Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
If all that was true then there would be no such thing as Christianity as we know it, and it would all be pointless. God created His elect to need, but also to glorify Him. We do both through prayer.
I am convinced that the only sacrifice I can offer my God is that of Praise...
I will sacrifice a freewill offering to you; I will praise your name, O LORD, for it is good.
~Psalm 54:6
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that confess his name.
~Hebrews 13:15
Bears repeating!
...and brings to mind the band Talking Heads for some strange reason ;)
You are avoiding the answer counselor. What you are relly implying is that Christianity is based on rewards. My point is that people go to church because they expect something in return, talking heads to the contrary notwithstanding. You make it sound like God owes us something for Him to be meaningful!
Correct. We can only praise His mercy we didn't deserve, and blessings we didn't earn.
Awesome.
Thank you my friend. :)
Not when you are the reason both possibilities exist, FK! The "choice" God makes, then, must come from possibilities He created. That would make God subject to His own creation!
How do you define "creating a possibility", and what makes you think God must go through this exercise in order to make a choice? Do you agree with Jesus in Matt. 19:26 "... with God all things are possible"? If all things are possible, and yet not all things happen, how can you say God does not make choices?
If God has more than one choice, that means He must have created more than one possible decision. God Is, He is existence; He pre-exists everything that is; everything that is comes from Him.
Thus, if God makes decisions between various possibilities (which are by necessity His creation, or else they wouldn't exist), then He is, by necessity, limiting His will to His own creation.
I doubt that God ever wondered which choice He should make.
Can your GOD have FUN?..
OR is "it" the progenitor of the hive mentality...
Yes, that's my view as well. FNC just ran a show on an indie filmmaker's look at moderate vs. Islamist viewpoints, and the terrorists will quote their texts more often, and more convincingly. Moderate Islam appears to be a perversion of the original intent of that belief system. And, BTW, the film (two actually) that were made were scheduled to be run on PBS until they pulled the plug at the last minute because a conservative was involved in the making AND, PBS thought not enough "sympathy" was given to the side of the terrorists. Our tax dollars at work.
It depends on how you look at it. First, I would agree with you that God did not drop a "sin bomb" on Adam and Eve, forcing them to blow it. However, what do you suppose would have happened if they passed the test? Would the serpent have slithered away, defeated, never to return? Or, would he have done what we all know satan does all the time, keep trying? Since we know for a fact that they DID have the potential to sin, unlike Christ, they would have cracked after some amount of time. We know this was by God's design since He could have easily protected them from that potential. But He didn't. So, everything happened exactly as God ordained it. Does that offend their free will to sin? I would say "no".
I for one like the way Harley has described this in the past. I believe, (Harley correct me if I'm wrong), that he has said that Adam and Eve simply didn't have the tools to know what to do here. Eve DOES come off looking like a total ditz and would have been easy pickings for the serpent. God, of course, knew that and allowed it anyway. This is very different from God "inserting" evil into anyone, but it also shows that God's intent was that the Fall happen.
That's interesting, I've never heard that before.
The chosen, called and faithful are His elect. They are the ones that face Satan (death) and allow the Holy Spirit to speak through them (as on Pentecost). All others will be deceived by Satan:
This is what I don't get: how can an elect fail at this point if the sin is unforgivable? Can an elect lose his salvation? I have never heard of that given the definition of an elect. Wouldn't that be Christ losing one of His sheep?
BTW, what is the difference between chosen, called, and faithful? I have never heard of that distinction before among the elect.
Note that here too "sin" is singular when it is about the unpardonable one, as the one you noticed, "the wages of sin is death".
Yes, that is fair enough.
I'm not sure of this at all. My belief is that He died for our sins but we must repent of those sins to be forgiven. [Acts 3:19] ...If we haven't repented but believe, we will be saved but what happens to the unrepentant for sins?
I do not believe it is possible to believe without having repented, that is, at the point of salvation. Who is a person that truly believes, but has not repented? That would make no sense to me. To believe requires minimal understanding, which would require the understanding of the necessity of repentance, i.e. that's a huge part of what "belief" and "salvation" means. Now, whether the idea of repentance is something that must be repeated over and over again throughout life towards justification, is a matter of strong contention I have with the Roman Catholics. :)
Oh, Come on Joe, YOU struck first. :) You said:
"The Holy Spirit doesn't lead us to read the Bible if it means separating ourselves from the community that He is the Soul, the Life Force."
I took you to mean that the Holy Spirit does not lead anyone to read the Bible if he is not a Roman Catholic. This is a very offensive statement (but I can take it), so, I answered in kind. Now, if you did not mean that, then I apologize and would ask you to reiterate in a different way.
My contention was that the Spirit leads ALL believers in faith to take in God's word, and you were disagreeing with that. What else was I supposed to think you meant?
OK, cool.
I'm trying to suggest that both acts are sinful, but one amounts to a rejection of grace. I don't mind that the boss-lady thinks Robert Redford looks better than I do. But our relationship would be in trouble if she was spending a LOT of time imagining life with him. That's kind of sort of where we're going with this mortal-venial thing.
While I would agree with you that the first scenario is clearly sinful, I would say that the second (admittedly as best as I could piece it together) is NOT at all. If the second was noticing, but not fantasizing, then that describes to me the occurrence of temptation, which we are clearly told in scripture is not sinful, in and of itself. For example, we are told that Jesus was led into the desert TO BE tempted, and that Jesus KNOWS every temptation known to man, yet He was without sin. Is this the difference you are talking about?
But it's just a theological "!!!TILT!!! to suggest that God would "let them slide", and part of the idea of purgatory is, in fact, straightening out the books on the consequences of (or healing self-inflicted wounds caused by) venial sins -- all of 'em.
OK, you're right that I wasn't thinking of purgatory. So, my attempted "save" is that my understanding of Catholic belief is that everyone in purgatory still goes to Heaven, regardless, so it could be said that there still is a "slide" on the issue of salvation or not. My understanding is that it is sort of a "pay-for-play" type of operation. :) IOW, compared to eternity in Heaven vs. hell, a few lashes (or whatever happens) in purgatory is NOTHING compared to the alternative.
I did not mean that at all. I have never said such a thing. I am not claiming any sort of "infallible reading ability" and I am Catholic. We as Catholics have a wide lattitude in reading the Scriptures. I have tried to explain this - saying is that when there is a disagreement on an article of faith - for example, is Jesus God (Arianism of the fourth century), we are to turn to our leaders and the Tradition once given. Otherwise, the Church would split and fracture into many denominations. The Church doesn't have a guide book on individual verses!
Also, I do not find where the Bible says that the Spirit leads individuals, even Roman Catholics, to understand the Bible SEPERATELY from the community. We see this in Acts 8, for example. We see this in the mere appointment of leaders to protect the once-given faith. Now, if you can point to me where the Bible says otherwise, I am listening. But if you intend on repeating the same mantra that the Catholic Church teaches "x" when she doesn't, then all I can do is explain our teachings. It is up to you to accept them or not. All I ask is you be honest with yourself and try to understand what I am actually saying, not what you think I say based on what your pastor told you about the evils of Catholicism.
My contention was that the Spirit leads ALL believers in faith to take in God's word, and you were disagreeing with that.
There is a huge difference in "taking in God's Word" and fully understanding every verse to the point of disagreeing with what the Church teaches. Faith comes from HEARING the Word proclaimed - seeing it in action, not from reading.
Regards
Tsk, tsk. As I've pointed out several times now, Eve did not make a "free decision" to disobey; she was deceived. It states this twice in scriptures. To say Eve made a "free" decision while being deceived is like saying people who are tricked into signing a document made a free decision. I guess we wouldn't need as many lawyers. If it give any comfort, I should point out that I was listening to a sermon this weekend by a well respected Reformed preacher who indicated the same thing. He was wrong as well.
This is a rather important point in understanding the fall of Adam. It was because of Adam that the race died, tainted by original sin (which the Orthodox don't believe); not because of Eve.
There are only two choices; God's way or sin. That's it.
Yes I wached the Fox News presentation of the PBS-banned report. I think the liberal, leftist PBS is no different than our war-mongering neocons. Both are capabale of lies and deceptions, and an Orwellian-like "official truth." In all my years that I have spent listening to PBS on the way to work, I have never heard them give an equal and balanced report on any issue. People will stop at nothing in order to push their agenda.
They would have lived happily and multiplied, just as God commanded them I suppose. [though I am not sure where all the people would have lived on this planet if everyone who was ever born was still alive and multiplying! The Bible doesn't address that..."minor" point]
Would the serpent have slithered away, defeated, never to return?
Evil "exists" only as long as there is potential for sin. That, of course, is intrinsic in free will. By giving us freedom God also permitted evil. That freedom is necessary for us to love God by choice, otherwise it's not love.
Since we know for a fact that they DID have the potential to sin, unlike Christ
Christ's human nature was no different than Adam's, so it too had to have a potential to sin.
they would have cracked after some amount of time.
Speculation.
We know this was by God's design since He could have easily protected them from that potential.
Wrong. In order to be free, one must allow that potential.
So, everything happened exactly as God ordained it.
Everything happened as God knew it would, based on their free choice, by His permission.
Adam and Eve simply didn't have the tools to know what to do here.
Of course they did. They could have repented. The act that sealed their fall was their refusal to repent when caught. Adam blamed God for giving him "that woman" and Eve blamed the serpent. All they had to do was repent. God gave them ample opportunity to do so.
This is very different from God "inserting" evil into anyone, but it also shows that God's intent was that the Fall happen.
If God created Eve "ditzy" enough as you say to be easy pray then God set her up. It's no different than leading a child consciously to step into the traffic and then blame the child for getting hit. God gave her freedom to choose and she abused it. That's why we have lawyers.
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.