| Author |
Message |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 1:29 am: |     |
Max,
Wow! I can relate to the lost dream world that became paradoxically his real world. Ten years ago.
Thank you for that information. Fascinating, yet spooky too. Maybe it was too close to home for comfort.
God Bless,
Denise |
Cindy
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 7:46 am: | |
Morning Max! The downtown trip was into Portland, not Seattle... A cold day, but still fun to see the "Saturday Market" with all the wares being sold and so many colorful characters roaming the streets.
Even stopping to get our Starbucks to warm up our hands and insides, it was so chilly browsing the outside stalls that we soon opted for the warmer inside Pioneer Place shopping and eating area...
Your description of Seattle was very nice, though! I loved the part:
"How I miss Emerald City! Dorothy, Toto,
Tinman, Cowardly Lion, please come back! All
is forgiven!" :-))
Also, Max, I never knew that "Cats" was based on T. S. Eliot's work. I've heard of "Cats" but have no idea what the play is about...? Lots of people dressed up like cats... :-)) I'm kind of out of the Broadway play culture...
Grace always,
Cindy |
Max
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 9:03 am: | |
Cindy,
"Cats" is not dead. It played not only on
Broadway, but all across the country. I saw it
years ago in San Francisco. And I'm sure it will
play again in the Portland area.
Eliot wrote a series of poems about various
cats, each one representing a human
character or type. Pure comedic genius. Many
years later some playwright turned the poems
into a play that brilliantly represented Eliot's
vision.
And -- voila! -- the theatre-going public caught
it. It's all about grace and redemption!
Glad you had a great day in Portland.
Blessings to you and Richard, |
Darrell
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 1:48 pm: | |
I hate to interrupt this fascinating discussion of T. S. Eliot, but I would like to respond to what Max wrote earlier:
"Then Luther and Calvin came along and
revived the scriptural teaching of divine
predestination and sovereignty (the two
words are only two sides of the same coin)
and -- voila! -- the Reformation swept Europe
like a forest fire."
Yes, but this does not prove cause and effect. I would pick the Biblical dotrine of the gospel (especially righteousness by faith in Christ Jesus) as being the cause of the reformation, but I guess I can't prove cause and effect any more than Max can!
About sovereignty: Looking from a human perspective, we could say that a king or nation is sovereign, but the citizens still can chose whether or not to obey, and receive the consequences. Does the word as used in the Bible mean anything different? |
Max
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 10:47 pm: | |
Hi Darrell,
Spent the day with your brother and his family
and found it very enjoyable as usual.
I agree that it was the gospel and not the
doctrines of sovereignty / predestination that
swept the Roman Empire and later Europe.
They played a necessary support role.
I also like the human analogy of a king's
sovereignty, which is certainly scriptural. But
the idea of God's sovereignty is as high above
the idea of a human king's sovereignty as the
heavens are high above the earth. Words fail.
Analogies fail. Anthropomorphizing certainly
fails.
I believe that God's sovereignty is clothed in
mystery and "thick darkness":
Psalm 97:1 The LORD reigns [is sovereign],
let the earth be glad; let the distant shores
rejoice.
2 Clouds and thick darkness surround him;
righteousness and justice are the foundation
of his throne.
3 Fire goes before him and consumes his
foes on every side.
4 His lightning lights up the world; the earth
sees and trembles.
5 The mountains melt like wax before the
LORD, before the Lord of all the earth.
6 The heavens proclaim his righteousness,
and all the peoples see his glory.
And just as we do not understand very much
at all of the implications of his sovereignty --
except as has been revealed in Christ's death
and resurrection -- we do not understand very
much of what it means to have a choice in
terms of obedience.
I believe, as I have posted before, that Saul /
Paul did not have a choice to obey or disobey
Jesus Christ till he felled him and blinded him
on Damascus road. Just so we are not free to
obey till he frees us in some way.
I do not believe that we are free to obey or
disobey God as an earthly subject is free to
obey or disobey his earthly sovereign. I think
the analogy breaks down at this point.
I believe that the freedom that does prevail is
sufficient to satisfy the divine claims that say,
"For freedom he hath made us free," and, "If ye
are free in Christ ye are free indeed."
Nor do we understand very much of what God
means when he says, "Jacob have I loved, but
Esau have I hated."
There is deep mystery here. We do not do well
to think to accept or reject God on the basis of
our pathetically ignorant understanding of the
meaning of this and many other similar texts.
Remember that Jesus said words to this
effect: "It was neither this man's sin nor that of
his parents [think, say, HIV infection] that
caused this man's illness [think AIDS], but he
is ill SO THAT THE GLORY OF GOD MAY BE
REVEALED. Then he healed him!
As much as anything else in Scripture, I think
of this as an authoritative statement of
predestination -- predestination of an illness.
How can grace be pure unless it is
predestined?
Does a passive God have a store where grace
is displayed over a price tag that says, "Free,
take one"? Wouldn't this be just one more
attempt of putting ourselves in a manipulative
position vis a vis God?
Or does an active God bestow grace upon
whom he will? And isn't this a case of a truly
sovereign way of dealing with human
subjects?
Points to ponder.
Max of the Cross |
Max
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 10:58 pm: | |
More about:
Cats
Music: Andrew Lloyd Webber
Lyrics: T.S. Eliot
Based on Old Possum's Book of Practical
Cats, a collection of poems by T.S. Eliot,
Cats--which containes no spoken
dialogue--revolves around the antics of such
feline characters as Old Deuteronomy,
Jennyanydots, Mr. Mistoffelees, Rum Tum
Tugger, Skimbleshanks, Griddlebone, and
Grizabella who sings the hit song "Memory"
before she ascends to cats' heaven at play's
end.
Originally produced at the New London
Theatre on May 11, 1981, Cats began its New
York run at the Winter Garden Theatre on
October 7, 1982. The production featured Betty
Buckley (Grizabella), and like the London
production which preceded it, the New York
version of Cats dazzled audiences with its
imaginative spectacle and story-telling flare.
The original Broadway cast also included
Terrence V. Mann (Rum Tum Tugger),
Stephan Hanan (Asparagus), Timothy Scott (
Mr. Mistoffolees), Ken Page (Deuteronomy),
Reed Jones (Skimbleshanks), Bonnie
Simmons (Griddlebone), Christine Langner
(Rumpleteazer), Rene Clemente
(Mungojerrie), and Harry Groener
(Munkustrap). Although T.S. Eliot died in 1965,
he received a posthumous Tony Award 18
years later for his unwitting contributions to the
score.
On Sunday, September 10, 2000, Broadway's
longest running show finally hung up its
whiskers, tails and toe shoes after nearly 18
years and a record 7,485 performances. |
Max
| | Posted on Sunday, December 10, 2000 - 11:31 pm: | |
HEY! WANT TO SEE CATS ANYWAY? GO TO:
New London Theatre, Drury Lane, London.
Booking to March 2001.
Box Office Information Phone Numbers
Box Office: 020 7405 0072
Book online with Ticketmaster
Performance Times
Monday ñ Saturday 7.30pm Tuesday and
Saturday 3pm
Christmas performances
No performance on Monday 25th December,
No matinee Tuesday 26th December
Extra matinees Wednesday 27th and 28th
December at 3pm
All other performances as usual
Ticket Prices
£37.50, £32.50, £27.50, £17.50, £10.50
Box Office Hours
The theatre box office is open Mondays -
Saturdays 10:00am - 8:00pm.
Group Bookings
Special Rates are available ñ call 020 7400
5007
The Auditorium
There are three main tiers of seating at the
New London Theatre; the moving seating at
the front of the auditorium, the stalls and the
dress circle.
Box Office Collections
Tickets left at the box office for collection may
be picked up on the day, from one hour before
the performance starts.
Getting There
The New London Theatre is on the corner of
Drury Lane and Parker Street. The nearest
London Underground stations are Covent
Garden and Holborn. The nearest British Rail
station is Charing Cross. Parking is available
at the NCP car park in Drury Lane. The New
London Theatre is air-conditioned
General Rules
No video cameras or recording devices.
Special Seating
For disabled customers the stalls offer the
easiest access and tickets need to be booked
direct with the Box Office. There is also
amplification for the hard of hearing.
Children
No babes in arms are admitted to the
auditorium. Young children are admitted but
not encouraged unless the parent is confident
that the child is old enough to be attentive to
the performance and not a distraction for other
members of the audience. Everyone must
have a valid ticket and occupy a seat.
Accompanying adults will be asked to remove
any persistently noisy infants.
_______________________________
OR -- EVEN BETTER IF YOU LOVE ROOS 'N'
WALLABIES 'N' KOALAS -- HOW ABOUT, YOU
GUESSED IT, AUSTRALIA?
HERE'S THE TOUR SCHEDULE
17.11.00 - 06.12.00 Perth, Esplanade Reserve
03.01.01 - 07.01.01 Frankston, Samuel
Sherlock
10.01.01 - 14.01.01 Albury, Gateway Island
17.01.01 - 21.01.01 Wagga Wagga, Bolton
Park
24.01.01 - 28.01.01 Mildura, Aerodrome Ovals
31.01.01 - 04.02.01 Bendigo, Weerona Oval
07.02.01 - 11.02.01 Ballarat, North Gardens
Res
14.02.01 - 18.02.01 Mt Gambier, Vansittart
Park
21.02.01 - 25.02.01 Warrnambool, Harris
Street
4 more info go to:
http://www.reallyuseful.com/ |
Joni
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 4:01 am: | |
How about, in the case of the blind man.
Jn. 9: 3and 4. Neither this man sinned, nor his parents. But that the works of God should be made manifest in him, I must work the works, of Him that sent me.
Maybe the sin, the blindness was caused by the the sin of satan and Adam. The earth being cursed now.
Romans 8: 19-22 "For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility not willingly but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now."
What about Gen. 3:16-19? Suffering is a part of the world now. Since Adam disobeyed God. Now we have thorns and thistles growing by the tons, but not so with fruit and veges. We sweat and toil to produce them. Sin has affected this world and until God restores it we will continue to be affected. We will continue to suffer the sin.
Maybe satan is the prince of this world, the slander, the adversary, evil craftiness, tempter, accuser, god of this age, prince of demons, ruler of the Kingdom of the air. etc. Did not Adam relinquish this earth?? Isn't satan the ruler of it?
If one is not born again and receive what was lost in the garden, the Holy Spirit, he will be with satan, working for him.
Being born again gives us the choice to sin or not to. We are no longer tossed about. We can have confidence that God will supply our needs. We become God's property. We become a bond servant of Christ. We join in the work of reconciliation and glorifying God.
I am not so sure that the human has no choice in this, matter. I do not see this. Maybe God is making lemonade out of lemons.?????
In the end when God restores the earth, there will be no more sin and death.
For now we will have suffering but can trust that God will comfort us and work all things for our good.
Satan tests us, to get us to do evil. He is the murderer and liar and was so from the beginning. God tests up to obey Him. When we obey Him we grow in faith and truth in Christ, and we have God's tools, armor, (Eph.) to fight against the wyles of the devil.
Do we look at Jesus and interpret the OT in light of the NT?? What was Jesus like??
Just some thoughts. |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 8:16 am: | |
Brilliant post, Joni! Proof that God is with your
mind and heart! |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 9:20 am: | |
But if you ever do get a chance to see
Webber-and-Eliot's musical, CATS, here's a
bit of what you can expect:
@SONG: Grizabella, The Glamour Cat
Remark the cat who hesitates toward you
In the light of the door which opens on her like
a grin
You see the border of her coat is torn and
stained with sand
And you see the corner of her eye twist like a
crooked pin
She haunted many a low resort
Near the grimy road of Tottenham Court
She flitted about the No Man's Land
From "The Rising Sun" to "The Friend at
Hand"
And the postman sighed as he scratched his
head
"You'd really had thought she ought to be
dead"
And who would ever suppose that
That was Grizabella, the glamour cat
Grizabella, the glamour cat, Grizabella, the
glamour cat
And who would ever suppose that
That was Grizabella, the glamour cat
@SONG: Memory, sung by Grizabella --
GLAMOUR cat no longer but REDEEMED cat
-- as she ascends into cat heaven at the end
of the play. [And some of you will be crying
before you finish witnessing her song. --Max of
the Cross]
Daylight, see the dew on the sunflower
And a rose that is fading
Roses wither away
Like the sunflower I yearn to turn my face to
the dawn
I am waiting for the day
Now Old Deuteronomy, just before dawn
Through a silence you feel you could cut with a
knife
Announces the cat who can now be reborn
And come back to a different jellicle life
Memory, turn your face to the moonlight
Let your memory lead you
Open up, enter in
If you find there the meaning of what
happiness is
Then a new life will begin
Memory, all alone in the moonlight
I can smile at the old days
I was beautiful then
I remember the time I knew what happiness
was
Let the memory live again
Burnt out ends of smokey days
The stale cold smell of morning
The streetlamp dies, another night is over
Another day is dawning
Daylight, I must wait for the sunrise
I must think of a new life
And I mustn't give in
When the dawn comes tonight will be a
memory too
And a new day will begin
Sunlight, through the trees in the summer
Endless masquerading
Like a flower as the dawn is breaking
The memory is fading
Touch me, it's so easy to leave me
All alone with the memory
Of my days in the sun
If you touch me you'll understand what
happiness is
Look, a new day has begun |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 9:32 am: | |
Next trivia qustion: What Broadway musical
contains not so much as a single word of
dialogue or speaking, but is composed of
music and singing in its entirity?
Answer: CATS |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 9:53 am: | |
Final "trivia" question:
Why do you think it is that the most successful
play in the history of Broadway
* had the longest run [just short of 18 years]
* set a new record for the most performances
[7,485]
* made the most money
* employed the most actors and singers and
dancers, makeup artists and other
stage-related people
* drew in the largest number of theatre-goers
Why do you think it is that this musical -- an
allegory of human beings everywhere -- is
perhaps the only Broadway play ever whose
central theme and singular message is....
sovereign GRACE alone?
Answer: Will be left as a "thought experiment"
(Einstein) for the reader.
Indeed, a sovereign God works in mysterious
ways his wonders to perform.
Max of the Cross |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 10:25 am: | |
Joni,
There is an interesting NIV text note to the
scriptural example you cited (Jesus healing a
man born blind). Here it is:
NIV John 9:2 His disciples asked him, "Rabbi,
who sinned, this man or his parents, that he
was born blind?"
NIV text note: "The rabbis had developed the
principle that 'There is no death without sin,
and there is no suffering without iniquity.' They
were even capable of thinking that a child
could sin in the womb or that its soul might
have sinned in a preexistent state. They also
held that terrible punishments came on
certain people because of the sin of their
parents. As the next verse shows [the one you
quoted, Joni], Jesus plainly CONTRADICTED
these beliefs."
Now, if Jesus plainly CONTRADICTED the
Pharisees' and other legalists' idea that there
is no suffering without iniquity, then where do
we get off thinking to agree with them and to
disagree with Jesus?
I'm not saying that's what you're doing, Joni.
I'm saying that those who do not accept the
biblical teaching of predestination have to deal
with this miracle of Jesus.
What think ye all? Can there be suffering
without iniquity? |
Maryann
| | Posted on Monday, December 11, 2000 - 3:59 pm: | |
Hey Guys!;-)
Wow! Am I ever pumped!!;-)))))
When I was about 17 or 18 we knew an SDA pastor where we lived that was rather grace oriented. This was during the time that my mom was attaching herself to the Brindsmead train and we were "actually" going to a "real" Church!
Anyway, that pastor got very sick and died in about 1980 and I lost touch with his family;-(
I've been thinking about his widow for some time and decided to find her Friday. Well, the conference office was closed so this morning I was able to get her number and it was a super duper thrill to talk to her.
Funny thing, she said she thought of me just a couple months ago!;-) AND:-) she lives only about 70 miles from here!!!;-)
Her health is good and her mind is sharp and she is looking forward to visiting and even a little "STUDY;-)!
So nearly 22 years later, I will meet her again;-)
Tickled pink.....Maryann |
Joni
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2000 - 2:49 am: | |
Max,
I do believe in predestination because the Bible is clear on it. I just can't explain it fully because the Bible is not clear on exactly what it means. Or maybe I just haven't found it yet.
I have a hard time with God always getting blammed. I am not sure that He is always the one that is at fault for the awful tradgedys in life. For instance the little girl that gets raped and murdered. I do not believe that God is the one who should get blamed. I do not believe that it is His will. But I do believe that He can protect her mind and soul, maybe not her body. He can let her die peacefully. I trust Him.
I seek to have His thoughts on this not mine. His are much higher than mine.
I do not think there is suffering without iniquity. That was my point. There is iniquity because of Adam. This world is full of it. I even see it in the thorns and thistles. We toil now, we suffer now. Suffering comes from sin. It comes from satan when we listen to him. It comes from God when He is trainning us. It comes from our own selves when we do stupid things. It comes from those around us who do not know God and even those who do.
Cancer could be from the world's environment, from our own selves: ie. stress, wrong diet, genes, etc, Some people think it comes from satan, I have heard some say from God. But definetly because we are not in the perfect world that God had planned for us to be in in the beginning. No matter how hard we try with our diets, or exercise we will not live forever here. I've seen people who have been extreme in there diets, no meat, no eggs, no cheese, no milk, sugar etc... and they still get CA, MI's, CVA's, autoimmune diseases, accidents, etc.
Because of sin we have to suffer. We will age, wrinkle, and die. We are appointed once to die physically. This is a part of the suffering.
But because of Christ and His sacrifice we have eternal life. We look for a future and a hope not just in this life. We were created to live forever and once Christ puts an end to this place and rebuilds it we will live forever. But only because we believe in Jesus.
When I look at Jesus in the NT I see Him healing and restoring life. He did not heal everyone. He came to show us what God was really like. He calmed the seas. He heals us today. He calms seas today. He also spoke truth. To the pharisee He spoke in parables. He upturned their tables.
Did God know, from the beginning, which of us would choose Him when He came to show Himself to us?
He healed many who came to Him, who believed in Him. When I say healed I mean not just physically. I mean Spiritually. When He healed the 10 lepers only one came back to thank Him. All were healed physically, only one was healed Spiritually. He didn't wave His hand over the whole city and say all are healed.
Does He really control those who have followed satan? Or does he let them go on their own? And by letting them go on in their own sinful way, He can use it for His purpose????
Some vessels for God, some for evil. Does this really mean that God made the evil vessesls to do the evil, or did He know that they would be evil and not choose Him?
Without Jesus in your life can you see yourself in adultry? in murder? going nuts? stealing from your friends? really getting wacked out on drugs? drinking and driving and killing innocent people?
Something in my mind does not gel with God being at fault, or it being His will for a lot of stuff that goes on. I do not know yet where to go with this. I do know that I trust God will reveal to me His ways in this matter. I do know that His thoughts are higher than mine, and His ways are strange, and so I will wait and continue to study until I reach peace and my mind settles.
Joni |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2000 - 1:46 pm: | |
Max, And anyone else who can help me,
I'm just not getting it. And so I keep coming back to it, not to argue, but because I truly want to understand the Calvinist perspective.
[Foreword: I *am* a Christian, and I rejoice in the full assurance of my salvation in Christ, like most of the rest of the folks here! :-) I also believe we serve a just and loving God. What I'm questioning in this thread is how those beliefs, which most or all of us share, can be reconciled with the Calvinist perspective. That's all.]
I wrote:
>>Suppose I love Christ and accept His
>>provision for my salvation -- only to find He
>>never made any such provision?
Max wrote:
>If you love Christ and accept his salvation
>then he HAS made the provision.
I wrote:
>>How do I know if I'm one of the "elect"?
Max wrote:
>If you believe, you are. If you don't
>believe, you're not.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the very fact that I *want* to believe, and *want* to follow Jesus, means that He predestined me to do so; i.e., if He hadn't earmarked me for heaven, I would have no desire to go. Similarly, then, it is impossible for those predestined to damnation/destruction to even manifest a *desire* for salvation. Is that a fair statement of your position?
Max wrote:
>Question: When on the road to Damascus to
>murder more Christians, did Paul have free
>choice? Answer: No. He was as much a slave to
>his Pharisaical addiction as any alcoholic today.
My answer: YES, he had a choice!! We always have a choice to do good or evil. The murderer has a choice. The adulterer has a choice. *I* have a choice every day, to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, or to be angry, spiteful, sarcastic, lustful, etc. Paul persecuted the church by choice, and after Jesus appeared to him, he chose to change his ways. Where there is no choice, what rational meaning is there for "sin"? By using this "no choice" logic, the sadistic so-called man in my original post could reasonably claim, not that "the devil made me do it," but "God made me do it -- he predestined me to do these things! I have no choice, just like Paul on the road to Damascus!" And we can throw our criminal justice system out the window, because nobody's guilty.
{Deep breath} Anyway, my problem with the Calvinist perspective *as I understand it* is that, although it appears to harmonize with Paul's comments where the word Predestination is explicitly used, it seems *really* out of whack with the whole thrust of scripture:
"Go, and make disciples of all men, teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you" -- WHY -- if God will save and damn those on his predetermined lists, regardless of the response of our [nonexistant] free will? Why give your life as a missionary to a "heathen" country, when it *won't make a bit of difference* ?
"The Lord is not willing that ANY should perish, but that all should come to REPENTANCE." Come to WHAT? Repentance is a voluntary action if anything is -- and the whole context of the passage implies that, although God doesn't WANT anyone to perish, some WILL. How does that harmonize with predestination?
The flood, as has been previously mentioned, and also Sodom and Gomorrah. God predestined the "wicked" to become incorrigibly depraved, then got mad at them and blasted them for carrying out their programming?
The list could go on. Why give the kingdom to King Saul, then take it from him for "disobedience," when he had no power to disobey? Why make a covenant with Israel, then spend half the Old Testament lambasting them for "breaking" the covenant -- when they had no free will in the first place?
Clearly I'm misunderstanding the Calvinist position somewhere... and that's what I'm groping for. I'm not slamming an entire branch of Christianity (maybe the largest branch, I don't know) -- I'm just trying to understand it.
Since we're quoting a lot of poetry in this thread, I'll close with one:
"Oh Thou who didst with Pitfall and with Gin
Beset the Road I was to wander in,
Thou wilt not with Predestination round
Enmesh me, and impute my Fall to Sin ??!"
- Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
Comments? Reactions? Clarifications?
Thanks,
Lorin |
George
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2000 - 9:51 pm: | |
Lorin,
You have stated my questions much better than I ever could.
The way I look at it is, if on one hand God says things are predestioned, and then on the other seems to say that we have a free choice, something is wrong with our unserstanding of the two ideas.
The only way it all makes sence to me is if "salvation" is predestioned, but our "accepting" it is not.
You could say that is like having our cake and eating it too. Both things then make sence.
What do you think?---George |
Maryann
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2000 - 11:43 pm: | |
Hi Guyz'z,
This predestination thing has never been of much interest to me;-)
To me, a simple person, (no comment from George's peanut gallery!;-)), that knows near zero Greek, Hebrew and all that stuff, it's JUST SO SIMPLE!
First off, the Bible is NOT real clear on the issue and makes no big deal about it, so neither do I.
Second, with the little deal made of it in the Bible; if God knows the end from the beginning and knows each persons every molecule, He knows what our choices were an eternity ago!
I just can't imagine that God I know sets out to predestine some to be un-saved and others to be saved.
Somewhere in the Bible it says that God did make someone evil? But I choose to understand that as "God talk" and leave the interpretation to Him!
I think Max said recently that we are all predestined for Grace or something like that. That makes loads of sense to me as Jesus is supposed to have died for EVERYONE! Right? Sooooooooo, we are all predestined.
Predestine means predetermine according to the dictionary.
Each one of us has predestined or predetermined that each one of our children will be a successful and up standing citizen at their conception. Right? Have EVERYONE of our kids followed through with our predetermination or predestination of them? NO!!!
In a much more infinite way than us "humans" operate, I think that God, in His "God way", as our Father, has predetermined or predestined each one of us for grace!;-) Have we "humans" all followed though with God's predetermined or predestination of us? NO!!!!
I just don't see where God could possibly be the bad guy here?!
What do you think of my modification of John 3:16?
For God so predeterminedly loved the world that He predetermenedly sent His only begotten Son, that whosoever predeterminedly believes in Him should not parish, but have everlasting life.
It's funny how using "predetermined" makes "predestined" easier to understand.
Or does it?;-) Well, it does to me!!!!
With helmet and shield in hand....Maryann;-)) |
Maryann
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 12, 2000 - 11:51 pm: | |
AND.....Besides that! Just how in the world can we "REST" in the confidence of our salvation unless God predestined each and every one of us for GRACE?
If it were any other way, we would be sitting back, chewing our nails and sweating bullets wondering if "WE" were one of the ones predestined.
Don't let this predestination thingy put y'all back in bondage!!!!!
XX-Large helmet and shield in hand...Maryann;-) |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 13, 2000 - 4:17 am: | |
Maryann,
No need for a helmet and shield, unless, of course, you refer to the "spiritual armor" that Paul talks about in Ephesians 6 ! :-)
This is more of a quest for understanding of our Christian brothers' and sisters' beliefs, not an "I'm right, you're wrong" kind of thing. You wrote:
>I just can't imagine that God I know sets out
>to predestine some to be un-saved and others
>to be saved.
Yet that's exactly what John Calvin believed, and what the Presbyterian church, among others, teaches. And so I'm just asking (1) Have I misunderstood Calvin's doctrines? or (2) If not, how do my brothers and sisters who follow that tradition derive from it peace, assurance, and a belief that God is a loving God?
Don't worry, I totally agree that such matters are not salvation issues; *neither* position on predestination makes one a "better" or "worse" Christian! But such things *are* of passing interest to me, although not to you. And that's OK! :-)
Have a blessed day, Maryann, and all!
Lorin |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 13, 2000 - 4:21 am: | |
George,
I think your post harmonizes it all pretty well! :-)
- Lorin |
Max
| | Posted on Friday, December 15, 2000 - 6:16 pm: | |
Hi, Lorin,
Can't stay long, but want to respond to your
very well thought out postings:
You wrote, ^^We always have a choice to do
good or evil. The murderer has a choice. The
adulterer has a choice.^^
If that is so, then there is no need for God's
grace, right. If I understand you correctly, then
the unredeemed person has a choice "to do
good"? If so, how can this be anything other
than utter legalism and pharisaism in its
purest essence?
You also wrote, ^^I have a choice every day, to
follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, or to be
angry, spiteful, sarcastic, lustful, etc.^^
Yes, this is true, but you are "in Christ," and if
Christ has made you free -- as he did Paul --
then you are free indeed." But before you
believed you were not free. You were a slave
to sin as surely as the unsaved person who
has no choice but to be angry, spiteful,
sarcastic, lustful, etc.
And you wrote, ^^Paul persecuted the church
by choice, and after Jesus appeared to him,
he chose to change his ways.^^ Do you have
even one Scripture to back up this assertion?
How is this not naked SDA-style legalism?
And again, ^^Where there is no choice, what
rational meaning is there for "sin"?^^
Nowhere in Scripture is there the slightest
evidence for the assumption that sin is
grounded in free human choice -- except for
the free choice of a sinless Adam! For in
Adam ALL have sinned.
And, ^^By using this "no choice" logic, the
sadistic so-called man in my original post
could reasonably claim, not that "the devil
made me do it," but "God made me do it -- he
predestined me to do these things!^^
Ah, how I love that statement! Of course God
made him do it! And of course God uses the
"sword of the law" (Paul) to punish him. Don't
you see, Lorin? God's in the picture! And more
than that, God has painted the picture!
^^Although [Calvin's perspective] appears to
harmonize with Paul's comments where the
word Predestination is explicitly used, it
seems *really* out of whack with the whole
thrust of scripture.^^
And is the thrust of Scripture legalistic? Jesus
said that the Pharisees searched the
Scriptures, for in them they THOUGHT they
had eternal life. But the Scriptures testified of
Jesus, and yet they REFUSED to come to him
that they might have life! THAT is the thrust of
Scripture, Lorin: Thinking that righteousness
and / or wickedness is based on human
choices.
The thrust of Scripture is always based on
GOD'S will, and never on HUMAN will, except
only in the sense that if Christ has made us
free, then we are free indeed. As saved
individuals we have choices. Otherwise not.
Some day I want to do a study of the Old
Testament texts which say things such as,
"Choose ye this day whom ye will serve," and
show that these choices are God-directed.
Only when the Holy Spirit came upon the Old
Testament "hero," such as Gideon, were they
able to act righteously. Nor were they robots.
We do not understand the freedom that God
gives, because the understanding of God is
higher above our understanding as the
heavens are higher than the earth, and
because the mind and person of God is
clothed in "thick darkness," impenetrable to
our foolish minds whether scientific or
philosophical.
More next post. |
Max
| | Posted on Friday, December 15, 2000 - 6:20 pm: | |
^^"Go, and make disciples of all men,
teaching them to observe whatsoever I have
commanded you" -- WHY -- if God will save
and damn those on his predetermined lists,
regardless of the response of our
[nonexistant] free will? Why give your life as a
missionary to a "heathen" country, when it
*won't make a bit of difference* ? ^^
It will make a difference, for in Christ you have
been set free. And it will make a difference, a
difference foreordained by God. |
Max
| | Posted on Friday, December 15, 2000 - 6:22 pm: | |
Joni,
What a wonderful post! I don't have time to say
anything more at this point than this from the
mouth of Job: "Though he slay me, yet will I
trust in him." |
Max
| | Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2000 - 2:56 pm: | |
Lorin and all,
While I slept last night a couple of texts sprang
to mind. And when I awoke I looked them up.
They have to do with whether or not the
unredeemed individual -- Paul, for example,
on the road to Damascus "breathing murder"
-- had a human free-will choice to continue to
murder or to obey the Sixth Commandment:
"Thou shalt not kill." Here are the two texts
(NIV):
Jeremiah 13:23-27:
Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the
leopard its spots? Neither can you do good
who are accustomed to doing evil. I will scatter
you like chaff driven by the desert wind. This is
your lot, the portion I have decreed for you,
declares the Lord, "because you have
forgotten me and trusted in false gods.
I [God] will pull up your skirts over your face
that your shame may be seen -- your
adulteries and lustful neighings, your
shameless prostitution! I have seen your
detestable acts on the hills and in the fields.
Woe to you, O Jerusalem! How long will you
be unclean?"
Jeremiah 17:9:
The heart is deceitful above all things and
beyond cure.
Grace, my friend Lorin, grace is the only cure.
Not PASSIVE grace that sits like a box of See's
chocolates on a shelf in some human-
imagined celestial candy store waiting sweetly
there for you -- by your "free will" falsely so
called -- to pick up or bypass at your pleasure.
But rather ACTIVE grace. No box of See's
chocolates. Sorry. It is rather the fist of God
that smashes you in the face like on your own
adulterous road to murdering Damascus. It is
grace that:
Smacks you down to earth.
Blinds you.
Forces you.
To "see with blinding sight" (Dylan Thomas)
what GOD wants you to see.
Not what YOU think you should see!
For ALL of us think this way: If only I can rise
from this barstool and stumble drunkenly back
to the pew ....
Little do we know that we are only going from
a pathetic bar stool into the "the synagogue
of Satan." There to sit on an even-more-
pathetic pew.
For in such a pew we learn this: Exercise
your free choice. Keep the Ten
Commandments, and especially the Fourth.
And, uh, yes, while you're at it -- "Search the
scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal
life [KJV]."
Unfortunate translation. For what God-
Walking-Earth REALLY told those first-century
SDAs who were trying to kill him for "breaking
the Sabbath" and for "making himself equal
with God" was this:
NIV John 5:39-40: "You diligently study the
Scriptures because you think that by them you
possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures
that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to
me to have life."
It was no less than the Commander of the
universe who was walking among them. And
they knew him not because they had neither
eyes to see nor ears to hear.
But while God was dying on the cross
screaming, "It [your salvation] is finished!" His
ACTIVE grace suddenly appeared. Then and
only then did he give them eyes and ears.
Then and only then were they smashed from
their own glass-eyed, tin-eared illusions and
unwillingly, unwittingly thrust into God's reality
and -- according to GOD'S time table and not
their own -- set free. Then and only then could
they become "free indeed" and choose.
Remember God says, You did not choose me,
I chose you.
And exercise their free choice they did. They
rejected Him. Let us not do as they did when
at His discretion and not ours He makes us
"free indeed."
But let us do, rather, as Peter did: With
absolutely no free will to do anything but
helplessly fulfillJesus' prophecy he disowned
his Lord three times before the rooster
crowed. Hear Matthew (NIV 26:74-75):
"[Peter] began to call down curses on himself
and he swore to them, "I don't know the man!"
Immediately a rooster crowed. Then and only
then did he remember the word Jesus
spoken: "Before the rooster crows, you will
disown me three times."
And he went outside and wept bitterly.
Did you get that? He "he went outside and
wept bitterly."
HE WENT OUTSIDE AND WEPT BITTERLY.
And so I ask you, was not Peter's case parallel
to Paul's? Did Peter have human free will to
choose to curse himself and disown his Lord
three times?
I fear not. Peter was predestined to curse
himself. He was foreordained to disown his
Lord three times. He was helpless to do
anythying but fulfill the prophecy of the
Commander of the universe. For God's word
cannot be broken.
But fear not -- God's ACTIVE grace broke
through! God's rooster crowing was as much
His weapon as was the blinding burst of laser
light he aimed at Paul.
For in both cases they "knocked some sense"
-- meaning freedom -- into pathetically
self-willed men who had none.
Nor can anyone come to God by his own free
will falsely so called. There are no Steps to
Christ by Ellen G. White.
If Jeremiah is to be believed the deceit of the
human heart is beyond cure -- Peter's, Paul's
yours. The Ethiopian cannot change his skin.
Nor the leopard his spots.
Since God alone is good (Mark 10:18), then
we who are accustomed to doing evil -- and
that includes ALL of us (Romans 3:9-20), my
friends -- CANNOT choose and perform good
works. Period.
Not "with Christ's help."
Not by "following Christ's example."
NOT AT ALL!
But let us not end the post on such a note, but
rather on this (NIV 2 Peter 3:9) with the
impetuous apostle speaking to the sheep he
is feeding -- you and me:
"[The Lord] is patient with you, not wanting
anyone to perish, but everyone to come to
repentance."
Max of the Cross |
Billtwisse
| | Posted on Saturday, December 16, 2000 - 4:43 pm: | |
Dear Max:
I love the direction you are heading! Would you say that this represents a change in your position or a refining of it? In any case, I think that we are beginning to discuss 'real issues' here again.
Just a side note: it was an immense pleasure to fellowship with you, Richard, Colleen, and the rest of the Redlands believers in our company last weekend. You all love the Lord and the gospel. I can't wait to see you again!
Personal koinonia is immensely more beneficial than cyber-koinonia. Issues that take 3 months to resolve with e-discussion are often put to rest in 3 hours face-to-face. I'm not putting down the importance of cyber-discussion, though.
Darrell had this to say:
Yes, but this does not prove cause and effect. I would pick the Biblical dotrine of the gospel (especially righteousness by faith in Christ Jesus) as being the cause of the reformation, but I guess I can't prove cause and effect any more than Max can!
The biblical nature of justification and election were twin issues in the Reformation and cannot be separated. The Council of Trent, formulated to damn and end the Reformation, condemned the Reformers' doctrine of election as much as it did their doctrine of justification by faith. See the canons.
Lorinc:
I think that you are asking the right questions. If God predestines some to be saved and others to be unsaved, where is the fairness? Paul himself anticipated that question in Romans 9:14-26. The question assumes that, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, "all men are created equal and possess certain inalienable rights." On the level of mortal existence and human government, that statement is true. However, in relation to God almighty--the sovereign creator of the universe and redeemer of mankind--is it?
There are many issues here and I can only scratch the surface. Why do certain people experience salvation by grace and others go to hell? I do believe that the Calvinists & Reformers were partially correct and partly wrong. They were certainly right on the issue of election to salvation. God is the hound of heaven: he pursues those whom he has chosen--when he decides to find and confront you with grace--YOU CAN'T SAY NO. The apostle Paul is the ultimate example of irresistable grace. Could he say 'NO' on the road to Damascus? Think about that question. A pure freewiller would say 'yes' but . . . factor in the power of the Holy Spirit in regeneration.
The lake of fire is created for devils (Mt. 25:41, Rev. 20:10). It is obviously a spiritual suffering--how do you torment a spirit with physical fire? Are the lost of 'apparent' humanity really human or devils? They appear to be human--but they possess the mystery of iniquity in their hearts. This is a principle that the saved NEVER know or experience--even in their unconverted state before turning to Christ. If they did, they would not be redeemable. The devil and his angels are steeped in rebellion against God to the point that it is impossible for them to be saved. Are the lost of the physical human race unique--wanting salvation and mourning their lack of it (as opposed to devils) but passed over by God? Or are they the same as devils? This is a serious question for the devout Calvinist. I believe scripture teaches that the lost are not 'passed over' but true devils from the beginning--in every sense. This is hard for us to understand, because we live with them every day. They seem to be like us in many respects. Only in eternity will the difference in hearts be fully revealed.
I'm not proposing that prior to conversion we were righteous. We were by nature 'objects of wrath' (Eph. 2:3) and 'without hope and without God in the world' (Eph. 2:12). But our sin was not eternal sin, the sin unto death, the sin against the Holy Spirit, the mystery of iniquity. That evil is unique to devils and is experienced only by those created to serve God's purposes outside of salvation.
Calvinism would deny that the lost are unredeemable. It proposes that the lost of humanity are redeemable--but 'passed over' by God in his decree of election. This is the issue on which I passionately 'beg to differ' with them.
Karl Barth is right in the principle of his Calvinistic universalism: all humanity will be saved (Rom. 5:12-18). But he didn't understand this: 'human' devils in the present age are only phantom humanity--not true humanity. In the judgment they will be shown to be real devils. They knock on the door of eternity only for the sensual pleasures of heaven, not for the holiness of heaven.
--Twisse |
|
