| Author | Message | ||
| Billthompson |
Kelly, Great questions. In my study of Scripture I have yet to find any condition, requirement or work for retaining eternal life. I have never come across a passages that mentions being "born again, again and again" this is only mentioned as a one time experience.. There are passages which make it clear there are consequences to sin in this life. For example living an unhealthy lifestyle may result in health problems but do not cancel your salvation. Adoption is the best example I can give and Scripture uses this also. We are adpoted into God's family. If we misbehave we may be punished but never disowned. Passages people often point to for loss of salvation (or eternal life) do not even mention "salvation" or "eternal life". There are passages which mention loss of rewards IN HEAVEN but this is a person WITH eternal life in heaven, not a lost person. The passage about all a persons works being judged "hay and straw" and being burned up even though the person himself is saved while another persons works are regarded as gold and silver and not burned up, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. King Saul and Judas are interesting to ponder but I have not been able to find defintive support for a sound understanding of how salvation works in these examples. I do find a clear gospel message elsewhere in Scripture, however. I'll continue to consider those two examples but I am not sure they will provide definitive answers. I am not sure their stories in the Bible are intended for the purpose of understanding the Gospel, specificly. They are pieces in a big puzzle which does present a clear picture eventually. Bill Thompson | ||
| Valm |
Hi Bill, I just read both of the Corinthians passages. I have recently read the one in 2 Corinthians 3 and this is certainly what I believe but appears in conflict with Romans 3:31. I am anxious to continue my study of Romans to put it all together. (There is an inherent danger in reading a little here and a little there!) I do not recall ever reading 1Corinthians 3 10-15. WOW!!!! I am just really getting back into reading the Bible after 20 some years of being out of Adventism. I am just amazed at what is there that was deemphasized as I grew up. This text puts our "reward" in heaven in the proper perspective. Valerie | ||
| Billthompson |
Valerie, If you'd like, go ahead and read Romans 13:8-10. It will give you something to look forward to. By all means, however, read the entire book verse by verse to get the full context. It is a wonderful book. Remember, as you read this that Paul was once Saul, a Jew among Jews, Pharisee of Pharisees and thoroughly schooled in the law. Kind of like we were as SDAs. Bill Thompson | ||
| Max |
Dear Chyna, Love your ìWhose Pawn Are You?î game. God has made you very creative, you know. Now I want to play a game with you. Itís named after the 1964-mega-hit tune ìCome a Little Bit Closerî written by Boyce, Hart and Farrell and sung by Jay & The Americans. Hereís the chorus: Come a little bit closer. You're my kind of man, So big and so strong. Come a little bit closer. I'm all alone. And the night is so long. Only for the sake of this game, the ìso big and so strongî man is neither songster Jay nor ìbad man Jose,î but is Jesus Christ the righteous. ìCome a Little Bit Closerî is a revised version of ìWhose Pawn Are You?î What I mean is this: Letís make this revision: Change the partial truth, the unscriptural ìonce saved, always savedî idea, to the full truth: scriptural ìpredestination.î I donít have time -- though I would love to take it -- to go into all of your examples. So Iíll limit myself to one or two: "God v Lucifer. Lucifer wanted to take God's throne, God won, cast Lucifer/Satan out of heaven along with 1/3rd of the angels (ouch, that's a lot of angels/current demons, of course they believe in God they were with Him before).î I know this idea is extremely popular, not only in Adventism, but throughout Fundamentalism as well. Nonetheless, it is exegetically questionable to say the least. Whatís wrong with it? Basically, it superimposes John Miltonís imagination (especially, Paradise Lost) upon the ancient biblical texts. Milton was a genius at dramatic writing, but he was no exegete, not at least of the order of, say, Luther or Calvin or, in more modern times, of Barth or Tillich. For it elevates Lucifer to a kind of godhood, or at least sub-godhood, and makes him an equal with Christ who is and has always been fully God and coequal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. And, even worse, infinitely worse, it LOWERS Christ from full deity to a sub-godhood equal with Lucifer. Youíll be extremely hard pressed to find this in Scripture alone. What you do find, of course, is the fully-scriptural idea that Satan is NOTHING more than Godís faithful -- if unwilling -- servant. ---------- Example No. 1 ---------- NIV Job 1:6 One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord [this is none other than the Christ of John 1:1-3], and Satan also came with them. [As far as God is concerned, this is a SUMMONING of servants, not the reception of a foreign diplomatic delegation. As far as the angels -- ALL of them, both evil and righteous -- are concerned, theirs is an act of SUBMISSION, not DEFIANCE.] 7 The Lord [the MAJESTY] said to Satan [the SNIVELING], "Where have you come from?" [This is a DEMAND, not an ENTREATY.] Satan answered the Lord, "From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it." [Satan doesnít DARE challenge his Sovereign. His SOVEREIGN places a DEMAND upon his unwilling, but captive SUBJECT Satan.] 8 Then the Lord said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil." [It is the SOVEREIGN, the LORD {YAWEH = I AM}, the JUDGE of all, who asks the questions, not the cowering, cringing, crouching CAPTIVE Satan!] 9 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. [Witness with fully justifiable glee as the SKULKING WRITHING SLITHERING SERPENT whines in the face of UTTER CALM of the SERENE MAJESTY of the universe, INCLUDING all the earth and everything in it, even and especially demons!] 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." [More pathetic whimpering and whining! Even an admission that he is helpless to inflict ANYTHING upon Godís ìperfect and upright servant Job.î Isnít it thrilling to know that Satan is helpless to do ANYTHING to us without Godís express permission, even command?] 12 The Lord said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger." Then Satan went out from the presence of the Lord. [Again, note that God still RESTRICTS and specifically LIMITS the sniveling SERVANT OF GODís evil future activity, despite the fact that he receives express permission from his MASTER -- YAWEH = I AM to afflict Job.] ---------- Example No. 2 ---------- You wrote the following: ^^God v. Satan. Jesus Christ the Messiah. All throughout the Old Testament you will see Satan constantly trying to wipe out the line that Jesus is supposed to be descended from. Once a mad queen tries to kill every single one of the descendants (who do you think was behind that!) but still one baby escaped King Josiah. When Saul was trying to destroy David, constantly again and again, who do you think was egging Saul on? Saul threw a spear at David in his palace!^^ But . . . remember . . . weíre playing ìCome a Little Bit Closerî -- to none other than our SOVEREIGN in heaven, who -- never forget -- is the pre-Christmas Christ in verity, the Creator of all of the infinity of universes! (John 1:1-3.) Therefore, I answer your question: Yes, it was an evil spirit who was egging Saul on to throw a spear at him in an effort to destroy David, the Lordís anointed from before the foundations of the earth were laid. Now, according to the rules of ìCome a Little Bit Closer,î let me now ask you a question: Who do you think was motivating and even commanding the ìevil spiritî who was PREDESTINED to execute IAM'S JUDGMENT upon Saul who was PREDESTINED to try to slay David? Letís look at the relevant texts: NIV 1 Samuel 16:14-16 Now the Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and an EVIL SPIRIT FROM THE LORD tormented him.ÝSaul's attendants said to him, "See, an EVIL SPIRIT FROM GOD is tormenting you.ÝLet our lord [King Saul] command his servants here to search for someone who can play the harp. He [God-predestined to be David] will play when the EVIL SPIRIT FROM GOD comes upon you, and you will feel better." NIV 1 Samuel 16:23ÝWhenever the SPIRIT FROM GOD came upon Saul, David would take his harp and play. Then relief would come to Saul; he would feel better, and the EVIL SPIRIT would leave him. [God decided to give Saul a bit of respite.] NIV 1 Samuel 18:10-11ÝThe next day an EVIL SPIRIT FROM GOD came forcefully upon Saul. He was prophesying in his house, while David was playing the harp, as he usually did. Saul had a spear in his and he hurled it, saying to himself, ìIíll pin David to the wall.î NIV 1 Samuel 19:9-10ÝBut an EVIL SPIRIT FROM THE LORD came upon Saul as he was sitting in his house with his spear in his hand. While David was playing the harp, Saul tried to pin him to the wall with his spear, but David eluded him as Saul drove the spear into the wall. And that is how one plays ìCome a Little Bit Closerî Yes, God commands all evil spirits, including Lucifer, to do HIS bidding! Period. End of story. MC | ||
| Richardhardison |
Chyna- The reason I sound a lot like your ex-SDA boyfriend is as I explained earlier, Wesleyan antecedents. The great theological battle is as it was in the 1830-40 timeframe that put Calvinism on the ropes by 1900. (All that saved the system was Scofield's notes, Machen's founding of Westminster and Chafer's founding of Dallas Theological Seminary) Many of the founders of the SDA were originally Methodists, the original Wesleyan movement in this country. In fairness to OSAS teachers, most do not teach that it's OK to sin, no matter the license the doctrine may give, and many have taken such license. Some minsters who have taught it have used it as a means of comfort, such as at a funeral for a man who had been murdered, but was eulogized "but we know we will see him again since he gave his heart to the Lord at the tender age of 7." Forget that he was shot at a topless bar after starting a drunken brawl. You ask a valid question, however. What does it take to lose salvation? To answer requires two definitions. Initial Salvation - the salvation we acquire in this life through a life of faith that is maintained until the end of this life. Final Salvation - the salvation we acquire when we are in the physical presence of God, or when we see "face to face" as Paul puts in 1 Corinthians 13. This is the Salvation that will not be lost because "that which is perfect" has come and the sin nature which we constantly fight, that tends to drag us away from a life of faith will no longer be present in us. The Christian life is a life of faith. Faith yields something, and you are indeed correct when you say that such faith changes a person. Because of the faith that changes them, they obey. As I pointed out, Chyna, simple belief is not enough, the demons believe and they tremble, but it doesn't help them because the belief makes no change in them. Christ and the Apostles were very clear on the matter, "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love" John 15:10. Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us" 1 John 3:24. This is a very small fraction of the scripture that shows what intial salvation is predicated upon, obedience. Obedience comes from faith, and "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God" Romans 10:17. No matter Bill's statements about agreeing to disagree, this is not something that can be compromised upon as it goes to the heart of salvation. OSAS is not biblical and is the borderline of heretical. | ||
| Richardhardison |
Maintaining a life of faith is not salvation by works. It was Paul was doing when he struggled with his old sin nature. When one neglects the struggle, gives into a life of prayerlessness, doesn't read the bible, hangs around with people who are "liberal" in theology, or runs mainly with sinful people, one will find themselves slowly yielding to a faithless life. Paul said it well in 1 Corinthians 15:33, "Do not be deceived: 'Evil company corrupts good habits.'" Remaining faithful, or maintaining faith, is not salvation by works. Salvation by works is depending upon obedience to a set of rules to earn your way in. You maintain the relationship with God by setting your heart and mind on Him, staying in the word and maintaining a healthy prayer life. Such a person doesn't have to worry about returning to sin. Max, is it your intention to teach double predestination? This is the idea that God has created certain people purely to damn them. Just wondering. | ||
| Max |
Thank you, Richard, and blessings, MC | ||
| Chyna |
Dear Richard, I respectfully reply that you are propagating a lie, when you claim there are two salvations: initial, and final. It is unbiblical to make that assertion. It claims that there is a 'trial' salvation that can be lost, and only those that make it to the end will have 'final' salvation. It is an idea totally incompatible with grace and unconditional love. Your statement about "God creating those that are destined to hell" gives away your thoughts. Yet, as I am discussing with Max, God created Satan, and Satan fell. How it was described to me is that God "fore-loved us." A couple at Urbana was describing that it is wise to decide to have a child in the family when the love you have between yourselves overflows, and that's how it was like with God, Jesus & the Holy Spirit, that they had an overabundance of love. So this couple decided that they had an overabundance of love, and decided to try to have a child, but they were not capable, but then I think over a period of time, maybe ten years, they were able to adopt. And they loved that child so much, they "fore-loved" her from the moment they conceived of the idea. Therefore God created man to have fellowship with because of His overabundance of love. So God fore-loved us even before we were created. Now. It is true that not all have come to be saved, yet we who are, are going to be restored to Him. God is operating within the definition of Who He is. In order to have true fellowship God created man with free will, and apparently with His angels also. His angels fell, so did man, yet God did not destroy everything. He has redeemed us. God is Love, He is also Just, He is also Holy, He is also Grace, and He is also Merciful. All these things coexist, and you can read them in the Bible. I think, many many times we judge God by our humanistic standards of what we feel is just. Yet, I always get angry, "God is the definition of Justice, you can't put your definition of justice on God." I dispute that belief doesn't change lives. Just as that passage mentioned about talks about the treasures of heaven being expended, there are only two things to do if one believes: to accept Christ as Lord of your life, or to reject His Lordship as demons do. It is an egregious error to proclaim: "to simply believe isn't enough." it is enough for someone who believes and desires to be a Christian. true, not to only be a hearer of the word, but a doer of the word. yet these are all indicators of a truly converted life, not requirements for "final" salvation. and yes, we are to struggle with sin all our lives, and to "run the race as to win." and to "work out our salvation with" "I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ." Paul begs us to "boast of our weaknesses" so that we can all the more "glorify God" because His "grace is sufficient." But the description of our Christian lives, the good that happens is solely from God, He makes it possible for us to grow, as Christians, and yes, we have to try, and one that does not try to live a life of obedience is questioned whether they were truly converted, or they will be one of those weak Christians who are inside, but at the gates (i know there is a verse somewhere, i'll get back to you) When Jesus described how we were to be to follow Him, we were to be like the children with "childlike faith." sounds like simple faith to me. sorry it's so disjointed, i'm jobsearching at the same time :) Dear Max: Jesus said: "I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning. " Revelations said: 4 His tail dragged down one-third of the stars, which he threw to the earth 9 The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole worldóhe was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him" Isaiah prophet of God described: Isaiah 14:12-17 "How you are fallen from heaven, O shining star, son of the morning! You have been thrown down to the earth, you who destroyed the nations of the world. For you said to yourself, 'I will ascend to heaven and set my throne above God's stars. I will preside on the mountain of the gods far away in the north. I will climb to the highest heavens and be like the Most High.' But instead, you will be brought down to the place of the dead, down to its lowest depths. Everyone there will stare at you and ask, 'Can this be the one who shook the earth and the kingdoms of the world? Is this the one who destroyed the world and made it into a wilderness? Is this the king who demolished the world's greatest cities and had no mercy on his prisoners?' Ezekiel 28:12-19 "Son of man, weep for the king of Tyre. Give him this message from the Sovereign LORD: You were the perfection of wisdom and beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God. Your clothing was adorned with every precious stone ñ red carnelian, chrysolite, white moonstone, beryl, onyx, jasper, sapphire, turquoise, and emerald ñ all beautifully crafted for you and set in the finest gold. They were given to you on the day you were created. I ordained and anointed you as the mighty angelic guardian. You had access to the holy mountain of God and walked among the stones of fire. "You were blameless in all you did from the day you were created until the day evil was found in you. Your great wealth filled you with violence, and you sinned. So I banished you from the mountain of God. I expelled you, O mighty guardian, from your place among the stones of fire. Your heart was filled with pride because of all your beauty. You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. So I threw you to the earth and exposed you to the curious gaze of kings. You defiled your sanctuaries with your many sins and your dishonest trade. So I brought fire from within you, and it consumed you. I let it burn you to ashes on the ground in the sight of all who were watching. All who knew you are appalled at your fate. You have come to a terrible end, and you are no more." Dear Max, I speak not of myths, but from Biblical exegesis about Satan's origin. Chyna | ||
| Max |
Dear Chyna, The several NIV text notes to Ezekiel 28:12-19 say this passage refers to Adam, not to Satan. How can it not refer to Adam when it says that the creature in Eden was "blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you"? Satan was already evil BEFORE he was allowed in the garden to tempt Eve. Genesis 3:1 indicates that the very fact that Satan was already evil was the REASON he was put into the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. NIV text note to Genesis 3:1 reads thus: ^^The great deceiver clothed himself as a serpent, one of God's good creatures. He insinuated a FALSEHOOD and portrayed REBELLIOIN as clever, but essentially innocent, self-interest. Therefore "the devil, or Satan," is later referred to as "that ancient serpent" (Rev. 12:9; 20;2). Therefore, it is very difficult to prove that Ezekiel 28:12-19 -- which speaks of "blamelessness" in Eden -- as referring to Satan = Lucifer. (NIV text notes were researched, written and approved by 42 of the world's best Evangelical biblical scholars.) N'est pas? MC | ||
| Max |
Dear Chyna again, Regarding Isaiah 14:12-15 the 42 NIV textual scholars say this: "Some believe that Isaiah is giving a description of the fall of Satan (cf. Lk 10:18 -- where, HOWEVER, Jesus seems to be referring to an event contemporary with himself [rather than with an event in heaven before the foundations of the earth were laid]. But the passage CLEARLY APPLIES TO THE KING OF BABYLON, who is later used as a TYPE (prefiguration) of the "beast" who will lead the Babylon of the last days (see Rev 13:4; 17;3). Again, as in the above post, it is very difficult to make an exegetical case that these two scriptural passages refer to any pre-creation sinless Lucifer in heaven. I have no bone to pick with you. But I personally go along with the NIV scholars. MC | ||
| Denisegilmore |
I have a question that sounds really silly perhaps but it is still a valid question. Why did God create "unclean" animals? In creation week, He said "And it was very good" with everything He made. Then we get to Noah and God is telling Noah to bring 7 of each clean animal into the ark and 2 of each unclean animal. What caused the "unclean" animal or beast to be unclean? If they were unclean, why were they not destroyed in the flood? I know these sound silly but I'm about brain dead and cannot figure this out. My SDA friend said that the "unclean" animals or beasts were created to be the animals that live off of the bottom of the ocean and other waste products. Does anyone agree with that? I think that it's a possibility but need more input. I look at the book of Genesis and see that there were 7 of each clean animal and right after Noah departs from the ark, he makes an alter and sacrifices 1 of each clean animal. Which leaves 3 sets of 2 to mate=6. And 6 being the number of man. I also see the two unclean animals as being male and female, also representing 2 human beings, male and female= we are born with sin. This all started over the "eating of swines flesh" by the way. Thanks and God Bless, Johnny 5 | ||
| Max |
Dear Chyna yet again, NIV Luke 10:17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, "Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name."18 He replied, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. As pointed out in the above post the NIV scholars exegete this text out to mean an event contemporary in time to the text (around AD 30), not to an event prior to Creation. The NIV text note to Luke 10:18 says this: "Satan fall. Even the demons were driven out by the disciples (v. 17), which meant that Satan was suffering defeat." In other words, Jesus saw Satan "fall like lightning from heaven" AT THAT VERY TIME. Meaning: Satan was suffering defeat AT THAT VERY TIME. Remember, it was IAM who came from heaven to earth as the Christmas Baby! Satan was dealing with his Master as surely as he was in Job when he was SUMMONED by IAM as I have posted from Job, chapter 1, above. There is no difference. Satan is not God's equal. It is ALWAYS a terribly unequal contest. Christ has NEVER not been Satan's SOVEREIGN Lord. He beat him in the wilderness, on the top of the temple, on the cross, at the resurrection, E V E R Y W H E R E at all times. OFTAs are wrong. Jesus NEVER could have sinned. It is impossible for God to sin. Even to ask the question -- could Jesus have sinned? -- is preposterous blasphemy! Christ Jesus came to earth to SAVE US, not to engage in a battle with Satan! Sorry if I'm coming across as testy. It's waaaay past my bedtime, and I'm tiiiiired out. Love you, Chyna, MC | ||
| Max |
Oh, Denise, I'm sooo tired. But you are sooo special, I just can't go to bed without e-speaking with you. ^^Why did God create "unclean" animals?^^ He didn't. Here's the definitive word that cannot be shaken or tampered with in any way whatsoever by anybody whatsoever, OFTA or not: NIV Genesis 1:24-25 And God said, "Let the land produce living CREATURES according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground [such as snakes and beetles], and wild animals, each according to its kind. And it was SO. God made the wild ANIMALS according to their kinds, the LIVESTOCK [such as HOGS] according to their knids, and ALL the creatures that move along the groudn according to their kinds. And GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD." Nuff sed for tonight, MC | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Dear Max, Thank you for this much as tired as you must be. However, Scripture does say that Noah was instructed by God to bring in the "unclean or not clean" animals by two's. How is "unclean" then defined? How is it that they became "unclean" so that God Himself called them "unclean?" I looked up the Hebrew word for clean then in the same passage the same number is used for unclean. However, there is the word "not" in front of clean. Where is that Cindy when we need her? :)) She knows some basics of Hebrew. I'm not understanding. But tomorrow I'm hoping to hear more. Get lots of rest my brother, God Bless you always, DtB, your sister in Christ | ||
| Max |
Blessed Denise, Later revelation may help us to understand earlier revelation, but it CANNOT contradict it. The creation of all animals is part of the supreme revelation of the cross, in a word, salvation. Therefore they cannot be unclean no matter what. There is a revelation to Noah in Genesis 7 about taking two of every kind of "unclean" animal into the ark and seven of every kind of "clean" animal. Sorry, not health instruction. All major Jewish organizations in America, including those of the Reformed and the Orthodox (or Observant) traditions, ALL say that the laws of "cleanness" and "uncleanness" have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with health. The NIV text note to Genesis 7:2 says this: "The CEREMONIALLY unclean animals would only have to reproduce themselves after the flood, but CEREMONIALLY clean animals would be need also for the burnt offerings that Noah would sacrifice (see 8:20) and for food." Genesis 9:3 NIV says this: "Everything that lives and MOVES" -- last time I checked, pigs MOVE -- "will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you EVERYTHING." Not enough time for more, though there IS more, a GREAT DEAL more. Blessings unceasing, MC | ||
| Max |
Ps. So that there will be no mistake, I'm referring to foods -- not diseases such as leprosy. | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Hello Max, You gave this NIV commentary or explanation: >>The NIV text note to Genesis 7:2 says this: "The CEREMONIALLY unclean animals would only have to reproduce themselves after the flood, but CEREMONIALLY clean animals would be need also for the burnt offerings that Noah would sacrifice (see 8:20) and for food."<< That's how I read the original Hebrew as well. As CEREMONIALLY unclean or clean. I just needed some confirmation to my thinking as this is an issue that is currantly being addressed by SDAs to me. Having been caught eating a pork roast not too long ago, this issue has really raised a fuss. I was trying to defend my position in all manner possible. The eating of swine in any form doesn't bother me. But a continue bombarding of nagging people who oppose this are reminding me quite often that this is a really really BAD thing to do. I have pointed out all texts possible with regards to judging one another in respect to food. I have also pointed out that we are not to let evil be spoken of, of what we consider good. Believe me when I say this, I do not go into their homes with a ham sandwich. However, I do so indulge in my home and when they come here while I happen to be eating my ham sandwich lunch, alot of tension arises. This shouldn't be. I fully respect their position on vegetarianism and expect the same respect. Am I wrong for wishing to eat what I feel is good? I know that Paul would probably not eat the pig for the sake of the gospel. But how far do we carry that take? Well, now you know why such a question was asked from me in the first place. This will be printed out and at hand just in case someone of unlike faith happens to enter my abode (which is inevitable), and start pointing a finger at me. Thank you and I do know that foods and days should not be argued but it happens nonetheless. Not that I would wish this to be as most certainly I do not. It seems so childish to me. Still, if they are believing that things like the Sabbath and pork eating will either keep you out of the Kingdom or allow entrance, then this is or can be a good thing. What do you or anyone else think on this? Blessings always in Jesus Christ, DtB, your sister who is trying to live in freedom of the Gospel and also let others know of this freedom. But most importantly, SALVATION BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST ALONE...not foods and days. | ||
| Max |
Dear Richard Hardison, I have no intention of getting into an argument with you. You have your opinions and I will respect whatever you can back up with Scripture alone. ^^Max, is it your intention to teach double predestination? This is the idea that God has created certain people purely to damn them. Just wondering.^^ "Double predestination"? The phrase appears to be an oxymoron. Nor does the concept seem to make any sense whatsoever. No one cannot control God with our ideas and theologies! Here's my opinion only: People may control OTHER PEOPLE with their foolish ideas about God, His providence, love, justice, mercy, predestination. But God Himself is never mocked, manipulated, controlled, challenged, frightened, or moved by our ideas, theologies, commands. But, as Abraham Lincoln once observed, "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." I think this great and godly man made that statement because he was observing God's marvelous and mysterious ways His wonders to perform: changing the hearts and minds of Americans about the atrocity of slavery and how it was spiritually destroying white folks in the North, let alone black folks in the South. But, I digress.... Back to the subject at hand: Even our prayers are predestined. God knows that John is going to pray for his father's recovery from cancer. God knows that Frank isn't going to. But their dad's recovery or non-recovery from cancer was predestined by God before the foundations of the earth were laid. But God also predestines freedom of choice. If ye are free in Christ ye are free indeed! But those outside of Christ have zero freedom. Only in Christ is there freedom of choice. Example: Paul had zero freedom of action on the road to Damascus. He had been predestined by God to destroy Christians. But when the Son God got his attention by zapping him with divine laser light, knocking him to the ground, and blinding him -- THEN AND ONLY THEN did he become free enough to make a choice for or against Christ. But even this freedom of choice was predestined by God. And don't start telling me that isn't logical. Because our human logic is THE fundamental problem here. We think we can summon God to the bar of our human logic. Baaaad move! God MAY privilige us enough to think His thoughts AFTER Him, but never BEFORE! As soon as we build a Tower of Babel constructed of the bricks of human logic, God comes in and confound us all by confusing our language! Well, Duh! The Great Trickster in the Sky strikes again! How I love it! You see, God is NEVER mocked! Not even in your dreams! As C.S.Lewis says in the Narnia chronicals: Aslan the Lion (God) is not SAFE, but He is GOOD! This "unsafe" aspect of God ought to scare us out of our arrogant human theological logic and into an attitude of what I call ROSH: R - Repentance O - Obedience S - Submission H - Humility Letting God be God (and it's such a relief too), Max of the Cross | ||
| Lori |
Hi, Max, I hope this will catch you at a less tired moment--I don't quite understand how Ezekiel 28:12-19 can refer to Adam. This passage says he was "in Eden" and it also says "he was blameless when he was created" but it doesn't say it in the same sentence. It refers to this person as a guardian cherub, Adam was never a cherub was he? "Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence and you sinned" --widespread trade denotes something that was far reaching (as in a third of the angels), "you were filled with violence" doesn't really describe the sin of Adam, but it does describe Lucifer, doesn't it? These "widespread trades" what are referred to in Isaiah 14:13,14: Satan's "first fall" was the "sin of the mind", the "I wills", 1.) I will raise my throne above the stars of God 2.) I will sit enthroned on the mount of the assembly 3.) I will ascend above the tops of the clouds I will make myself like the Most High It says "your heart became proud on account of your beauty" --was this not the sin of Lucifer? (Adam's sin in the garden was not based upon his beauty.) "I made a fire come out from you and it consumed you.......you have come to a horrible end and will be no more" Isn't this the destiny of Satan? Isn't Adam a believer with eternal life and therefore already face to face with God? Just asking.....I can easily see how this describes Lucifer but find it more impossible to associate the terms with Adam. Lori | ||
| Max |
Hi Lori, In my tiredness I may have misspoken or given a wrong impression. There is no question that Ezekiel 28:12-19 is talking about NO ONE but the King of Tyre (KOT). In the passage there are all kinds of allusions: "You were in Eden, the garden of God" -- COMPARING KOT to Adam. "You wre anointed as a guardian cherub" -- COMPARING KOT to an angel guarding the entrance to Eden. "I threw you to earth" -- COMPARING KOT to Adam and Eve's expulsion from the "heavenly garden." Remember heaven was on earth in the Garden of Eden because the Son God Christ was there, and where God is, heaven is. Period. You're observation that Ezekial is not talking about Adam is indeed scriptural. But I can find no scripture-alone evidence that Ezekiel is talking about anyone other than KOT, certainly not Lucifer. MC |
