Posted on 03/07/2007 9:10:18 AM PST by Salvation
Excellent points, as usual.
Thx.
Thx.
The prize . . . healed feet?
You might enjoy reading .30Carbine's post on the subject, which she posted to another thread but is relevant here. An excerpt:
"Meditate upon these things," commands the Holy Word, and James exhorts us to be "quick to listen, slow to speak," and these together fit the picture of how the light bouncing all the more times within the gem produces all the more glory when it emerges. I like that.
An uncut diamond (or any of the variety of gemstones) receives and reflects light rays far differently than the polished jewel - could we call one saved and the other as yet unfound, encased as it is within its hard and ugly outer shell? Each uncovered and polished gemstone in their many varieties of color, hue, size, and number of facets will act and react very uniquely to the one source of light shining upon and into the very heart of all.
The Blue Diamond Web site linked above also declared this interesting truth:
what you believe today is exactly what you have always and everywhere believed.
= = =
Pondering . . . I wonder . . .
Given that humans are ESSENTIALLY the same. Eternal truths are eternal truths . . . particularly about human nature, human inclinations, habits, behaviors . . . rebellions, idolatries . . . relating or not to God Almighty etc.
Yet . . . is it possible to believe precisely what was always believed.
ESSENTIALLY, I think it is, but precisely, I think is beyond us.
1. Culture and cultural reality changes. The meanings of words change because the reality has changed.
For example, in industrialized countries, WORK does not mean what it meant 2,000 years ago, for most people. Certainly not for computer programmers or day traders etc.
TRANSPORTATION, TRAVEL does not mean what it meant. KNOWLEDGE does not mean what it meant. AUTHORITY does not mean what it meant.
2. There's whole robust layers of gestalt around each concept, word, reality--all those layers are at least SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT than they were 50 years ago, 250, 500, 2000 years ago.
So, automatically, our beliefs written, experienced and understood in those words--our beliefs are inherently SOMEWHAT different. I doubt in any essential sense--but in complexion, flavor, 'clothing,' . . . and it does effect behavior to some degree.
But I think AT THE HEART LEVEL, THE ESSENTIALS ARE STILL THE ESSENTIALS.
3. I think that's one reason Christ's (A) LOVE GOD WHOLLY; (B) NEIGHBOR AS SELF; (C) DO UNTO OTHERS . . . all from the heart . . . ARE the ESSENTIAL GOSPEL, THE ESSENTIAL DOCTRINES.
4. There's no weaseling about those from the heart. One either does or does not or does to whatever degree. God knows it and somewhere inside, the honest person knows it.
5. All the other accoutraments and details that all the historical squabbles are interminably about will likely, essentially have been for naught. God will still be checking to see
IN EACH INDIVIDUAL'S MOMENT BY MOMENT CASE . . . DID THEY DEMONSTRATE WHOLLY LOVING ME; LOVING OTHERS AS SELF; DOING UNTO OTHERS; DID THEY FORGIVE AS THEY SOUGHT TO BE FORGIVEN; DID THEY DO AS THEY SAID.
I'm skeptical that ANYthing else will matter significantly.
The denominational 'water fights' (since I can't put it more accurately in the religion forum LOL) will turn out to be either black marks because of the motives of the hearts involved . . . or just such utter chaff as to be totally inconsequential.
imho.
INDEED.
Thanks for the ping.
Thanks, Forest Keeper. Yes, that's exactly what I was saying. Christ, not theology, is what's necessary. Anyone, no matter what race, creed, color, can come to Christ through receiving Him into their lives with a sincere heart. Thinking one has to be of a certain theological bent to be saved is a lie from the pit of hell. One of my dear elderly friends is a christian believer who once was mormon. It doesn't matter what they were or even what they were taught. CHRIST is supreme, not theology.
Are you dense or what? I don't know what your church teaches about Christ but born again believers KNOW that Jesus is the ONLY way, not church theology, but a relationship with the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. It doesn't matter if one is a mormon, a JW, RCC, EO or what. That person can be saved and have a living relationship with God through Jesus Christ if that person repents and turns his or her life over to Christ. They usually leave that church to find one that is a Bible believing church but not always. God has some stay to be a light to others caught up in 'theology.'Cheez.
AMEN, silverlings. Thanks.
I think pot is calling kettle black here...
I am assuming Nicea was an ecumenical council. Who decided who should go and who couldn't go to Nicea? How was the council of Nicea paid for? Who opened the council and presided over it?
I can agree with all of your points except for one:
I assert this means that all types are according to God's will - but not every gemstone (or Christian) participates the same way in His Light.
Hebrews 1:3 tells us that Christ is the brightness of the Father's glory. We cannot magnify the Father's glory in this way, but we can be participants in His Light. And that thrills me to no end!
Fitting point. Pondering . . .
How about:
HE WILL . . . IN HABIT US, TEMPLE IN US . . . at some point . . .
such that
HE WILL SHINE THROUGH US/BE REFLECTED IN US PERFECTLY AS HE DESIGNED IT TO BE SO.
He doesn't do things less than perfectly--whether designing us, shaping us, refining us, faceting us, polishing us . . .
HE WILL PRESENT US BLAMELESS BEFORE THE FATHER . . . and I construe that to mean His maturing of us will be perfect, too.
GIVEN THAT . . . as bride components without spot or wrinkle . . .
HIS GLORY WILL BE MANIFESTED IN AND THROUGH US FLAWLESSLY.
And in the process, our PERSONALITIES will be MORE US vs less us.
Character and purpose
To most bishops, the teachings of Arius were heretical and a danger to the salvation of souls. In the summer of 325, the bishops of all provinces were summoned to Nicaea (now known as ?znik, in modern-day Turkey), a place easily accessible to the majority of them, particularly those of Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace.
Approximately 300 bishops attended, from every region of the Empire except Britain. This was the first general council in the history of the Church since the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, which had established the conditions upon which Gentiles could join the Church.[4] In the Council of Nicaea, “the Church had taken her first great step to define doctrine more precisely in response to a challenge from a heretical theology.”[5] The resolutions in the council, being ecumenical, were intended for the whole Church.
[edit]Attendees
All 1800 bishops of the Christian church were invited (about 1000 in the east and 800 in the west), but only 250 to 320 bishops actually participated. Eusebius of Caesarea counted 250,[6] Athanasius of Alexandria counted 318,[7] and Eustathius of Antioch counted 270[8] (all three were present at the council). Later, Socrates Scholasticus recorded more than 300,[9] and Evagrius,[10] Hilarius,[11] Jerome[12] and Rufinus recorded 318.
The participating bishops were given free travel to and from their episcopal sees to the council, as well as lodging. These bishops did not travel alone; each one had permission to bring with him two priests and three deacons; so the total number of attendees would have been above 1500. Eusebius speaks of an almost innumerable host of accompanying priests, deacons and acolytes.
A special prominence was also attached to this council because the persecution of Christians had just ended with the February 313 Edict of Milan .
The Eastern bishops formed the great majority. Of these, the first rank was held by the three patriarchs: Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, and Macarius of Jerusalem. Many of the assembled fathers — for instance, Paphnutius of Thebes, Potamon of Heraclea and Paul of Neocaesarea — had stood forth as witnesses of the faith and came to the council with the marks of persecution on their faces.
Other remarkable attendees were Eusebius of Nicomedia; Eusebius of Caesarea; Nicholas of Myra; Aristakes of Armenia; Leontius of Caesarea; Jacob of Nisibis, a former hermit; and Spyridion of Trimythous, who even while a bishop made his living as a shepherd. From foreign places came a Persian bishop John, a Gothic bishop Theophilus and Stratophilus, bishop of Pitiunt in Egrisi (located at the border of modern-day Russia and Georgia outside of the Roman Empire).
The Latin-speaking provinces sent at least five representatives: Marcus of Calabria from Italia, Cecilian of Carthage from Africa, Hosius of Córdoba from Hispania, Nicasius of Dijon from Gaul, and Domnus of Stridon from the province of the Danube. Pope Silvester I declined to attend, pleading infirmity, but he was represented by two priests.
Athanasius of Alexandria, a young deacon and companion of Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, was among these assistants. Athanasius eventually spent most of his life battling against Arianism. Alexander of Constantinople, then a presbyter, was also present as representative of his aged bishop.
"Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully seated the bishops ahead of himself."[4] As Eusebius described, Constantine "himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones."[13] He was present as an observer, but he did not vote. Constantine organized the Council along the lines of the Roman Senate. "Ossius [Hosius] presided over its deliberations; he probably, and the two priests of Rome certainly, came as representatives of the Pope."[4] “Eusebius of Nicomedia probably gave the welcoming address."[4]
"I am assuming Nicea was an ecumenical council."
It was. Its where the Creed comes from, at least most of it.
"Who decided who should go and who couldn't go to Nicea?"
All the Christian bishops were invited because the main issue at hand was dealing with Arianism which was being preched by more than a few bishops.
"How was the council of Nicea paid for?"
I haven't a clue. Maybe at second collection at Sunday liturgies? A tax on goats?
"Who opened the council and presided over it?"
I believe the Emperor Constantine may have presided over the opening session. I know he called the Council. At least after the first session, it was presided over by +Hosius, the Bishop of Cordova and +Alexander, the Pat. of Alexandria. Interestingly, Constantine had very definite personal Arian leanings and sympathies (though he recognized the trouble Arius was causing in The Church) but the Council came down firmly against Arianism.
In my case, it is clearly less. The person I am after being indwelled by the Spirit is nothing at all like the person I was. I was entirely unlovable, mean, self-serving, rude, vain ... you wouldn't have been comfortable around "me."
= = =
AHHHHHHHH, BUT DEAR HEART!
THAT was not THE YOU, THAT GOD DESIGNED.
That was the God designed you wholesale polluted and infected through and through with satan's pernicious sin stains and mangling, distorting corruptions.
As you well know, THE BLOOD 'Cloroxes' all that out.
Especially as we cooperate with Holy Spirit in the recovery and return to OUR DESIGN PARAMETERS.
Goodness! Was never talking about the sin polluted versions.
In my case, it is clearly less. The person I am after being indwelled by the Spirit is nothing at all like the person I was. I was entirely unlovable, mean, self-serving, rude, vain ... you wouldn't have been comfortable around "me."
= = =
AHHHHHHHH, BUT DEAR HEART!
THAT was not THE YOU, THAT GOD DESIGNED.
That was the God designed you wholesale polluted and infected through and through with satan's pernicious sin stains and mangling, distorting corruptions.
As you well know, THE BLOOD 'Cloroxes' all that out.
Especially as we cooperate with Holy Spirit in the recovery and return to OUR DESIGN PARAMETERS.
Goodness! Was never talking about the sin polluted versions.
AT LEAST NOT IN THEIR MOSTLY sinFUL states.
NO! BUT AS THE REDEEMED--A BRIDE WITHOUT SPOT OR WRINKLE.
Have I been that poor at communicating??
IIRC Constantine made a big speech at the opening but did not preside (there's 4 folks who may have presided). There's no record of Constantine presiding, and he wasn't even present after the first day.
I beleive Constantine offered to cover the travel expenses of all the invited bishops.
"IIRC Constantine made a big speech at the opening but did not preside (there's 4 folks who may have presided). There's no record of Constantine presiding, and he wasn't even present after the first day."
You are right. I stand corrested.
"I beleive Constantine offered to cover the travel expenses of all the invited bishops."
I like the tax on goats idea better! :)
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.