Posted on 01/16/2006 12:59:35 AM PST by Gamecock
We know! It is because those who have been bought with the Precious Blood of God the Son rejoice at the hearing of it every time it is proclaimed.
Since you have said believing world why limit it to half the time? I trust that the both of us are at a loss the whole time not simply half the time (:
It could not be stated more clearly.
Christ has been Crucified - past tense even in God's language; Christ has been raised from the grave - past tense also but following the crucifiction; Christ as God the Son is again at the right hand of God never again to be otherwise.
So there is with God an ordered sequence of events as with the plain old number system 1 < 2 < 3 ...
Your question are so trivial. You must be teaching an ESL class.
Yes
Yes
I do agree that sequence is a constant across time.
It is almost as if sequence is an established location. As you say: 1>2>3>...
Exactly right. And each time it's proclaimed it is just as astounding as the first time we understood it, by the grace of God. All of God, and none of us. Only mercy.
I think personally that it is a matter of perspective. While a new Christian may see himself as "accepting Christ", there comes a point where, as the Christian grows, they begin to realize that it wasn't so much that they "accepted" Christ, as they RECEIVED Him, having been found accepted BY Christ. The work of salvation in the heart of man is one of active Grace by God, and passive reception by man. Whatever the man did at the moment when he became a child of God had its source and first impetus in the Grace of God, not the mind of the man. It is a response to Grace, not the cause of Grace.
What you choose to characterize as "legalistic" is in reality more a matter of accuracy and correct perception of what really happened, as opposed to what one subjectively perceives as having happened. Striving to be accurate is not legalism.
That is a pretty 'strained' explanation, but I can see where some Clavinists must take that position since to do otherwiae would be to deny the truth of TULIP.
Should have said to refute TULIP. I don't think every element of TULIP is true.
What's 'strained' about it? How is seeing one's salvation experience from a less subjective viewpoint a "strain"? This has nothing really to do with TULIP, and I don't use TULIP as the backdrop for what I understand.
I know my own salvation experience very well, and I clearly see that it was God who apprehended me, and not my own "smarts" that resulted in my receiving of Him, and His redemption and forgiveness. He chose me, I didn't choose Him UNTIL He confronted me with the Truth, in a very graphic way. At the point of choice, there really was no other rational or logical choice that to yield to His confrontation of my sinfulness and need of a Savior. But, if He had not confronted me, I would NEVER have chosen Him of my own choice or free will.
So, I did not "accept" Him, in the sense that I made a choice between two opposite but equally valid options, as though it were some sort of business transaction between two parties of roughly equal standing, it was a "reception" of the terms of One who held all the cards, and had all of the authority. It was a capitulation, rather than an agreement.
DO tell ?!? Gosh, ctd, we didn't know that! < /sarcasm >
The efforts of some to "refute" the points of TULIP have uniformly fallen short, and always will. But that's not my problem....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.