe obviously doesn't fit. Why not just say as we do that we believe in God's position as Loving Father and King of kings. Or that He will accomplish ALL His will.
Anyway, you have illustrated over and over again, and you have even admitted it in the past, that you don't read our posts.
Again you have failed to answer most of my questions.
BTW you falsely accused Tim of being disingenuous. Why do you always use bully tactics when you respond to Tim? You should show him more respect. You would if you knew him, he has a tender heart for the Lord.
I am aware that I have not addressed other errors in your last post, this is hard for me but I am trying to keep my posts shorter.
1 Cor 14:29 "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge."
Are you afraid of being examined? You have seemed open and not afraid of the light. You have nothing to be afraid of with regard to me. God is your judge . . . as you have testified, so far I appear to be the only one challenging you on this. And I can easily go away.
"God created Satan to do His will. Satan never acts apart from God's direction, never outside His limitations. "
So . . . God created Satan to sin . . . is that your position? You confirm this with later statements. So . . . God intended Satan - and people - to sin . . . He commands them to not sin, but intends for them to do so. Either God is a liar, or you are very, very wrong.
Jeremiah 32:35 "And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom [Gehenna], to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, NEITHER CAME IT INTO MY MIND, THAT THEY SHOULD DO THIS ABOMINATION, TO CAUSE JUDAH TO SIN"
Psalms 5:5 "The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou HATEST ALL WORKERS OF INIQUITY." He wants them to sin, but He hates people who sin . . . strange. That does NOT sound like the refining of a loving father.
Psalms 45:7 “Thou lovest righteousness, and HATEST WICKEDNESS” Jesus hates wickedness . . . but He creates it?
"Why do you assume that Satan can't be refined by God to dwell in harmony with all of creation after time? "
This exposes your error as clearly as anything. HOW is this refining to take place? ONLY by the shedding of blood is the remission of sin, God says. Satan - and all sinners - are spiritually dead. Only living things, real gold, can be refined. How is he to be made alive? Again . . . how is ANY sinner in hell to be made alive? This is the 3rd time I have asked for the method of redemption. There is no redemption from sin by suffering . . . there is a refining of a being already born of God, but NEVER a method of suffering to become alive in the first place.
How strange to believe that God would create a being like the devil on purpose to suffer unimagined torments in hell . . . just to see him squirm and scream in horrid anguish. A cruel loving God, loves torture, says it is “very good” (since all He creates – including sin, you tell me – is “very good”). I do not speak for God . . . but you must be prepared to stand before Him and give account for how you have represented Him.
“Or that He will accomplish ALL His will.” If you will keep making that point, then answer how He can tell people that He wanted one things, but they did something else. Again, either He is lying, or you are wrong. Matt. 23:37 “I would . . . ye WOULD NOT” Psalms 7:11 “God is angry with the wicked every day.” How strange that He wants them to sin, then gets angry with them when they do . . .
“You have even admitted it in the past, that you don't read everything in our posts.” I read them . . . but I get weary of endless repetition, especially of data dumps. If you want to wear me out, you might accomplish that . . . if you want me to respond to your main concerns, do as you have said . . . keep it short and to the point.
“Why do you always use bully tactics when you respond to Tim?” Hey . . . first of all, most of “Tim” is you . . . right? So it is hard to know when it is really him. I don’t want to be a bully . . . he hardly ever responds himself . . . I presume he reads the responses? If so then he would know exactly what I am saying by my post . . . it is “disingenuous” to “play dumb” and attack on a surface technicality. Sort of what you did with “Calvinism” too . . . my focus has consistently been on “omnipotence” meaning God makes us choose what He wants, a point made over and over. If that was not clear, it is now. So . . . respond in kind . . . you both know what I mean.
"Alfred, where does Tim promote the pursuit of the pleasure of sin? Was it in these verses?"
Oh, boy . . . sin is fun, sin is pleasureful (Hebrews 11:25). It doesn't take long to put 2+2 together, that there is no real danger in enjoying those pleasures. "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die . . . and after that we go to heaven"
Paul put it this way: 1 Cor 15:32 "If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? Let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die." And . . . you would add . . . after that we ALL go to heaven. Why deprive the heart of ANY fun?
Interesting . . . that churches that bear the name "Universalist" seem to openly embrace any amount of sexual expression and perversion as "normal". You cannot long deny them, since in your world 1) Sin is really a good, God ordained thing, and 2) Any amount of sin will be fully forgiven, guaranteed. Sort of like those credit card repair commercials that say that if you have CC debt in excess of $10,000, then they will settle your debt for pennies on the dollar. Duh . . . then I am going on a spending orgy . . . so I can take full advantage of forgiveness.
Jack . . . you may wave your hands, you may nuance my words, but you have NOTHING substantive to say against what I just said.
Oh, boy . . . sin is fun, sin is pleasureful (Hebrews 11:25). It doesn't take long to put 2+2 together, that there is no real danger in enjoying those pleasures. "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die . . . and after that we go to heaven"
Paul put it this way: 1 Cor 15:32 "If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? Let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die." And . . . you would add . . . after that we ALL go to heaven. Why deprive the heart of ANY fun?
Interesting . . . that churches that bear the name "Universalist" seem to openly embrace any amount of sexual expression and perversion as "normal". You cannot long deny them, since in your world 1) Sin is really a good, God ordained thing, and 2) Any amount of sin will be fully forgiven, guaranteed. Sort of like those credit card repair commercials that say that if you have CC debt in excess of $10,000, then they will settle your debt for pennies on the dollar. Duh . . . then I am going on a spending orgy . . . so I can take full advantage of forgiveness.
Jack . . . you may wave your hands, you may nuance my words, but you have NOTHING substantive to say against what I just said.
You leave me with a dilemma. Which error to address. Since quoting God’s word in length and in context, and showing the supporting verses, to illustrate the harmony of the good news message wearies you, and going into detail on every misconception which you present wearies you, I will only attempt to answer this one passage of your last three posts. I feel it represents the deepest concern you have against the mercy of God being extended to all after death and before the end of time.
See if what I am about to offer, does not defy your claim that it will be lacking in substance. First I must restate your premise, to verify that I understand your concern. Basically I understand it to be that:
“if one adopts the belief that the final result of unrepentant sin is anything less than eternal torment, this belief will give it’s adherents over to unrestrained sin, taking away the motive for righteous living.” The underlying reason being that sin is filled with pleasure, while righteousness in this life has no worthy rewards. (At least not when compared to the immediate rewards of throwing off restraint from pleasure.)
Allow me to illustrate the folly of that idea!
First, I will choose an obvious pleasure, and cast off restraint. Let’s choose…. Say, the sin of gluttony! Since all sin will be forgiven eventually, I will from this day forward, cease to be concerned with my appetites for the best tasting morsels. I will not restrain my taste buds from any pleasure that they desire. Chocolate will be consumed by the pounds, and greasy burgers, fatty fried foods, and all manner of sweets. Pies, fruits, I might even crave salads and steamed veggies. I will eat continually, and if I run out of room, I will purge myself and continue enjoying whatever I like. Ice cream, donuts, coffee lattes, pancakes with tons of butter and syrup, bacon, sausage, ham, fried potatoes, omelets, crepes with jelly and on and on.
The result: instant misery! Stomach aches, poor health, obesity, rejection from others, reproofs from my own body, reproofs from the world, reproofs financially and, without repentance, the final result is death. I find it interesting that the sin of gluttony is practiced by many who hold to the doctrine of eternal damnation. Usually in a more moderate manner than described above, but does that make it less of a sin? How many overweight believers do you know? Would you say that Universalists tend to be more overweight than Baptists?
(continued)
Let’s look at another appetite, the appetite for immorality. How close do we have to look to see that unrestrained immorality also has immediate consequences, for instance: A man learns that Jesus has made payment for His sins and that he will eventually be guaranteed a place in heaven, though he may need to go thru Hell to get there, nevertheless he reasons: “Why should I deprive myself of the opportunity to become intimate with as many beautiful females as I can seduce?” The immediate consequence to this thinking would, for most of us, be frustration, finding that most beautiful females just aren’t that easy to attract, but say our imaginary friend, found more than one or two women who were willing to indulge in immorality with him. What is the most likely type of lady that might be attracted to a man choosing such a lifestyle? Statistically, we know a common thing about such women is the likelihood of them transmitting diseases to their partners. What fun! Say our man was previously married, before he came to this new “freedom” of thought. I’m sure this would serve to heighten his joy at home, especially when his wife finds herself with the new disease too! Perhaps he would be more selective, and only find virgins. The consequences of such a lifestyle are numerous, and painful. Secrecy, hurt, jealousy, guilt, divorce, financial reproofs, exhile and perhaps having to deal with an angry father or brother,(Absalom and Tamar). not to mention a bunch of angry women. Oh boy...what fun. Are the evangelical churches free from immorality since they believe in eternal damnation for non believers? Actually, their belief gives them less reason for restraint since they believe they are saved already. They are forgiven, and can let the little sins slide by; Sins of impure thoughts, sins of unrighteous gazes, sins of giving in to momentary passions which often lead to major sin. I can provide you with reams of news articles showing evangelical leader after evangelical leader caught in the scandels their belief allowed them to enter into and this is just the times they have been exposed.
Why would I cast off restraint from the folly of sin and bring the immediate consequences on my life that always accompany sin? Is it because I don’t fear eternal damnation? HOGWASH! The reason is because I prefer to avoid the consequences which are guaranteed.
Ga 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap aionios life.
Kingdom life! Righteousness, peace and joy! Immediate benefits!
Your fear and your arguments are based on the false supposition that sin is pleasurable when compared to righteous living. This is a major deception. I could go through the entire list of Commandments and laws in Scripture and illustrate how they are all for our benefit here and now, and how it is to our detriment to violate them, so why would I put myself in torment, when God has given us a better way?
The sin Moses forsook, was the sin of abusing the Israelites for his own gain. He refused to forsake love for them, even though they were obstinate and adulterous and idolatrous and even though they rejected him and their own God.
Does your "religion" give you that kind of love for sinners?
Hi Alfred,
So...let's try to find some common ground here. If I generalize about the process God uses to bring us to conviction and repentance, that's bad but you generalizing about my position on God's sovereignty (calling it Calvinism) is ok. Please show me that you wear flesh and blood and admit to this inconsistency. I have yet to hear you admit one point of value to past and present discussions (maybe i missed it). This creates the inconsistent viewpoint that I am in a conversation adult to adult and you are in a conversation Parent to child. What's it going to be?
Tim: I don't want generalizations, so let's stop that. I will call it "Christian Fatalism" if you want, the idea that God makes us to whatever it is we do. Appologies for dragging Calvin's name in . . .
There is no way to "generalize" the method of salvation. If you believe that suffering saves souls, you need to say that. If it is only by Jesus blood, then say that. If you don't know, say that.
I believe you have bought into an unscriptural view of salvation, one that is consistent with any number of false religions and cults.
Jack: With the world around us - the religious world as well - enjoying the delights of immorality . . . AND entire groups of genuine believers giving themselves over to it . . . let alone the millions of individual Christians that give in in a moment of weakness, your comments are astonishing. Based on your perspective Universalists should be the most pure group of folk around. The opposite is emphatically true . . .
Gluttony may have some immediate consequences. Immorality typically not. Bad analogy. Some animals are endlessly promiscuous with no apparent consequences. Some people live the same. Were it not for the fear of the Lord, I might well be there too.
"The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, to depart from the snares of death." Proverbs 14:27
"By the fear of the LORD men depart from evil." Proverbs 16:6
"The fear of the LORD is to hate evil" Proverbs 8:13
God says it takes fear to say clear of sin . . . what do you say?
[Oh . . . and "The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever" Psalms 19:9 . . . it lasts for aion ("ad" in the Hebrew) . . . those that lose it have a problem, no matter how you slice aion]
Apology accepted. I like to call the view I have of God and his dealing with His creation the "best understanding that I have of scripture so far." I understand that you don't believe that view I've come to is scriptural.
I believe that Jesus's blood is the only thing that saves souls. I believe that God brings us to that "saving realization/faith" at different times. I believe that God sometimes, perhaps even always, uses difficulty and judgment to bring us to that realization. I believe that God never acts apart from love.
One would have to be looking very generally at this "blessed Hope" to equate it to the universalism of cults and unbiblical representations of the church. There is little, if any, simularity.
You do not like this doctrine. Understood. You oppose us for teaching it. Also understood. You think I am going to answer to God for leading people astray. I have heard you on all these issues and I do not take them lightly.
I know that there are many things the Lord may deal with me at the end of this life. Even you do not know, let alone myself, all the ways I have failed my Jesus. Even Satan does not know. The Lord in His omniscience knows far more about my weaknesses than any on earth or heaven. May he deal with me with His mercy and love.
I do pray that God opens your eyes to see greater into His love. I covet your prayers for the same.
"I believe that Jesus's blood is the only thing that saves souls."
I expected this answer from you, Tim . . . and I agree with you.
How is the Devil to be saved? Jesus shed His blood for men only. In fact, His blood was shed to destroy the devil . . . not to save him.
Hebrews 2:14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil"
How is the Devil to be saved? Jesus shed His blood for men only. In fact, His blood was shed to destroy the devil . . . not to save him.
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Here we have a declaration which makes it clear that “all things” is referring to that which is created by Jesus. In every instance the phrase “all things” in verses 16 and 20 are “ta panta” in the Greek. Are you saying Satan and the fallen angels are not created by Jesus? (Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.)
Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
Here, four verses later we have the same “all things” receiving peace through the blood of his cross, and reconciliation which is again attributed to him and by him.
In contrast, the imperfect sacrifices of the high priest are shown to only cover “almost all things”. Jesus perfect sacrifice exceeds the animal sacrifices and makes peace with all things which he created.
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
You quote “Hebrews 2:14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil"
I can see your point here. Clearly, something happens to the devil through death. The word translated “destroy” in this verse is katargeo. Do a word search on it. It’s very interesting how it is used in the New Testament. You will find that it has the meaning of “rendered useless” often translated “made of no effect”. I think the choice of destroy is a reflection of the prevailing tradition which was accepted as fact at the time of the translating even though it causes so many contradictions. At any rate, a simple word search on katargeo reveals the true sense of the word. Let me know if you find me to be incorrect in this assessment. If I'm not, perhaps you could admit that this verse does not really substantiate your claim about the blood of Jesus not being for the fallen angels or even the devil himself.
Alfred, in response to your post that accuses all who are universalists of being impure, and that admits your propensity towards the same except for your fear of the Lord... How do you understand the following verses?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
1Co 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
As for the fear of the Lord, let me clarify my understanding for you. As you know, I believe the word which says,
1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
I also believe the verses you quoted. Sincd I don't always have perfect love. Then there is a time to fear, that is, when I am being foolish, because my loving heavenly Father promises to discipline the son whom he loves.
As for your delusion that there are no immediate consequensces to sexual sin, I caution you to rethink that. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean that those who are involved aren't experiencing it.
One more question. "If you believed that you would not go to hell for eternity even though you practiced sexual immorality, are you saying you would give yourself over to it?"
19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple , and in three days I will raise it up."
John 2:19 (NASB)
What is allowed to be destroyed can be raised up again.
Does destroy mean destroy as we think of it? Or did it have a somewhat more toned down meaning to the KJV translators? It is obvious that they liked the word a lot since they used it to translate six different Greek words.
It represents the Greek word apollumi in 19 verses. Strong’s - to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively.
The Greek word apollumi is also used in the following verse. Can you guess which English word translates it here?
Mt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
If you guessed lost, you were right. The word translated destroyed also can mean lost. It is the translators call which to use. The lost sheep that the good shepherd finds and the lost sheep of the house of Israel that Paul says will all be saved are both represented as apollumi. No matter how you translate apollumi, we have this testimony from God’s word: Mt 18:11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was apollumi. Destroyed or lost, the Son of man came to save it.
Destroy represents the Greek word kataluo in 5 verses. Strong’s - to loosen down (disintegrate), i.e. (by implication) to demolish (literally or figuratively); specially (compare 2646) to halt for the night.
The Greek word luo is translated “destroy” in 2 verses. Strong’s - a primary verb; to "loosen" (literally or figuratively)
Both kataluo and luo are used in the passage where Jesus said, Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again and in the verse where Jesus was accused of saying the same.
Phtheiro represents destroy in one verse in which it is used two times, once translated destroy and the other defile. Strong’s - probably strengthened from phthio (to pine or waste); properly, to shrivel or wither, i.e. to spoil (by any process) or (generally) to ruin (especially figuratively, by moral influences, to deprave).
Katargeo is translated destroy in 3 verses of the 26 it is found in. Strong’s - to be (render) entirely idle (useless), literally or figuratively. It is found many other times with a much less severe meaning than destroy, such as:
Ro 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Chances are you would never guess that “delivered” is the word used to translate katageo in this verse.
Diaphtheiro is translated destroy twice in the same verse. Strong’s - to rot thoroughly, i.e. (by implication) to ruin (passively, decay utterly, figuratively, pervert). It is used in a total of five verses including this:
Lu 12:33 Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth.
It is translated with the word corrupteth, which is defined as what a moth does to a bag.
Notice that none of these “destroys” are necessarily without remedy, after all, in relation to the salvation of men we find:
“Mr 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.”
“Are you saying Satan and the fallen angels are not created by Jesus?”
Not at all. The rocks were created by Jesus . . . so were plants and animals. Did Jesus create them to be saved? More importantly, did He die for all of these?
“Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”
The devil is “under the earth” . . .
2 Peter 2:4 “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment”
. . . and those things do NOT get reconciled. “Under the earth” DOES bow in Phil 2:10 . . . but is NOT reconciled in Col 1 and elsewhere. Very precise.
“Clearly, something happens to the devil through death. The word translated “destroy” in this verse is katargeo. Do a word search on it.”
Jack: The word search for the day is “obfuscate”. You are constantly trying to obscure and confuse. The whole point of that verse is WHY Jesus came . . . to deliver the “children” (good) and to destroy the devil (very bad). No manner of word searches is going to change the fact that He did NOT come or shed His blood for the devil’s good.
“1Co 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.”
Not sure where you are going with this, so this deserves a clearer focus. Paul understood that things he COULD do were in fact not always the best for him. Can you explain how immorality is ever “lawful”?
“1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.”
We have addressed this clearly before . . . this is the FEAR OF MAN, not the fear of the Lord. Again, Mr. G. gives the examples of you walking by a house, looking in and seeing a party of happy people . . . and fearing to just walk in and join them. Yet, if the house were on fire you would run into the house yelling and screaming . . . the fear is gone because of your love for your neighbors. You should get the clue that this is the ONLY verse you are able to cite that appears to make fear go away . . . “in the mouth of *2* or *3* witnesses let every matter be established”. You have greatly erred in this.
“As for your delusion that there are no immediate consequences to sexual sin, I caution you to rethink that. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean that those who are involved aren't experiencing it.”
According to you it should read, “By the consequences of sin men depart from evil.” Not so . . . the fear of the Lord says that I have the greatest intelligence and unlimited power committed to making me sorry for doing something . . . there is NO way I will escape, even if I can’t see how.
“One more question. "If you believed that you would not go to hell for eternity even though you practiced sexual immorality, are you saying you would give yourself over to it?"”
Without being afraid of God, I believe I could well end up in those things. Jesus told His DISCIPLES to be afraid . . . “My friends . . . fear HIM”, because of His power to cast into hell, even though they knew they would never be there. To tremble at His word, lest I somehow miss something He said to me. (Is. 66:5) He has the ability to make me regret anything I do that He told me not to do . . . there is no limit to that ability. “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall” 1 Cor. 10:12
"19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple , and in three days I will raise it up."
John 2:19 (NASB)
What is allowed to be destroyed can be raised up again."
I do not follow that. Here is an example of something He destroyed and said He would NEVER raise up:
Isaiah 25:2 "For thou hast made of a city an heap; of a defenced city a ruin: a palace of strangers to be no city; it shall never be built." That is in a "coming day" or aion context, BTW.
My heart smites me over the "obfuscate" comment . . . it wasn't necessary nor perhaps even accurate. I am sorry, Jack.
Alfred,
I can see how you could come to the conclusions that you are defending. God's word is truly complex and full of hidden wisdom. I am sure that you are persuaded in your mind, and that you can justify your stand by the word of God as you see it. I also believe that God has given you the attributes that allow you to see and understand as you do and I appreciate your view point. I wonder if we can ever come to a point of mutual respect, allowing that either one of us could be right while the other could be incorrect in our understanding. I am trying, in my heart to make a conscious effort to allow that you could be right, and I admit it is extremely difficult for me...maybe impossible to think you are correct in the overall matter we are discussing, but I do allow the theoretical possiblity. In other words, the evidence screams to me that God is always Love to all His creatures, yet experience has taught me that some times when I am sure I am right, alas, I find I am still wrong. So I admit with honesty of heart that I could be the one who is wrong here, while in my mind I cannot now believe as you do. My interpretation of the evidence I have thus far viewed compels me to believe as I do and I trust that the same God who loves you and has given you the gifts you have and the understanding you have, also loves me and has given me gifts and abilities according to His plan for me which gifts lead me to a different understanding than the one you hold.
My understanding and beliefs compel me to share the good news as I am able, and I delight to do so. Your beliefs perhaps compel you to refute my beliefs, which is fine with me, I invite you to continue doing so, but I may not be compelled to rebut as I have the perception that almost nothing I have presented to you has had any validity in your mind. You probably feel the same way about me in this.
"I trust that the same God . . . has given me gifts and abilities according to His plan for me which gifts lead me to a different understanding than the one you hold."
In personal scruples - activities we rule in or out of "Christian" life - Scripture demands tolerance (Romans 14). But Jack . . . in all else He demands unified thinking.
Romans 15:6 "That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God."
2 Cor 13:11 "Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind . . . "
Philipp 1:27 " . . . with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel"
Philipp 2:2 "Be of one accord, of one mind."
1 Peter 3:8 "Finally, be ye all of one mind"
Jesus prayed that we might be one. (John 17) For a matter this critical, God CANNOT lead one to one conclusion and another to another.
Sort of like the multi-religious perspective that says, "Every religion is right! Just get alone together." They are not all right, and they will never get along together, except as a last step before dieing.
God only has one perspective. He is not both light and darkness, good and evil . . . He does not at the same time grant genuine free will and ultimately control our will . . . He will not at the same time save everyone, and symultaneously just save "the elect". Therefore there are higher perspectives that allow Scriptures that seem to support opposing positions to remain fully true while supporting each other. Most Christians "agree to disagree", which is a violation of His commandment.
Here is what He says about us:
1 Cor 11:19 "For there must be also heresies [out of balance truth] among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." It is required that we take the truth we know and find the balance that keeps the truth fully intact. We must humble ourselves to see this through, so that there may not be a schizm.
In Jesus name Paul says to Jack and Alfred:
1 Cor 1:10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all SPEAK THE SAME THING, and that there be no divisions ["schizma"] among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the SAME MIND and in the SAME JUDGMENT."
We have one thing going for us: We love the same Lord Jesus with all our hearts. If this is what He wants, then are we prepared to do whatever it takes to see that it happens?
Thanks for your perspective Alfred.
Jesus prayed that we might be one. (John 17) For a matter this critical, God CANNOT lead one to one conclusion and another to another.
I find your perspective to be in contradiction to the Word of God in several instances, but we have gone over them, (and if anyone else reading would like to know where I see these contradictions, simply post your question here and I will gladly reply with the Scriptural reasons), and I will answer this one item for you, Alfred.
Jesus clearly leads each person to the conclusion that He desires them to come to. Here is a verse referring to this practice of God.
2Co 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Oh wait a minute. The God of this world... you probably think this is Satan. Think again!
θεος του αιωνος would be the exact Greek words. God of eternity according to your definition.
Of course you want two witnesses. So I include:
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Pr 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.
1Ki 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
By the testimony of Scripture and the mouth of three witnesses I find that God's will is for some to spend time under deception. But that will not always be the case.
There will come a time when the knowlege of God will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. Isa 11:9 and Hab 2:14. I recently took up Scuba diving, and I can assure you that as far as I can tell, everything under the sea is covered with water.
And a time when all shall know Him.
Heb 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
So we find that in matters of God's will He allows the passage of time for the accomplishment of it. He works all things according to the counsel of His own will.Eph 1:11
"Jesus clearly leads each person to the conclusion that He desires them to come to. "
So . . . based on the reasoning posted He WANTs us to not be of one mind, right? He commands it, but He secretly makes it not happen. Do you see ANY problem with that reasoning, Jack?
At what point are you impugning the Lord's character by making Him make us do things He earnestly commands us not to do?
It is impossible to be honest and at the same time to adopt all the ideas of any other man, unless you don't think.
I understand being of one mind as:
To be of one mind in our earnest pursuit of love toward God and our fellow man. This is the only possible common ground for believers. Love supercedes knowledge, and understanding and faith, and hope. We are to be of one mind in love. To claim you have the right knowlege is to claim you are puffed up, for knowlege puffs up but love builds up.
You put words in my mouth and then tell me that they don't make sense. I agree, the words you put in my mouth don't make sense. Try this: We are in a process that God has designed and ordained. In that process it is His will that we fall short of His glory so that we come to the realization of our need for Him and so that we can fully appreciate all that He is and all that does for us.
Without distinction God has subjected all His created ones to vanity, emptiness, frustration and without distinction He shall deliver the same created ones and bring them all into the glorious libety of the children of God.
Ro 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
(This is a clear declaration showing that it is not our will, but God's, and He has reasons, that we be subjected to vanity, that is, our moral depravity,)
21 Because the creature itself also SHALL BE DELIVERED from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
So again, scripture clearly testifies that God's created ones will "shall" be delivered and brought into the glorious liberty of the children of God. It's just a matter of time.1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God...
Who villifies God? The one who boasts of His perfectly balanced love to all His creation and of His righteous judgments all designed for man's benefit, or the one who warns of a cruel wrath that can never be satisfied, the one that claims God is so selfish that He had to create millions upon millions to reject Him so that He could enjoy the few who come to Him of their Free Will?
"It is impossible to be honest and at the same time to adopt all the ideas of any other man, unless you don't think."
If you respect another man, when that man disagrees with you, you at least take it very seriously . . . right? I have yet to find a person you consider wiser than yourself, at least in this issue.
"Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? There is more hope of a fool than of him." (Proverbs 26:12)
=============================
“One mind” I never claimed to have the perfect perspective . . . only that Jesus demands that there be no “agreeing to disagree”. Indeed, even those instances where tolerance is called for (Romans 14-15), the matter is resolved by the stronger observing the scruples of the weaker which he does not necessarily agree with. “One Mind” is coupled with “One mouth”, to “speak the same thing”. That makes it completely clear.
=============================
“The words you put in my mouth don't make sense. Try this: We are in a process that God has designed and ordained. In that process it is His will that we fall short of His glory so that we come to the realization of our need for Him”
I said that you believe it is God’s will that we sin. You said, “it is His will that we fall short of His glory” To “fall short of His glory” IS sin, for the verse reads: “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) I think I said exactly what you believe. He either emphatically and overtly hates sin and sin is NEVER His will, or sin is part of His plan and He wants us to sin. You can’t have it both ways.
=============================
“This is a clear declaration showing that it is not our will, but God's, and He has reasons, that we be subjected to vanity, that is, our moral depravity”
Not so at all. The word – at its root – means “devoid of force, truth, success, result . . . useless, of no purpose”
That is exactly the type of existence that the present age provides, at witnessed by Solomon, the wisest man that ever lived. Meaningless is really the idea, NOT sinful.
23 “And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body.”
The futility continues AFTER salvation, until we get to heaven. “Creation” is the world order . . . in that day it is all under His feet, including those condemned to the permanent prison of hell, from which they – including the devil, for whom it was created – will never escape to bring sin back into creation.
Heaven is perfect happiness, endless life, no “old man” to dog our steps, earth is not like that . . . that is it, Jack. God NEVER wants anyone to sin.
A false perspective is proven by the contradictions it contains. It is quite simple: DOES God want sin, or does He emphatically never want it? You are caught in your own devices, for you know that if you say He does not, then you will have accepted that God does NOT control our wills. If you say He does, you have called Him a liar and the creator/author of sin . . . which is blasphemy.
Or you can wave your hands, complain about my “attacks” or my lack of understanding, and walk away, as you have in the past . . .
If I answer your every point, (as I have in the past), you complain my posts are too long, (mega dumps is the word you introduced), and you demand me to pick one thing. If I pick one thing and ignore anything, you say I "wave my hands and walk away".
As to the idea of me, perceiving myself to be the wisest man I know, that is absurd. I have very little wisdom. I come to Jesus not with wisdom, but with child like faith. It doesn't take wisdom, to have simple truths revealed to you. In fact, wisdom very well could be a hindrance, since the wisdom of man is foolishness with God. Nor do I consider myself to have more faith than anyone I know. I can think of others who would be totally unknown to you, who have more faith than I do. If I were to describe my perception of the situation of life I find myself in it might be described like this:
I was introduced into a large group of blind people, and I too was blind. There were, in the group, a few who had varying degrees of eyesight, perhaps none whose sight was perfect all the while I didn’t even know what seeing meant. Groping along I heard of one who loved me and was perfect, but He wasn’t of this playground. I called out to Him in faith, to live in me, but I wasn’t even aware that I was blind. This one I called out to for love, still unbeknownst to me had perfect vision and the power to give sight to anyone He wanted to. Slowly, He began to peel the layers off my eyes, so that at this time, I can make out light and color and some form. He has shown me things about Himself and His character that others cannot see. I am still weak, insignificant, and dull, but I can see better than I did when I was blind. When He shines His light on an area of truth, I see it as clearly as He wants me to and I know what I have seen. I am not stronger than others on this playground, nor smarter, nor more wise, nor better looking. I simply have been given a larger measure than many of the gift of sight. I didn’t earn it, I don’t deserve it, I’m not proud about it. It is a gift which I humbly and gratefully receive. I encourage you to ask for it, and be prepared to humbly receive it too! Be prepared to “think differently”. When your eyes are opened, it is much easier to navigate and to understand, but if you refuse to believe that you are blind, then you will postpone the gift of sight. I encourage you to humbly implore your creator to give you eyes to see, and ears to hear. When you have them, you will know and you will recognize those around you who cannot see or hear. It truly does give a distinct advantage, though we cannot boast because it is a gift.
I allow that your attacks against my character are intended to bring me to examine myself, which I do, and have done and I find myself standing not in my own righteousness, but in God's power through Jesus in peace and joy.
If I did not love you, I would have totally ignored many of your posts including the one I am now answering, but I am confident that some day you will see and understand the truth on this matter and you will appreciate the effort I have made to show you things that you have been unable to grasp. It is not through man's wisdom that I have been shown these things, but the Lord Jesus has shown them to me, allowed me to see. I can take no credit, I possess no higher station, I only joyfully receive the privilege of sight in this area.
So, tell me Alfred, who is wiser than you? Is there anyone wiser than you who's view point is different than your's? Please give me a list of all the men who are wiser than you. Tell me how you are one both in word and in thought with all these wise men. Or do you choose who is wise, by the fact that they see things like you do?
And as for the dilemma regarding sin and whether God wants it or not. How do you explain that God hardened Pharoahs heart to cause him to sin?
Ex 10:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:
Who takes responsibility here for Pharaohs propensity to sin? Who wanted Pharaoh to sin? And no less than five other times in Exodus we find the testimony of the LORD hardening Pharoahs heart which in every case caused Pharoah to make a sinful choice.
De 2:30 But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.
Again, God hardened Sihon here to sin for His purposes.
Isa 63:17 O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.
Would you consider Isaiah to be wiser than yourself? It was his perception that God made Israel to err from His ways. That would be sin would it not?
Here is the testimony of another very wise man who I agree with, do you?
Joh 12:39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. 41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
If God didn’t want them to be in the sin of unbelief, why did He harden their heart and blind their eyes, nor allow them to understand in their heart? Even though John acknowledges here that they would be converted and God would heal them if He hadn’t blinded their eyes? Doesn’t it appear clear here that God is responsible for this condition?
The futility continues AFTER salvation, until we get to heaven. “Creation” is the world order . . . in that day it is all under His feet, including those condemned to the permanent prison of hell, from which they – including the devil, for whom it was created – will never escape to bring sin back into creation.
Then why does Scripture here proclaim that the creature shall be delivered … Ro 8:21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God? This contradicts your perspective.
Heaven is perfect happiness, endless life, no “old man” to dog our steps, earth is not like that . . . that is it, Jack. God NEVER wants anyone to sin.
Then why does Scripture teach that The Kingdom of God is upon us? Heaven is here, it is not meat nor drink but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is here on earth. This too, contradicts your perspective.
A false perspective is proven by the contradictions it contains. (Your words not mine.)
You also said:
It is quite simple: DOES God want sin, or does He emphatically never want it? You are caught in your own devices, for you know that if you say He does not, then you will have accepted that God does NOT control our wills. If you say He does, you have called Him a liar and the creator/author of sin . . . which is blasphemy.
Are you saying God blasphemes himself?
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Rebellion is a thing, unbelief is a thing, sin is a thing, everything was created by Him and for Him. Even the wrath of man is a thing which He created and which shall praise Him.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Why do you accuse me of blasphemy when you are the one who denies Him the credit for creating everything for His purpose, while I ascribe this to Him. When you are the one who says He will someday become intensely hateful to those He has created to be what they are while I affirm His mercy that endures forever and his continual goodness? Even if you hide behind the thin veil of Free Will, surely you cannot deny that He knew the choices each person would make and could have in mercy ended their existence before it began or caused any number of more merciful and loving outcomes for those you say are condemned forever, or do you also deny that He has all knowledge? I affirm He is all merciful, all just, all good, all love, all knowing, all powerful and all wise. By your own testimony you affirm He is not all merciful, not all love, not all powerfulin that He is bound to let man's will preclude His own. And you accuse me of blasphemy? This too is a contradiction.
"If I answer your every point, (as I have in the past), you complain my posts are too long, (mega dumps is the word you introduced), and you demand me to pick one thing. If I pick one thing and ignore anything, you say I "wave my hands and walk away"."
It is not the length of the posts . . . but the seeming inability at times to focus on the essential. And when you present 20 verses that say essentially the same thing, that is a "dump"
IF you have thought this out, then you will be able to zero in on the essential problem with my concerns or arguments, just like Jesus did. If you haven't, then I would expect "offuscation".
As to "waving the hands", so often when I feel I have finally really nailed something down, you reply with something like, "Agree to disagree", or "You never listened before, so you won't now" . . . and if you pick a point to reply on, it is a side issue. Between "Be of one mind" and "Does God want sin?", the latter is the biggy by far.
Again, if you are right, you have nothing to fear and can hit me straight on. Perhaps over and over, if I am a bit slow. Humor me . . . go ahead an cut and paste . . . hit me again.
As C. S. Lewis said, truth, like a lion, needs to merely be let out of its cage to prevail.
"He has shown me things about Himself and His character that others cannot see."
This is precisely what every cultist says, as you well know. Higher knowledge . . . gnosticism. Just . . . beware. How often the "higher knowledge" is just another lie from the angel of light (2 Cor 11:14).
"So, tell me Alfred, who is wiser than you?"
I consider a great many men - and women - wiser than myself. I will refrain from naming names for the moment, but you know many of them. There was a time that I did not feel so and secretly despised those around me. I ended up picking up a bunch of strange notions . . . and then a major spiritual and psychological collapse which I may have shared with you. Out of the rubble I learned that I do need others and can't, in fact, make it without them. There are those that "watch for my soul", ordained by God to do so (Heb. 13). I have learned - to a greater extent - to pay attention to correction . . . the fear of where I was is real. Bottom line: I have a much greater appreciation for the “umbrella of protection” to protect my spirit and mind.
Yes, I don't agree with every point of every wise man . . . I see it as a process and keep the question mark on things where we are not of one mind . . . and I reject "agree to disagree".
“How do you explain that God hardened Pharoahs heart to cause him to sin?”
“Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” Pharaoh was already living in sin, i.e. keeping God out of his planning and life. God then “raised him up”, i.e. set him on the throne, to make use of that. God simply made him bolder so he would suffer many more consequences before bailing – even the ungodly know when they are licked and quite fighting God, even if they still hate Him. God did not make him sin . . . ever. “The wrath of man shall praise Thee” . . . the wrath is man’s . . . the use is God’s.
Ditto of Sihon.
As to Isaiah . . . consider this:
2Thess 2: 10-12 “ . . . because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Received not the love of the truth, THEN got strong delusion so they would be overtly condemned.
2 Cor 4:4 “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” Again, they believed not . . . THEN they get to be blinded.
In EVERY instance there is already sin . . . God just accelerates the decay rate so that there may be overt judgment, and they, hopefully healing. Three more proofs of that:
1 Cor 5:5 “To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. “ An overt act of a spiritual authority toward a sinning brother to “deliver to Satan” so that things may get worse . . . so they can get better.
Matt. 13:28-30 “ . . . The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them [tares] up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.” There is a deliberate process of dealing with EXISTING sin, that sown by the enemy, which includes “letting it grow” as rapidly as possible . . . so it may be eradicated.
The hardening of the heart is simply to accelerate the process fast enough so it may be dealt with IN TIME. There is a time when it is too late.
A proof from the Old Testament:
Leviticus 13:13 “Then the priest shall consider: and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: it is all turned white: he is clean.” Again . . . if the conclusion may be quickly met - like the pussing of a boil - it will bring healing.
“Then why does Scripture here proclaim that the creature shall be delivered . . . This contradicts your perspective.”
Back to verse 23: “ . . . ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, WAITING FOR THE ADOPTION, to wit, the redemption of OUR BODY.” My point was based on that and is exactly correct.
“Then why does Scripture teach that The Kingdom of God is upon us? Heaven is here, it is not meat nor drink but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is here on earth. This too, contradicts your perspective.”
Matt. 8:11 “And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.” Many SHALL sit down . . . hasn’t happened yet.
Matthew 25:34 “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” I do not underestimate your ability to spiritualize anything . . . but . . . this is the FINAL judgment . . . hasn’t happened yet.
Mark 14:25 “Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God. “ When is this, Jack?
Mark 15:43 “Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.” Still waiting . . . long after Jesus said the K. of H. was “among us”.
I will refrain from any further dumps . . . unless you demand them. Point being that, just like “eternal life” being “knowing God” and ALSO referring to a separate eternal state (which I proved, and will again), so also the K. of God is NOW in authority, but then in actual presence. THAT is, of course, what I refer to.
“Are you saying God blasphemes himself?
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”
This has – in context – to do with the evil of bad things happening to me, NOT bad things I do. Peace - not righteousness - is the opposite of evil (trouble).
“Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Rebellion is a thing, unbelief is a thing, sin is a thing, everything was created by Him and for Him. Even the wrath of man is a thing which He created and which shall praise Him.”
He did NOT create sin . . . never! Proof: Exodus 20:11 “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and *ALL* that in them is” Sin did not show up until day 8 . . . and beyond.
“You cannot deny that He knew the choices each person would make”
As you should well know by now, I strongly disagree.
Jer. 17:9-10 “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: WHO CAN KNOW IT?” But instead of saying, “I DO!”, here is what the Lord says to answer His own question: “I the Lord SEARCH the heart, I TRY THE REINS, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.”
The deceitful heart IS unknowable, because God granted – sovereignly – free will. He pulls on the reins to see what we will do, THEN rewards us according to our doings.
To gain the ability for us to choose and love Him He gave us this heart . . . We devise our way, we choose our love, but God decides where every step is planted. (Proverbs 16:9 “A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.”)
In this way every evil of man (man’s choice) works to further His will in some way . . . or gets restrained. (Proverbs 16:4 “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.”)
"He has shown me things about Himself and His character that others cannot see."
This is precisely what every cultist says, as you well know. Higher knowledge . . . gnosticism. Just . . . beware. How often the "higher knowledge" is just another lie from the angel of light (2 Cor 11:14).
What aspect of the Christian faith is not received by faith? When you share Jesus with someone who does not believe in Jesus, often they simply cannot see what you see. Does that cause you to worry that you may be in a cult? Of course not. When you share the concept of debt free living with believers that can’t come to grips with that level of trust, do you fear you are in a cult? When you see that a married couple should trust God to determine the number of children a family has, and others in your own fellowship don’t see that, does it concern you that you may have become a cultist? When God has given you a conviction against divorce and remarriage which goes against the mainstream Christian beliefs, does that cause you to be concerned that you may be holding to cultist beliefs? Do you ever hear God speak to you? If so, do you worry that perhaps it is an Angel of light lying to you? I know many wise men of God who believe like I do in this area, and I know many wise men of God who don’t. It isn’t a matter of wisdom but of revelation.
IF you have thought this out, then you will be able to zero in on the essential problem with my concerns or arguments, just like Jesus did. If you haven't, then I would expect "offuscation".
I see! Obfuscation is what you’d expect! Is that why you use it so much?
Now that you mention it, it seems to me your arguments have been full of the very technique you accuse me of. For instance here, when you throw in the word Gnosticism. I didn’t even know what it meant so I looked it up on Google. Please! Spare me. Was that some kind of attempt to sound sophisticated or simply a smoke screen to add some kind of pizzazz to your statement? Let’s not go there. Nothing I have said remotely resembles the Gnostic religion and we will both be held accountable for every word we speak to each other so let’s not muddy the waters with Gnosticism.
Yes, I don't agree with every point of every wise man . . . I see it as a process and keep the question mark on things where we are not of one mind . . . and I reject "agree to disagree".
Then what is your point when you require me to be of one mind?
and ALSO referring to a separate eternal state (which I proved, and will again), so also the K. of God is NOW in authority, but then in actual presence. THAT is, of course, what I refer to.
Could you please define the word “proved” according to your usage? It seems rather odd to me, that you could honestly think you have presented anything on this to the level of proof. I’m thinking you must mean something else by the words "proved" and "proof".
He did NOT create sin . . . never! Proof: Exodus 20:11 “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and *ALL* that in them is” Sin did not show up until day 8 . . . and beyond.
Could you see into Adam and Eve’s heart? Does God make proclamation that they were without sin? How do you “prove” that they didn’t already have within them the seed of rebellion? If God didn’t put it there, where did it come from? Did it create itself? Did Adam or Eve create it? Did Satan create it?
Where is your “PROOF”? I’m embarrassed for you, that you keep claiming you proved this or that. Your reasonings are far from conclusive, why can’t you see this? Even though the reasonings have presented have been consistently more powerful and conclusive than yours on every point, yet I would not claim them to be proof! I allow that it can be looked at enough ways that it cannot be locked down. If you ever truly offer proof, I will not be able to dispute it. All you have offered is reasonings, which in fact contradict other Scriptures. Isn't that "truth out of balance" as you are so fond of saying?
“You cannot deny that He knew the choices each person would make”
As you should well know by now, I strongly disagree.
I see! You did mention earlier that you don’t believe God is omniscient and it seems you offered the typical Deist reasonings quoting verses where God had to come down to see if the reports he heard were true, or when He had to ask Adam and Eve where they were. Now, I’m fairly sure you are not a Deist, since a Deists consider Christianity to be a cult, so it is curious to me what has caused you to adopt this “strange” belief, and be okay with it, while you are all concerned about us believing that Jesus will ultimately deliver all His created ones. It seems rather suspicious to me that you carve away at His power and greatness, while we exalt it, and you associate us with depravity and immorality, with Gnosticism and Calvinism, and all the while you over rule verses that clearly teach His omniscience, with verses that use accommodation. I’ll grant you, that verses which describe God in language that uses human traits, such as he came down to see, or he repented, do contradict verses that describe His character and attributes but the problem is both verses are recorded in Scripture and you must allow them both to be correct if it is the Word of God, and I believe it is. (Accurate in the original languages.)
So if we have a statement describing God as all knowing, and we do have a sufficient number of verses that do, and we have verses that show Him as acting like a man, not knowing something, we have a dilemma that must be solved. Either the statement which says He knows everything is incorrect or limited in some way, or has some totally different meaning, or the statement of His coming down to see is given for a different purpose. One of the conflicting verses has to yield to the other.
In the example you give, Jer 17: 9-10, we find the rhetorical question following the statement regarding the deceitful quality of the heart, and the question is: “Who can know it?”
Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
In this, you make the very strained observation, IMO, that the answer, “I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins…” “proves” that God didn’t know what was in the heart. All the while it is possible, even probable IMO that God is using accommodating language to help us see that He even knows our hearts, a knowledge we cannot attain to.
In the light of verses which proclaim God’s all knowing attribute such as:
1Jo 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
Isa 46:9 … for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
And there are many others I could “dump” on you as you put it.
The point here is that I believe, along with many of the wise men you admire, most likely, that God is omniscient. This is very important, as you have brought out because it does great harm to the free will belief you hold and that is why you cannot accept it.
Isa 45:7 ...This has – in context – to do with the evil of bad things happening to me, NOT bad things I do. Peace - not righteousness - is the opposite of evil (trouble).
More Obfuscation ala Alfred!
Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. 8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
Righteousness is very much a part of the context my friend. Furthermore, the word for “evil” is “ra”. The very same word used in this verse which should be so familiar to you.
Pr 8:13 The fear of the LORD is to hate evil (ra) : pride, and arrogancy, and the evil (ra) way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.
You, my friend are striving with your maker! Saying He is less than He is in power and goodness and saying He is more than He is in cruel hatred, That is vilifying, or blaspheming.
Isa 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?
11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.
12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
13 I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways: he shall build my city, and he shall let go my captives, not for price nor reward, saith the LORD of hosts.
To sum up your perspective Alfred. From what you have testified in these discussions, I would conclude that you believe:
God is not all merciful!
God’s mercy is only for the few, the “elect”.
God is Love and Hate!
God ultimately hates His enemies!
God is not Omniscient- that is there are things He does not know.
God’s will is in subjection to the will of man when it comes to salvation. (Even though He wants everyone to be saved, He cannot violate their free will to choose eternal damnation.)
God’s love is not sufficient to win most sinners to Him! In this aspect, it fails though it never ends to the objects of His love like yourself.
God is not Omnipresent – that is He has to come down and look to find out what’s happening on earth.
Is this assessment correct?
“How do you explain that God hardened Pharoahs heart to cause him to sin?”
“Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” Pharaoh was already living in sin, i.e. keeping God out of his planning and life. God then “raised him up”, i.e. set him on the throne, to make use of that. God simply made him bolder so he would suffer many more consequences before bailing – even the ungodly know when they are licked and quite fighting God, even if they still hate Him. God did not make him sin . . . ever. “The wrath of man shall praise Thee” . . . the wrath is man’s . . . the use is God’s.
More obfuscation Alfred?
Did the hardening of Pharoahs heart cause Pharoah to sin a sin that he otherwise would not have committed? Yes or No?
If Yes, then God deliberately caused sin to occur and He bears full responsibility for it.
If No, then why did God bother hardening Pharaohs heart? Didn’t He know that Pharaoh would resist anyway? God claimed He knew exactly how Pharaoh would respond and He told Moses before hand. Was that just a lucky guess on God’s part?
How can you get away from acknowledging that God caused Pharaoh to sin to further His purpose? And no more obfuscation, thank you.
Your extremely lame explanation, excuse my graphic description, says that since Pharoah had already sinned, God is not responsible for causing him to sin the next sin.
It remains evident that Pharoah would not have continued in sin unless God had hardened his heart, otherwise, God was wasting His time and power, and vainly boasting. Furthermore, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God so on this reasoning of yours, if God who never has anything to do with sin, wants to, He can harden all the hearts of everyone in the world and cause us to sin every sin possible and He is free from responsibility for this act because we have all already sinned.
Your theology is blowing up all around you, why don’t you abandon it before you sink with it?
Alfred, it is time for you to metanoeo, that is to rethink, or think again. I suggest instead of a knee jerk reaction, that you ponder the things that have been shared with you. Get quiet before God and ask Him to show you who He really is. Wait on Him, get to know Him better, rest in Him. Then come back and tell us what you learned.
“What aspect of the Christian faith is not received by faith? When you share Jesus with someone who does not believe in Jesus, often they simply cannot see what you see.”
The essential aspect of “faith” is never whether or not I believe something . . . but rather whether I believe God . . . and obey what I know.
1 Peter 4:17 “What shall the end be of them that OBEY NOT the gospel of God?”
Greater faith (Luke 17) comes from applying what I know, like the planting of a seed. Rejecting what I know results in darkness . . . and delusion (Rom. 1/ 2 Thess 2:11) The humbling and embarrassing thing is that we can be completely convinced of something . . . and completely wrong, for God has deceived us. It is a judgment for rejecting what God taught us earlier. 2 Timothy 3:7 “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
So . . . not every “revelation” is in fact a revelation for our good. Y2K was a good example of that. Those that rejected God’s truth about how He works through authority were doomed to embarrassment by giving in to fear and a host of wonderful “revelations” about the end of the world and how God wanted us to prepare for it. God allows this to humble us – failure to accept His truth is little things leads to embarrassment in large things.
It is my opinion that you have pride as it relates to a huge majority of your fellow believers, including great men and women that have God’s mark of approval. I know what it is to walk there . . . Daniel 4:37 “Those that walk in pride he is able to abase.”
On Gnosticism . . . give me credit that this is not the first time I have brought this up. I guess you didn’t look it up that last time.
And it does relate . . . it was an essential error in Bible times, some that had superior knowledge (gnosis) to other believers and despised them. 1 Cor 3:19 “He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.”
“Then what is your point when you require me to be of one mind?”
Don’t “agree to disagree”. Don’t consider it “OK” for you and I to be of different minds . . . consider it a judgment. You don’t even have to think I am right . . . it is pressure from Jesus to figure out why.
“Could you please define the word “proved” according to your usage? It seems rather odd to me, that you could honestly think you have presented anything on this to the level of proof. I’m thinking you must mean something else by the words "proved" and "proof".”
On Feb. 9th in “God Knows Me” in response to your request to prove that aionios life was future, i.e. heaven I wrote:
“The fact that it is a present possession and comes from knowing God does not alter the fact that it is eternal. Which is why He called it "aionios" life instead of "God" life or "Spiritual" life or any number of other tags that would define it closer to what you are trying to make it.
The fact that eternal life is present does not negate that it is also very specifically a future inheritance, your "pie in the sky" if you will. Luke 18:30 "Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting." Blessings in this life, eternal life in the next. This answers your question, “Can you find a verse which states: This is life aionios, that we get to go to heaven when we die, or something of that nature?””
--------------------------------
As to proving . . . Jack, I have no idea what “prove” means to you. Is there any standard you will accept that will change your mind? That is a serious question. In this example I DID prove my point previously . . . you never countered it.
You mock my “proofs” . . . frankly, I don’t believe you care about “proofs”. As long as I don’t agree with you, I am wrong and nothing is proven.
The most glaring of these is the proof that secular and original use of aionios is clearly and emphatically as “eternal”. This represents the complete collapse of your theory, because if aionios means “eternal”, then hell is eternal, among many other things. Your response was to admit that you weren’t able on a scholarly basis to challenge the source I provided [i.e. make your own translation] . . . then attempted to use Sodom as an example of aionios that is not eternal. I proved that, contrary to your understanding, Sodom’s destruction remains complete, eternal . . . and that Isaiah’s cited comments to the contrary were a nickname for Jerusalem. That was the end . . . you never replied.
Bracing for another scornful response, it seems to me that I proved your primary linguistic premise false. This has huge implications . . . but you don’t care, from all I can tell. Which seems to me proof positive that you have nothing objective on which you stand, only your subjective perceptions . . . your higher understandings and knowledge, your “peace of God” confirming in your heart triumphs over all “proofs”. At least be honest and admit it.
“Seed of Rebellion”
An interesting concept . . . where do you get that from? Rebellion is rebellion . . . it is a choice, to make myself an authority equal to God. You are confused because you – again – are deterministic, seeing everything as a cause and effect relationship. God – and Jesus specifically – said, “Ye are gods” (Ps 82:6/John 10:34) . . . meaning we HAVE the ability to make independent decisions in the Universe. And we may choose – like Lucifer – to be “like God”, decide for ourselves what commandments we will live by instead of placing our will under His. That is sin . . . pure and simple.
You claimed that sin is created. God says in Exodus 21 that He made EVERYTHING that He made in 6 days . . . “Sin”didn’t happen in those six days. What is it about this proof that you despise?
“It seems rather suspicious to me that you carve away at His power and greatness, while we exalt it”
There are those that would “exalt” Him by having Him be Sovereign, making decisions that He will never explain, choosing some to heaven and some to hell. Some would “exalt” Him by denying that He could ever confine Himself to a human body . . . or suffer death. His ways and thoughts are above ours, Jack . . . so sometimes what we think is “exalt” is in fact heresy . . . or worse.
“1Jo 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.”
The same word is used in this verse:
1 Cor. 8:3, "if any man love God, the same is known of Him;"
Strange, eh? That the fact that we love Him means that He knows us? Explain that.
“Isa 46:9 … for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:”
This is completely clear . . . He knows it because He MAKES it happen – “I will do all my pleasure”, NOT I know what y’all are going to do. God controls our EVERY step . . . NOT our intentions, just our steps. (Prov. 16:9 “A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.”) So, as a result, He can control the outcome completely, as much as He chooses. But He will judge us for our heart choices, whether we have believed Him and love Him. John 3:19 “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men LOVED DARKNESS rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”
“And there are many others I could “dump” on you as you put it.”
Go for it . . . a few at a time. This is essential.
“Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. 8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
Righteousness is very much a part of the context my friend. Furthermore, the word for “evil” is “ra”. The very same word used in this verse which should be so familiar to you.”
PEACE is the opposite of evil here . . . period! The word has the same meanings as our English word does . . . “Evil disease” does not mean a sinful disease . . . not the same meaning as “Evil man”.
AND . . . The righteousness here is HIS righteousness, coming down from heaven, not man’s righteousness.
Remembering the “2-3 witnesses” rule, does He anywhere else claim to “create evil” where it clearly means sin? NO! But the other use is abundant:
Exodus 32:14 “And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.”
Exodus 33:4 “And when the people heard these evil tidings . . .”
Deuteronomy 31:17 “ many evils and troubles shall befall them”
Joshua 23:15 “Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things”
“I would conclude that you believe . . . Is this assessment correct?”
Of course not . . . you are really not trying very hard to correctly represent me, vs. scolding a caricature.
“God is not all merciful!”
Where did you get that idea? No, really . . . Humor me by accepting that I really truly believe in free will . . . God is endlessly merciful – By His own righteousness He can not make us obey Him.
“God’s mercy is only for the few, the “elect”.”
See point 1.
“God is Love and Hate!”
God is love . . . and He hates. He loves some more than others, starting with His own Son. Those that hate His son that He loves He will hate.
“God ultimately hates His enemies!”
Yes, that is what He says. Or . . . is the Scripture not your final authority? Psalms 11:5 “The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.”
“God is not Omniscient- that is there are things He does not know.”
You really did wave your hands at Jer. 17 . . . basically telling me that you aren’t convinced, although I have no reason why (other than that it contradicts your beliefs) What do you make of this? Mark 13:32 “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father” That tells me that the Son – Who is God – voluntarily restricts His knowledge to further a specific end.
“God’s will is in subjection to the will of man when it comes to salvation. (Even though He wants everyone to be saved, He cannot violate their free will to choose eternal damnation.)”
Hey . . . YOU tell me that He can’t choose to not save anyone . . . sounds like bondage to me. You claim that that is His choice, to save everyone? If you allow He could choose to do that . . . then . . . He can choose to let man have free will . . . right? If He wants to? That is an act of awesome sovereignty, not subjection.
“God’s love is not sufficient to win most sinners to Him! In this aspect, it fails though it never ends to the objects of His love like yourself.”
Sufficient? What a strange world you live in, Jack. At least you can try to think like you, yourself, used to think. Of course it is sufficient . . . give me credit for not being a Calvinist. If a way to escape is offered to all, and some reject it, is that a problem of sufficiency?! No . . . it is a problem with the foolishness of those who refused the escape.
“God is not Omnipresent – that is He has to come down and look to find out what’s happening on earth.”
Not sure where that comes in . . . I never said that, nor do I believe it.
“Did the hardening of Pharoahs heart cause Pharoah to sin a sin that he otherwise would not have committed? Yes or No?”
Your question is based on a false premise, that you can decide between “big” sins and “little” sins.
Pharaoh would have sinned regardless . . . we read “The plowing of the wicked is sin” (Prov. 21:4) Preaching in Jesus name and doing miracles is called sin (iniquity) in Matt. 7.
He sinned differently than he would have . . . not sure how you decide that openly not letting the people go is a greater sin than giving lip service to giving in while secretly continuing to hate the Lord. In fact, the opposite appears to be true: Rev. 3:15-16 “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth . . .”
With the open defeat there was a far greater chance of true humbling and genuine repentance than living an ordinary sinful life free from trouble . . . wouldn’t you agree?
Luke 6:21 “Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh . . . But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation.”
Do please respond to this! Pharaoh is not a good example to help you prove that God likes sin and wants people to sin. He moves a man with a given bent in a direction that will both further His will and result - hopefully - in less sin.
It is my opinion that you have pride as it relates to a huge majority of your fellow believers, including great men and women that have God’s mark of approval. I know what it is to walk there . . . Daniel 4:37 “Those that walk in pride he is able to abase.”
Alfred, I am in no position to argue with you on this point. I accept your opinion and rejoice to go to my Saviour acknowledging to Him this problem you see in me.
Lord Jesus, I have pride and this is displeasing to you. I have blindness as well, in that I wasn’t even aware of it, but I appreciate and trust Alfreds perspective on this matter, and implore you for gentle correction, complete forgiveness, and complete cleansing from all unrighteousness. Thanks for your provision for all my unrighteousness. You are my hope, my comfort, my peace, my strength, my righteousness, apart from you I am weak, dirty, blind, agitated, dumb, and deaf, but in you I am whole. Your presence overwhelms me, thank you for your peace.
Yes, Alfred, I’m sure your observation is correct, but please don’t let my short comings blind you to the truth I am representing to you. God uses imperfect vessels. In His hands, we become useful.
The essential aspect of “faith” is never whether or not I believe something . . . but rather whether I believe God . . . and obey what I know.
NEVER? Isn’t that just semantics? Believing God, is believing many things. To me, this seems to be more obfuscation on your part. (I’m so glad you introduced that word into our discussion.) Believing God is believing what He says, what He is, what He does, what He teaches. Aren’t these all “somethings”, they certainly aren’t “nothings”.
1 Peter 4:17 “What shall the end be of them that OBEY NOT the gospel of God?”
The question is about those who don’t obey the GOSPEL of God. It is possible that this could be you. You reject the good news, that Jesus is the Saviour of all men, that God is in Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, that death and Hell will be rendered powerless, and embrace the repugnantly bad news that I believe is clearly inconsistent with the GOOD news of great joy which shall be to ALL people.
…The humbling and embarrassing thing is that we can be completely convinced of something . . . and completely wrong, for God has deceived us.
Can I take this as a concession? That you are agreeing with what I said earlier? I will cut and paste my statement that you seemed to disagree with earlier.
I am sure that you are persuaded in your mind, and that you can justify your stand by the word of God as you see it. I also believe that God has given you the attributes that allow you to see and understand as you do and I appreciate your view point. I wonder if we can ever come to a point of mutual respect, allowing that either one of us could be right while the other could be incorrect in our understanding….
experience has taught me that some times when I am sure I am right, alas, I find I am still wrong. So I admit with honesty of heart that I could be the one who is wrong here,
Your reply didn’t indicate any common ground, but now I hear you saying essentially the same thing. (your post “For Him” April 21, 2010 6:30 AM)
Do we have some common ground here? Can we approach this discussion from the theoretical stand point that You could be wrong? I am willing to, as I said in the previous post, acknowledge that possibility on my part.
1 Cor. 15:50 "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood CANNOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption."
This is in the emphatic context of the resurrection, so you don't get to spiritualize it. Clearly, we don't "inherit" the K. of G. until we have immortal bodies. That is heaven, Jack . . . future.
The Kingdom of God may be among us in authority . . . but it is a place NOT AROUND HERE . . . and we don't get to live there until we have new bodies.
Post away, Jack . . . the last post on my part was just something I ran across, hadn't seen your last reply. Peter and I are in the Basic Seminar all this week . . . you know what the schedule is. I will reply as I can to any and all of your comments . . . perhaps not until next week, but we will see.
I love you.
Hi Alfred,
Caught you online. :)
Flesh and blood cannot inherit, does not preclude the Kingdom from being here now silly. You are more than flesh and blood. When your spirit leaves you, that is a reference to leaving this life. Your spirit can and must now inherit the Kingdom or you are not yet one of His.
Ro 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
We who know Him, are already in the kingdom.
frankly, I don’t believe you care about “proofs”. As long as I don’t agree with you, I am wrong and nothing is proven.
To prove something, would be to conclusively show that the something is fact by presenting conclusive irrefutable evidence, to disprove would be to conclusively show that something is NOT fact, by presenting conclusive irrefutable evidence. This would be how I would understand “prove” or “proof”.
The “proofs” you have claimed thus far all fall short of this criteria, since they are all based on suppositions that can’t be substantiated, or assumptions that can be disagreed with. It would behoove you to not boast of “proofs” when you merely have presented sketchy evidence that seems to support your viewpoint.
i.e. The fact that eternal life is present does not negate that it is also very specifically a future inheritance, your "pie in the sky" if you will. Luke 18:30 "Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting." Blessings in this life, eternal life in the next. This answers your question, “Can you find a verse which states: This is life aionios, that we get to go to heaven when we die, or something of that nature?””
It is a cardinal rule, I understand, in logic, that you don’t define a word with the word you are defining. You are claiming that aionios means everlasting because you think it means everlasting. I understand that you “think” that it means everlasting but that doesn’t prove it. I think it is a reference to that spiritual life in the Kingdom of God that continues in the next age for those who enter already possessing it and this is logical and reasonable as far as translations are concerned.
Lu 18:30 who may not receive back manifold more in this time, and in the coming age, life age-during.'YLT
Proof would require another word that clearly meant “eternal”.
Interesting in most translations we find something like this:
Lu 18:30 who will not get back very much more in this age, and in the age to come eternal life." NRSV
For aionios the NRSV opted for “eternal”, but even you know that “eternal” has no beginning and no end”, whereas in this context we are talking about something that seems to have a beginning. This illustrates my point that translations aren’t always accurate. I’m not saying it proves it, though I think I could make a very good case for this statement.
As for the argument that I didn’t answer your “proof” from the poem, doesn’t rise to the level of proof. You have not answered all my challenges either. I have put that one off for now, and I have legitimate reasons for doing so, but even if I showed you that the English translation of the poem you possess was in fact incorrect, would that persuade you ? I highly doubt it. My resources are limited as is time. I have found arguments by Greek scholars on the meaning of aionios, and it seems that even among those who study Greek and read Greek that the true meaning of “aionios” is a controversy. They cannot seem to agree on what it means.
I exhort you to quit saying you proved this or that. It is unbecomingly arrogant, and compels me to demonstrate the foolishness or weakness of your assertion. It is empty boasting.
You claimed that sin is created. God says in Exodus 21 that He made EVERYTHING that He made in 6 days . . . “Sin”didn’t happen in those six days. What is it about this proof that you despise?
In the light of Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made your proof has contradiction that you haven't explained.
Was anyone blind in the first 6 days? Was anyone deaf in the first 6 days? Ex 4:11 And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?
By your definition, it would seem that God didn’t make you, because you were not seen in the first 6 days? God didn’t make rain, God didn’t make thunder, lightning, rainbows, or snow?
By my definition, God created everything. There is nothing that exists that He did not create, therefore everything is good in that it is designed to accomplish His will, and His will is that everyone might one day be reconciled unto Him.
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And BTW, just because He doesn’t mention “under the earth” here, does not exclude things under the earth. Especially in the light of “without him was not anything made that was made.”
If your argument is true, where did sin come from, who made it? Did it make itself? Who made the law?
Consider what Paul says here:
Ro 7:7 What then should we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."
8 But sin, seizing an opportunity in the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead.
9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived
10 and I died, and the very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.
11 For sin, seizing an opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.
In Paul’s description here, we see that sin lies invisible, until the commandment gives it opportunity to manifest itself. The commandment to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did not appear to be given in the first 7 days. But sin could have been, no, must have been created already. If you disagree, then logic demands that you explain where sin came from and for your explanation to rise to the level of proof, you must show irrefutable evidence based on solid facts, not conjecture and assumption.
1 Cor. 8:3, "if any man love God, the same is known of Him;"
Strange, eh? That the fact that we love Him means that He knows us? Explain that.
The precious concept of “knowing” God and being known of Him” is essential to my life in Jesus. You are aware of course that the same word “know” “ginosko” is the word used for intimate relations between a husband and wife.
Mt 1:25 And [Joseph]knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
“Knowing” in this context for the husband includes sowing seeds. Seed is often used to illustrate the words of God, which He sows in our hearts, which are designed to yield fruit. The Lord Jesus, our groom, plants the seeds of truth in us when we open ourselves up to Him. When we allow Him to see our nakedness, when we don’t cover our sins or hide our imperfections from Him, He responds by sowing seeds of truth in our lives, in our hearts, in our minds, so that we become pregnant until they grow sufficiently and then appear as a new life, a spiritual life, aionios life, where joy and peace and His righteousness are established.
I hope you come into this understanding of relationship with your Saviour sooner than later. As the Father loves Him, so does He love you. He will not reject you but He will discipline you till He has brought you to perfection in Him.
Joshua 23:15 “Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things”
Is the propensity to sin an evil thing? You introduced this verse and I can’t help but notice that it says “all” evil things. As long as sin is a “thing” that ever existed, God claims to have created it and here in your proof text God brings all evil things on His people.
You should go ahead and admit it, sin is a “thing”. God through Jesus made everything! He created EVERYTHING. Without Him, nothing was made that was made.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
You deny that God created sin yet
you believe that God made everything? Do you deny sin is something? Where is your logic?
Now you will just say, (as you do in another post, I haven’t yet addressed,) that we just can’t understand God. That was Calvin’s argument when people decried His doctrine. He turned the blame on those who challenged His faulty doctrine by saying, “dare you challenge God”, when in fact, they were only challenging Calvin’s misperceptions.
God encourages us to use reason, to seek understanding, to search things out, to test all things, to hold to that which is good.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
“God is not all merciful!”
Where did you get that idea? No, really . . . Humor me by accepting that I really truly believe in free will . . . God is endlessly merciful – By His own righteousness He can not make us obey Him.
“God’s mercy is only for the few, the “elect”.”
See point 1.
I see your point I think. In other words, because God has extended the potential to receive mercy, he is all merciful. Is this what you mean?
And you dispute that God’s mercy is only for the elect, it’s for everyone except those who reject it of their own free will. Is that more accurate?
You say God “can not” make us obey Him. Would you take it so far as to say God can not even persuade many to come to Him, it is not possible for Him to do so? Would you say that there is no device available that God could employ to change the hearts of a single person who rejects Him.
When the Bible proclaims that His mercy endureth for ever, do you perceive it to mean that the attribute of mercy towards His friends endures forever, but it can never be extended in any way to those who have sealed their fate at death? To me, that seems to be less than all merciful but to you, somehow it’s okay for the all merciful one to forever withhold mercy from the millions who for whatever reason didn’t get saved before they died. How would you suggest I label this belief in my summary?
Alfred doesn’t believe that God will extend mercy to His enemies after death, but otherwise He is all merciful? Please help me define your belief in this.
Perhaps: Alfred believes that Gods never ending mercy, and unlimited mercy are limited and denied to those who don’t make the right choice before they die?
God is love . . . and He hates. He loves some more than others, starting with His own Son. Those that hate His son that He loves He will hate.
Why do you say “will”, doesn’t He already hate them? M
“God ultimately hates His enemies!”
Yes, that is what He says. Or . . . is the Scripture not your final authority? Psalms 11:5 “The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.”
Wow! Such accusations! One verse standing alone, and if I don’t believe it proves your point then Scripture is not my final authority?
Describe for me your hatred for your mom, your wife, your children. Or is Scripture not your final authority? Anyway, at least you do concede that you believe God hates His enemies. Do you use the same definition for hate here that you will use when you describe your hatred for your family members? Perhaps you could give us both definitions if they differ and explain why they should differ?
“God is not Omniscient- that is there are things He does not know.”
You really did wave your hands at Jer. 17 . . . basically telling me that you aren’t convinced, although I have no reason why (other than that it contradicts your beliefs)
In my reply to Jer. 17 I offer Scripture which contradicts your interpretation along with a possible meaning to your verse that doesn’t contradict logic or other Scripture. Instead of waving your hands, why don’t you offer a plausible explanation of the proper meaning of the verses I quote which contradict your verse and show how they could be understood in a way that doesn’t contradict Jer. 17.
Here’s the copy paste of my response again:
In the example you give, Jer 17: 9-10, we find the rhetorical question following the statement regarding the deceitful quality of the heart, and the question is: “Who can know it?”
Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
In this, you make the very strained observation, IMO, that the answer, “I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins…” “proves” that God didn’t know what was in the heart. All the while it is possible, even probable IMO that God is using accommodating language to help us see that He even knows our hearts, a knowledge we cannot attain to.
In the light of verses which proclaim God’s all knowing attribute such as:
1Jo 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
Isa 46:9 … for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
And there are many others I could “dump” on you as you put it.
The point here is that I believe, along with many of the wise men you admire, most likely, that God is omniscient. This is very important, as you have brought out because it does great harm to the free will belief you hold and that is why you cannot accept it.
I also believe in free will BTW, but it is not an excuse for God to be cruel, rather a device for Him to work His love and mercy in bringing us to perfection. He is way to smart, and powerful, and irresistible to fail in bringing everyone to Himself in His perfect time. We all love Him because He has drawn us by His love to Himself. If His love fails to draw a single person to Himself then His love FAILED.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
What do you make of this? Mark 13:32 “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father” That tells me that the Son – Who is God – voluntarily restricts His knowledge to further a specific end.
Jesus seems to be saying that He doesn't know something that the Father knows. During His time on earth as a man, He seemed to have suspended some of His God attributes. That does not indicate that the Father ever didn't know anything. He numbered the grains of sand and keeps track of the hairs on your head, he knows every sparrow and knows when they fall. To tell the end from the beginning requires Him to know every pertinent decision that ever was made before they were made. He cannot be limited in knowledge and know the end from the beginning. Too much hinges on human decisions.
“God’s will is in subjection to the will of man when it comes to salvation. (Even though He wants everyone to be saved, He cannot violate their free will to choose eternal damnation.)”
Hey . . . YOU tell me that He can’t choose to not save anyone . . . sounds like bondage to me. You claim that that is His choice, to save everyone? If you allow He could choose to do that . . . then . . . He can choose to let man have free will . . . right? If He wants to? That is an act of awesome sovereignty, not subjection.
No Alfred, I don’t claim that!
God does!
I have shown many of the verses where God’s word makes these claims.
He did give man free will, I have continually agreed with this reality, but He will bring every person to the point where they WILLINGLY, joyfully, gratefully, accept His better plan for them. He will do as He promised and draw all unto Himself. That’s His plan, not mine. He alone can accomplish the salvation of any soul, and that includes yours. He doesn’t need your help, or your permission, or even your obedience, though He will get your permission and willing obedience, and everyone else’s, like He said, in due time.
The difference between your version and mine is that the end result in yours is bad for most and leaves the Lord Himself bereaved, where as in the picture I see, God is Highly Exalted and Loved by All, and all are blessed in Him. He is fulfilled and receives the inheritance promised to Him.
Ps 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
We are all His children and we are all, except Adam and Eve, the fruit of the womb. We are all His inheritance.
Another major difference is that I believe and teach that our sins always bring negative consequences now in this life. Immediate and severe, cutting us off from the Kingdom of God and all the blessings of fellowship with Him, while your belief majors on the big, ultimate, scare of an inescapable horrendous judgment that cannot be fathomed instilling a fear to cause obedience that can never be realized perfectly. Killing joy and peace and the natural out spring of love and gratefulness and joy which empowers His children and sets them apart from the world.
Anyway, you admit that this is an accurate representation of your belief.
“God’s will is in subjection to the will of man when it comes to salvation. (Even though He wants everyone to be saved, He cannot violate their free will to choose eternal damnation.)”
“God’s love is not sufficient to win most sinners to Him! In this aspect, it fails though it never ends to the objects of His love like yourself.”
Sufficient? What a strange world you live in, Jack. At least you can try to think like you, yourself, used to think. Of course it is sufficient . . . give me credit for not being a Calvinist. If a way to escape is offered to all, and some reject it, is that a problem of sufficiency?! No . . . it is a problem with the foolishness of those who refused the escape.
What I meant was that God’s love, which we understand must be extended to us first, is not enough (sufficient) to draw those who will refuse it.
My premise is that :
1Jo 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.
The cause of us loving Him is His love for us. His love extended to us stimulates us to respond with love in return. If He doesn’t love us, we can’t love Him, or 1Jo 4:19 does not mean what it seems to be saying. We also have other verses that indicate this:
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
And of course, the promise:
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
We also know that salvation is of Him, by Him and not of ourselves, and that it is impossible for man to save himself but with God all things are possible.
With these verses in mind isn’t it true that you believe that God’s love is inadequate to draw some to Himself?
Even though you excuse your belief by faulting the created ones, don’t you admit that you believe that God’s love is insufficient to draw all men to himself? If not, then how do you explain the fact that all don’t come and yield to Him before they die?
Do you agree with this assessment of your belief?
“God’s love is not sufficient to win most sinners to Him! In this aspect, it fails though it never ends to the objects of His love like yourself.”
“God is not Omnipresent – that is He has to come down and look to find out what’s happening on earth.”
Not sure where that comes in . . . I never said that, nor do I believe it.
If God is always everywhere at the same time, and I believe He is too, then how could he possibly not know anything? How many times have your children operated in a way that you could predict before they did it? For me the number is incredibly high, and I don’t claim to know much and I’m not everywhere at once, looking at their hearts and their quiet reasonings like God is.
Before we even pray He answers.
Ps 139:2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.
Ps 139:16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
Okay, I’ll scratch Omnipresence from the list of things you don’t believe in.
Post away, Jack . . . the last post on my part was just something I ran across, hadn't seen your last reply. Peter and I are in the Basic Seminar all this week . . . you know what the schedule is. I will reply as I can to any and all of your comments . . . perhaps not until next week, but we will see.
I love you.
Hope the week is very profitable for you and Peter. As you see, I have already “posted away” just answering your previous posts.
Thanks for the love.
Next week, I will most likely not have access to internet, (camping with the fam.) So if you don’t hear from me, enjoy the break! : )
“Did the hardening of Pharoahs heart cause Pharoah to sin a sin that he otherwise would not have committed? Yes or No?”
Your question is based on a false premise, that you can decide between “big” sins and “little” sins.
Why is that a false premise, and why is that even a premise to what I ask? My question has nothing to do with the size of the sin, only whether or not God caused Pharaoh to commit a sin?
Pharaoh would have sinned regardless . . . we read “The plowing of the wicked is sin” (Prov. 21:4) Preaching in Jesus name and doing miracles is called sin (iniquity) in Matt. 7.
He sinned differently than he would have . . . not sure how you decide that openly not letting the people go is a greater sin than giving lip service to giving in while secretly continuing to hate the Lord. In fact, the opposite appears to be true: Rev. 3:15-16 “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth . . .”
With the open defeat there was a far greater chance of true humbling and genuine repentance than living an ordinary sinful life free from trouble . . . wouldn’t you agree?
Yes, I would agree. I would make the same point. Sin is designed by God to lead us into circumstances that bring more grace, and I would hasten to add with Paul, “What then should we continue in sin so that grace may abound? God forbid. That would be stupid!
Luke 6:21 “Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh . . . But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation.”
Do please respond to this! Pharaoh is not a good example to help you prove that God likes sin and wants people to sin. He moves a man with a given bent in a direction that will both further His will and result - hopefully - in less sin.
First I would like to clarify. Just because God creates something, does not mean He LIKES it. I made a paddle to discipline my children with. I don’t like the paddle, and I don’t like to use it, but I do find it useful, and I do utilize it for their benefit. I like the results that proper use of this particular tool gets, and so do my children and so do their friends and acquaintances.
God created us, designed us, gave us attributes and propensities. He knew the results of every minute detail when he made us, and He knows that in His perfect time and after the exact sequence of events we go through, that we will respond to His love and love Him in return.
Pharaoh is an excellent example, for God clearly takes credit for causing him to sin against the direct command to let His people go. It is also an excellent example to show how God gets His way, illustrating the importance of fully submitting to Him, the sooner the better.
As for the verse you ask me to respond to: Luke 6:21, Who is weeping now? Are not the poor who do not know Christ weeping now? Are not the rich who realize that there is no satisfaction in riches weeping now? Are not those who believe they can never be saved weeping now?
And who is rich now? Are not any Christians rich now? Are you not rich when compared to 70% or more of the world, who don’t own a car, or a luxurious home like your’s? How many can’t go to the store and get whatever food they want? Who only have one set of clothes, maybe a pair of shoes or sandals? How many can’t take their family out to eat, ever? How many don't have indoor plumbing and hot showers?
So the poor and bereaved who do and those who don’t know Christ, shall be laughing, and the rich who do and those who don’t know Jesus, woe to them. They will seek consolation and not find it for a time.
How do you read it?
“Yes, Alfred, I’m sure your observation is correct, but please don’t let my short comings blind you to the truth I am representing to you.”
Jack: I appreciate your response . . . thank you for humbling yourself.
This is what I have been troubled by:
1) Fear – You really need to rethink your perspectives here. Your one verse relates to the fear of man, not the Lord. The lack of genuine fear of the consequences from the Lord if you are, in fact, proud really bothers me. You do not seem to appreciate the potential gravity of the situation you are in.
2) Counsel – A genuinely humble man does not trust his own heart, even when he feels sure of his perspectives. Yes, that is a confession on my part . . . I accept the possibility that I may be wrong . . . which is in part why I am taking this so seriously. One of us is horribly wrong. There are no matters more important than those we are dealing with. When someone – anyone – brushes off the deep convictions of an absolute majority of those generally regarded as spiritually mature, that is pride. To openly indicate that one has gained spiritual perspectives that are hidden from the immature, this is very offensive. Proverbs 26:12 “Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit[eyes]? There is more hope of a fool than of him.” This will not end well if this continues.
3) Scholarship – You appear to not respect scholarship. I too have a suspicion of the learning of men . . . but I also know that such things are not unimportant. It is not right to present learned arguments of linguistics of others with authority, then back away without concern when you cannot answer other arguments because you lack the knowledge. There is genuine scholarship, and such understanding can lead us to different understandings of Scripture than we would from our own spiritual perspectives. A genuinely humble man will honor all of those to whom honor is due in this area – considering both spiritual and expertise credentials - who present a perspective different from what he is expecting, not despise them.
It is interesting that we are both earnestly praying for the other, crying out to the Lord to open eyes. The Lord is grieved with at least one of us . . . that alone should humble us both. For my part I see a catastrophe ahead for you and your family . . . one that you deserve to escape, in the mercy of the Lord. I know the Lord will not forget your genuine love for Him and love for His people . . . and the lost . . . and all you have suffered for His name’s sake.
“The essential aspect of “faith” is never whether or not I believe something . . . but rather whether I believe God . . . and obey what I know.
NEVER? Isn’t that just semantics? Believing God, is believing many things. “
It leads us to many things, but it is not many things. Faith is ALWAYS in a person . . . because of that we believe things. We believe His absolute truthfulness and accuracy . . . and we believe His genuine love for us. Based on that we believe the facts He tells us.
1 John 4:16 “We have known and believed the love that God hath to us.”
John 1:12 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” We can’t see Him or completely understand Him . . . but we believe HIM . . . His name on something means it is right, and the opposite too. Because of this we are afraid to take his name lightly (“in vain”) and easily attach it to things.
Here it is again:
John 12:36 “While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light.” 1john 1 says that God is light . . . We love the light (John 3:19), we believe the light (Him), then we become children of the light. Has nothing to do with what we see in the light . . . If we do not receive the light He removes the light and gives us darkness . . . on purpose:
39 “Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.”
The revelations of creation and the witness of the heart lead us to trust the Lord . . . but the perceptions of the spirit never – ultimately – define our faith. We try, accept or reject things we perceive based on the One we believe. Our confidence never rises any higher than the assurance that we are correctly hearing HIM, not our understanding.
“Flesh and blood cannot inherit, does not preclude the Kingdom from being here now silly. You are more than flesh and blood. When your spirit leaves you, that is a reference to leaving this life. Your spirit can and must now inherit the Kingdom or you are not yet one of His.”
The only way you could say that is if you didn’t read the passage.
1 Cor 15:35 “But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?“ The whole discussion is about the resurrection, the resurrection of the BODY.
50 “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”
This happens at the LAST TRUMP . . . no matter how many trumpets you think you have heard, you haven’t heard the last one. THEN the corruptible puts on incorruption, then the mortal becomes immortal . . . THEN death is swallowed up in victory. Death still has a swing to make at us . . . no matter what the awesomeness of Christ’s victory over death, death still gets one last stand . . . then will be swallowed up.
THAT is the context . . . your corruptible body CANNOT inherit the physical Kingdom of God He is talking about here. You are out of balance to declare that ALL the K. of G. is, is now. The physical reality is future . . . and you do not have it now.
“To prove something, would be to conclusively show that the something is fact by presenting conclusive irrefutable evidence, to disprove would be to conclusively show that something is NOT fact, by presenting conclusive irrefutable evidence.”
“Conclusive” is the operative word. What does that mean? NOTHING is irrefutable . . . unless you have a common basis of evaluation. So far I am having trouble finding that . . . Is there any reality which is absolute, stands against all, other than that God has to save everyone?
You aren’t sure that sin is never God’s intention, believe that all roads lead to Heaven (including all that entered the wide gate), that people get saved through suffering (vs. saved people getting refined through suffering) . . . and I perceive that you seem to believe that God CAN lie, that is, say one thing and really mean the opposite. Is there ANYTHING that you believe to be an absolute truth?
“It is a cardinal rule, I understand, in logic, that you don’t define a word with the word you are defining. You are claiming that aionios means everlasting because you think it means everlasting.”
Humor me and reread what I wrote. My proof in that instance was that aionios life is future, NOT that it means “eternal”. So . . . if you could reconsider my proof I would deeply appreciate it.
“Lu 18:30 who may not receive back manifold more in this time, and in the coming age, life age-during.'YLT”
WHAT in the world is “age-during”?! This so-called literal translation is senseless . . . no, it is offuscation. Is there ANY other Greek scholar that would translate it that way? I have shown that aionios DOES mean eternal in secular literature . . . Young is not much of a scholar if he chooses to ignore that because he believes in universalism . . . right?
I throw down the gauntlet again . . . show me one instance in Scripture where aionios cannot mean “forever”, as we use the English word, a place where “age bounded” would be the only choice.
AND . . . For a thrill, go to the secular online translation tool Babelfish (http://babelfish.yahoo.com ), Choose “English to Greek” and type in the English word “eternal” . . . Humor me, tell me what comes up, how modern Greeks would say “eternal”.
“it seems that even among those who study Greek and read Greek that the true meaning of “aionios” is a controversy.”
I challenge that statement . . . eliminating those who are convinced Universalists, who have a vested interest in the outcome. Give me a relatively neutral source, or secular sources. I recall them speaking of a deep word, of mystery . . . but not controversy.
“In the light of Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made your proof has contradiction that you haven't explained.”
OK . . . so . . . did He create TRUTH or LOVE in 6 days . . . or thereafter? None of that beforehand? Wait . . . He IS truth and love . . . explain how He created them, as you insist in your definition of “made”.
Did He create LIES? We read of lies: “When he [devil] speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and THE FATHER OF IT. (John 8:44) That says that the devil created lies . . . right?
Idols are made . . . by God?
Did God create all idols? They are part of “all things” in the world. I need an answer on this one . . .
“1 Cor. 8:3, "if any man love God, the same is known of Him;"
You are aware of course that the same word “know” “ginosko” is the word used for intimate relations between a husband and wife.
“Knowing” in this context for the husband includes sowing seeds. “
You have proven my point! You do NOT initially know your wife in any implicit way . . . then, by experience, you come to know her.
My point is exactly this: God knows our heart in this way, by trying us, examining us . . . when we love God, then He knows us intimately, as a husband should know his wife.
“Joshua 23:15 “Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things”
Is the propensity to sin an evil thing? You introduced this verse and I can’t help but notice that it says “all” evil things.”
You forgot “which the Lord your God promised you” . . . ALL that He promised, both the good and the bad. That list of Evil is bad things happening TO me . . .
“I see your point I think. In other words, because God has extended the potential to receive mercy, he is all merciful. Is this what you mean?”
I guess you could say it that way. Throwing a sinking man a life preserver is “extending the potential to receive mercy”, I guess.
“And you dispute that God’s mercy is only for the elect, it’s for everyone except those who reject it of their own free will. Is that more accurate?”
? Extended mercy is for all . . . it is also for those who reject it. By rejecting it, they don’t get it . . .
“Would you take it so far as to say God can not even persuade many to come to Him, it is not possible for Him to do so? Would you say that there is no device available that God could employ to change the hearts of a single person who rejects Him.”
Why are we making this so complex? I persuade people . . . God persuades people . . . He has many more tools at His disposal than I do . . . He WILL NOT bend a person’s will with His to choose against the love they have selected. He will entreat them to choose a new love, the love of the light, of Him, but He will NOT make them do so.
“When the Bible proclaims that His mercy endureth for ever, do you perceive it to mean that the attribute of mercy towards His friends endures forever, but it can never be extended in any way to those who have sealed their fate at death?”
Here is His testimony:
Ex. 34:6 “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, MERCIFUL and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for THOUSANDS, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that WILL BY NO MEANS CLEAR THE GUILTY; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.”
Not clearing the guilty – those who refuse to repent – is intimately associated with His enduring mercy.
“somehow it’s okay for the all merciful one to forever withhold mercy from the millions who for whatever reason didn’t get saved before they died. How would you suggest I label this belief in my summary?”
“Whatever reason?!” This is why Jesus said they refuse Him:
John 3:19-21 “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men LOVE DARKNESS RATHER THAN LIGHT, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.”
Two groups of people, each fully responsible for what they chose. Those that rejected Him did so to hide from Him . . . because they had evil deeds that they preferred over Him. THAT is why mercy will be cut off from them.
“Why do you say “will”, doesn’t He already hate them?”
Not until they refuse His Son. THIS – persisted in - is the unpardonable sin. Or . . . do you not believe in an unpardonable sin? Please answer . . .
“Yes, that is what He says. Or . . . is the Scripture not your final authority? Psalms 11:5 “The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.”
Wow! Such accusations! One verse standing alone, and if I don’t believe it proves your point then Scripture is not my final authority?”
OK, 2-3 witnesses:
Hosea 9:15 “All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters.”
Romans 9:13 “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
Prov. 6:16-19 “These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him . . . A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.”
“Describe for me your hatred for your mom, your wife, your children. Or is Scripture not your final authority? Anyway, at least you do concede that you believe God hates His enemies. Do you use the same definition for hate here that you will use when you describe your hatred for your family members? Perhaps you could give us both definitions if they differ and explain why they should differ?”
If my family members reject Christ, I reject them. If they demand loyalty above that to Jesus, I walk away. That is it.
Deut 13:6-9 “If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers . . . Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.”
If the law would allow it, would you put your own wife to death if she tried to seduce you to follow some other God besides Jesus? Or . . . would you be “merciful” and let her slide on by? I want to know, Jack.
“In my reply to Jer. 17 I offer Scripture which contradicts your interpretation along with a possible meaning to your verse that doesn’t contradict logic or other Scripture.”
I presume that “God knows our heart” is the Scripture you refer to? Which, being “ginosko” we have proven is to “know by experience, by exploring? That sides with me, not with you.
The other would be Isaiah 46:9 . . . End from the beginning . . . which I explained was true BECAUSE He controls all things externally (“I will DO all my pleasure”) . . . and can make any outcome in life He chooses. He deliberately does NOT control our hearts.
“If His love fails to draw a single person to Himself then His love FAILED.“
If “Love never fails” means that its intentions are not realized, then God has already failed in love. Love, for example, “Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth” . . . so that if any object of His love falls out of the truth and into iniquity, love has instantly failed, as you see it.
A husband’s love fails if he refuses to take back his wife after she has sinned against him . . . it does not fail because she refuses to return to him. Once she is remarried, He CANNOT receive her back again* . . . but his love never failed, for he will continue to do her good as he is able. In the same way, God’s love leaves the door open . . . even in the face of blatant adultery . . . until the time is up, the door is shut . . . His love NEVER fails, but He cannot spring them out of hell any more than a remarried wife may return to her prior husband, no matter now repentant and sorry.
(*) Deut 24:4 “Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.”
“Jesus seems to be saying that He doesn't know something that the Father knows. During His time on earth as a man, He seemed to have suspended some of His God attributes.”
Is He God . . . or is He not? If He is, He cannot suspend being what He is. Jesus – God - voluntarily – NOT by suspended attribute – chose not to know this fact. In the same way God the Father voluntarily chooses to not know certain things so that we may have a free will. Just like quantum mechanics teach us: The test itself changes the outcome, hence we will never know what it really was before we tested it.
“ He cannot be limited in knowledge and know the end from the beginning. Too much hinges on human decisions.”
To reiterate: He controls absolutely the outcome of EVERY human decision . . . EVERY step man takes, regardless of what he decided. If He so controls the universe, therefore no conclusion is kept from him.
A Mr. G. example: He believes Leah was intended for Esau, and Rachel for Jacob. When Esau rejected Him, He used Laban’s EXISTING sin of deceitfulness to get Jacob to take the “2-for-1” deal. Therefore the 12 tribes should have been split between brothers . . . He still gets it done . . . sovereignly.
Prov. 16:9 “A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps”
“but He will bring every person to the point where they WILLINGLY, joyfully, gratefully, accept His better plan for them.”
Explain to me how the rich man in hell would not have WILLINGLY, joyfully, gratefully accepted His better plan for Him. You make no sense . . . 2 seconds in hell is enough to convince anyone . . . lots of joy. Elsewhere He speaks of people kept out of a wonderful feast because of a shut door . . . and a command to “depart”. They are ALL convinced then . . . But it is withheld, they are cast into “outer darkness” to grind their teeth . . . great gulf fixed, “cannot pass” from one to the other. You are a false witness for the Lord.
” The difference between your version and mine is that the end result in yours is bad for most and leaves the Lord Himself bereaved “
There will be more in heaven than hell . . . every little baby, every abortion, every retarded soul . . . WAY more. Jesus wins.
As to bereaved . . . how little you think of Jesus . . . and how highly you think of man, who is “less than nothing”. God does not need us to be complete . . . never did . . . perfect fellowship with His Son, nothing lacking. His love for His son NEVER has an end . . .
“Ps 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
We are all His children and we are all, except Adam and Eve, the fruit of the womb. We are all His inheritance.”
Then why does He speak of those children as “lost sheep” in Matt. 18?
11 “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13 And IF so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that [sheep], than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.”
EVERY sheep is His inheritance . . . but some are lost . . . and He always says “IF” to the notion of regaining them. Same in John 1:12 “He came unto HIS OWN, and HIS OWN received Him not . . . But AS MANY AS RECEIVED HIM, to them gave He the power to become the Sons of God . . . “
Never a question of ownership . . . but a great question as to whether that which is His will be recovered.
“Another major difference is that I believe and teach that our sins always bring negative consequences now in this life. Immediate and severe, cutting us off from the Kingdom of God and all the blessings of fellowship with Him, while your belief majors on the big, ultimate, scare of an inescapable horrendous judgment that cannot be fathomed instilling a fear to cause obedience that can never be realized perfectly.”
Not so! I teach immediate as well as long term consequences. Immediate consequences to “sins”, long term and fatal consequences to “Sin”. Sin is being my own boss . . . sins are perversions that come from those decisions. God says, “Don’t run in the street”, I am my own boss and run in the street and break a leg. The broken leg is one of the “sins” . . . the rebellion is “Sin” which will take a man to hell.
“What I meant was that God’s love, which we understand must be extended to us first, is not enough (sufficient) to draw those who will refuse it.”
Love is not a force! GRACE is a force . . . love is what presents grace to us. Grace, however, may only be received by the humble . . . that has nothing to do with sufficiency on the part of the Lord . . . ever.
“Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Couple that with the next verse:
“45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that HATH HEARD, and HATH LEARNED of the Father, cometh unto me.”
The teaching is the drawing . . . drawing like a magnet . . . BUT only those who have learned of the Father – repented – will be able to come. IF He meant what you say, He would have said “Every man therefore cometh unto me”. He didn’t . . . ponder it, Jack.
“it is impossible for man to save himself but with God all things are possible.
With these verses in mind isn’t it true that you believe that God’s love is inadequate to draw some to Himself?”
Of course it is impossible for a man to save Himself, but it IS possible for him to repent and receive the unmerited favor of Grace and Salvation based on Jesus finished work. Never is God’s love inadequate (which is, again, NEVER presented as a force) . . . the response of man is inadequate.
“If not, then how do you explain the fact that all don’t come and yield to Him before they die?”
Ditto . . . again. They are “gods” as He created them . . . they CAN and do choose to refuse the Lord . . . the choice is theirs, but the eternal consequences are entirely out of their control.
“How many times have your children operated in a way that you could predict before they did it? For me the number is incredibly high, and I don’t claim to know much and I’m not everywhere at once, looking at their hearts and their quiet reasonings like God is.”
You are making my point. That is precisely how He operates. You have not proven that by “determinism” – making 100% correct predictions based on 100% complete knowledge of all factors – you can 100% predict the actions of genuine free will. In fact . . . you can’t
“Before we even pray He answers.”
Always He does that? No . . . sometimes? Do you sometimes answer your children before they ask? I know I do . . . This says nothing by way of proving God implicitly knows the direction of every decision the heart of man makes.
“Ps 139:2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
3 Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
4 For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.”
Note that the thought is understood from far off . . . explicitly this is saying “not implicitly” Because He has my thought in hand long before I say it [but at a specific point in time], He knows what I am going to say.
“Why is that a false premise, and why is that even a premise to what I ask? My question has nothing to do with the size of the sin, only whether or not God caused Pharaoh to commit a sin?”
Again . . . YOU claim God MAKES us sin . . . I say we make us sin, then He uses our sin to further His end to reduce sin. You make a point of Pharaoh because you claim God made him do bad on purpose that he would not have otherwise done . . . I say he did less bad as a result of God’s hardening.
“First I would like to clarify. Just because God creates something, does not mean He LIKES it.”
I disagree . . . EVERYTHING God makes is “VERY GOOD”. He likes all of His decisions, no exceptions. OUR decisions He hates . . .
“Pharaoh is an excellent example, for God clearly takes credit for causing him to sin against the direct command to let His people go. It is also an excellent example to show how God gets His way, illustrating the importance of fully submitting to Him, the sooner the better.”
This is getting bizarre. Make up your mind . . . does He MAKE us sin, or not? “Fully submitting to Him” is the renouncing of sin . . . If He makes us sin, what in the WORLD is the point of learning the importance of “fully submitting to Him, the sooner the better?” You just said you CAN’T submit to him sooner . . . ‘cause He is making us sin.
“So the poor and bereaved who do and those who don’t know Christ, shall be laughing, and the rich who do and those who don’t know Jesus, woe to them. They will seek consolation and not find it for a time.
How do you read it”
The point is that part of God’s redemption program is to make rich people poor, so that may be humbled. So Pharaoh’s hardened heart was to move him from the “rich” to the “poor”, from the “wise” to “children”
You HAVE to answer me on this one: Given all you have said about sin being God’s creation, please explain the following, cited again:
Jeremiah 32:35 “ And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.”
I say that you must accept that at least SOME sin is not by God’s will . . . or that God is a liar. Am I right?
I have brief access to internet so I'm answering just your last post, the only one I had time to read.
I love that verse. If it didn't even enter into God's mind that they should burn their sons and daughters, how could it be His plsn to burn His own children?
As for the "phrase" "neither came it into my mind", if it isn't hyperbole, then it is contradiction, making God a liar, in and of itself. Now we both know that God is not a liar, and neither of us wants to call God a liar or accuse God of lying. Since he knows the thoughts of man, answers prayers before the words come out of our mouth, knows the end from the beginning, etc, it simply had to be in His mind somewhere that people would abort their own babies. Since we can't have it both ways, God both knowing and not knowing something at the same time and in the same relationship, the only answer that holds logic in my mind is that God is using hyperbole in this verse.
Can you see my point?
I won't be back for a couple more days and then it looks like I may have a bit of catching up to do.
Blessings to you.
"Hyperbole - an obvious and intentional exaggeration."
That is getting real close to a "lie". God says one thing, something a child would believe, yet He means something else.
"He really made them do it, but says out loud it wasn't ever even a possibility of His intent."
Tell me this is what you believe, or - without just nuancing it - clarify what you do believe.
As to taking comfort in this proving God would not burn His children in Hell:
1) They are not His children, those in hell. "Ye are of your father the Devil" . . . They are called the "Dead", as opposed to the "Quick" (living) . . . no family life.
2) People are burned by God in the fire . . . so either 1) is true or this verse has no bearing on that.
Yes . . . lots to ponder . . . why, again, I wish we could thread these discussions a bit, allow clear replies to specific posts, rather than an enlessly growing list of interleaved replies . . .
Have (or hope you have had) a wonderful time.
This would be great as a new thread . . .
Titus 2: 11 “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men”
All men get grace, right? Next verse:
12 “Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, IN THIS PRESENT WORLD”
Grace is ONLY for this present world . . . and that grace brings a person to repentance and a rejection of ungodliness and worldly lusts, sober, righteous, godly. They are made alive IN THIS LIFE . . . those that do not receive that grace go out into eternity DEAD.
More:
13-14 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, ZEALOUS OF GOOD WORKS.”
Good works are ONLY for this life . . . that is where our Savior Jesus and our Savior God take us. This life only . . . in that life – “pie in the sky” :-) - there is no more work:
Revelation 14:13 “And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their [already completed] works do follow them.”
There is no way in which a dead person in eternity may be made alive . . . none of the salvation verses apply . . . Jesus salvation and grace do not apply in that life . . . only in this. They go into eternity dead, they stay that way . . . eternally . . . undying worm, never-ending fire.
I confess that I find many of your posts difficult to follow. Could you put my quotations in Italics like I do for your's. When so much is being said, and time passes, it's sometimes difficult for me to know when you are quoting me and when you are sharing. Add to that, being tired, and I'm afraid I'm not getting everything you're putting into the comments, out of them.
I throw down the gauntlet again . . . show me one instance in Scripture where aionios cannot mean “forever”, as we use the English word, a place where “age bounded” would be the only choice.
Here's one:
Ro 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since time αιονιος 26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting (aionios) God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Notice that in verse 25 we have kept secret since time aionios which is followed by verse 26 but now is made known...
I know of at least three verses where aionios is coupled with chronos, time aionios? Aionios time?
How do you understand this? Can you concede that aionios doesn't seem to mean eternity here?
Post a Comment