Posted on 06/17/2007 4:26:04 AM PDT by markomalley
Actually, yes I would. We are all His children, the good, the bad and the ugly. That doesn't mean He won't send some of us to hell but we are still His. If God was not the father of Satan who was? Please don't misunderstand me - We are all created by God, Jesus is God, a whole different "fatherhood".
((blushes))<— Where’s that blushing smiley when I need him.
Gotcha
Well, FWIW, the kids to whom they are referring are Christian kids. They have experienced regeneration through baptism.
The goal of this article is to teach their teachers how to use the theological truths that are contained within that prayer to inspire the kids to develop a deeper and more intimate prayer life with God, their Father, so that they learn to truly ‘pray without ceasing.’
Show me that in scripture because Jesus does not agree with you . You can believe anything you want but that dies not make it true.
Gen 5:1 ¶ This [is] the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat [a son] in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Psa 14:2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, [and] seek God.
Psa 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are [all] together become filthy: [there is] none that doeth good, no, not one.
If all men are born as the sons of God then Mary did nothing special did she? She just gave birth to another son of God
Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Jhn 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
The children of God are born of the spirit .
It requires more that your parents taking you to church as an infant, it must be a personal decision .
I think using it to teach the nature of God is fine, but at some point you have to confront the fact that something like 25% of Catholics are observant. That means 75% are not. The kids need to hear what it is that the Bible requires of them for son hood.
Good talking to you mark.. just smile like this :)
Interesting that we discuss the Fatherhood of God on Fathers day. I hope yours was good!
It was a fine Father's Day. One of my best ever, in fact.
I know in Catholic theology baptism is regenerative, but scripture is pretty clear on what is needed for son hood and it is not Baptism
It requires more that your parents taking you to church as an infant, it must be a personal decision .
Actually, I do understand what you're saying. Frankly, there's a far more fundamental discussion that would need to happen: that discussion is the efficacy of the sacraments. Does God dispense His grace through the sacraments or do we accomplish those sacraments simply as the matter of obedience to an ordinance?
Not a discussion for tonight, but I think (provided the trolls stay away) it could be an absolutely fascinating discussion. (And if the trolls show up, which they will, they'd need to be simply ignored)
But that is a fundamental difference between Catholics and Protestants, Evangelicals, Charismatics, and Restorationists (I think I captured it properly). And one where there is not unanimity among you "separated brethren," as well on that subject.
I think using it to teach the nature of God is fine, but at some point you have to confront the fact that something like 25% of Catholics are observant. That means 75% are not. The kids need to hear what it is that the Bible requires of them for son hood.
No kidding!
But let me ask you one thing on the subject of son hood.
You ever read the story of the prodigal son? (I'm sure you have...once or twice). Wonderful story of God's forgiveness, imho.
But a couple of questions (rhetorical -- for teaching purposes) came up on that subject for me. #1: What would have happened had the kid not decided to come back home? #2: in that hypothetical, would he have continued to be a son?
Corollary to that there is one more (teaching) question: how does that apply in our lives?
Now I know the answer to those questions. Scriptural answers. But they are through my Catholic filter. I'm always curious to hear how other groups view those questions...through the filter of their belief systems.
Reading the "lost "chapter is very interesting
Those that are not familiar with it may want to read it over
One thing we have to notice is all the found things already belonged to the one finding them. It was not a case of one finding a coin or a sheep that was not theirs originally
That is similarly true of the prodigal son
This is a teaching of Gods sovereignty in salvation
The prodigal son was always the son , just as the elect have always been the children of God
Each one of the elect is like the prodigal son in this, that for a time he is deluded by the world and is led astray by his own carnal appetite. He tries to feed on the husks, but they do not satisfy. And sooner or later he is obliged to say, "I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight."(repentance)
Notice that the text makes this comment
Luk 15:16 "And he would have gladly filled his stomach with the pods that the swine were eating, and no one was giving {anything} to him.
Luk 15:17 "But when he came to his senses, he said, 'How many of my father's hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger!
He had a turning, a revelation and he "came to his senses".
And he meets with the same reception, tokens of unchanging love; and a father's welcome voice echoes through the soul, and melts the heart of the poor returning backslider, ---"This my son was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found." Let it be noticed that this is a parable that reinforces the work of God in His children . The prodigal was a son, and could not lose that relationship. Those who are not sons never have the desire to arise and go to the Father.
Corollary to that there is one more (teaching) question: how does that apply in our lives?
Have you ever noticed how few people have a real serious interest in the nature and work of God? So many are happy to go through the motions and never examine the nature of God. A priest once told me to always ask the Holy Spirit to guide me in my scripture study. I think that was very wise advise.
I heard one man say may "professing Christians" are busy building idols as they are building the god they want to have in their hearts. They are not worshiping the God as revealed in the scripture. Another man opined that most Christians rebuke and deny the God of scripture because they find him too harsh and judgmental . They want a god that will let them live as they want to live .
When the prodigal son "came to his senses it was a work of the Holy Spirit drawing him to the Father .
The greek word for draw means to do something against your desire as dragging or drawing the water ( that never helps in the process)
THAT is each of us. It was the Holy Spirit that brought me to my senses and showed me the pig pen that was my life.
Now I know the answer to those questions. Scriptural answers. But they are through my Catholic filter. I'm always curious to hear how other groups view those questions...through the filter of their belief systems.
One does not need to believe in predestination to see the truth of the sovereignty of God ( as I do) , one need only see that He has absolute foreknowledge, so He for all time has know all that are His. He knows who He will draw and who will repent and come home
Eph 1:3 ¶ Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
Eph 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Eph 1:8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him
: Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also [trusted], after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Simply put there was never a doubt that the son would "come to his senses" and be drawn back to his Father
For me it was a moment of truth Mark.. I pray that for all I know :)
I would love a discussion on the sacraments. As a Presbyterian I believe we have 2 as demonstrated in scripture. maybe we can find a quite spot :)
Sometimes we tend to forget some of the other aspects of the parable of the Prodigal Son.
The older brother figures in the picture as well-—it seems that his fidelity to his father was not entirely based on love, and because of that, he could not experience a quality of joy at the return of his brother.
We often ask ourselves how we fit the portrait of the prodigal—is it worthwhile sometimes to consider how we may fit the portrait of the older brother? And notice that the father shows his love for both.
Another thing—the prodigal son, being the younger son, by the Hebraic code of family life, was not even entitled to ask for his inheritance. This was to be handed over to the older brother at the proper time, who would then dispense it according to his good will.
That the younger son asked for his inheritance was a disrespectful request according to that culture. The fact that this must have rankled the older brother is another way in which we can search our hearts to see if, by chance, we could have that kind of carnal and fraternal jealousy in our own hearts.
Again—the Father loved them both.
The “Our Father” of “La Civiltà Cattolica” - (comparison to Muslim version)
HOLDING HANDS AT THE OUR FATHER?
Our Father - In Heaven (Dr. Scott Hahn)
The greek word for draw means to do something against your desire as dragging or drawing the water ( that never helps in the process)
You're talking about ἕλκω in John 12:32? "and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."
And, although it is not explicitly stated, I can see how you infer it. But I don't see this as a story of the new birth as much as a story of forgiveness for one who is already a son.
The younger son who took his share of the inheritance was the father's son prior to taking the inheritance. When he was living high in the distant country, he was still the father's son, even though he left. And when he was dealing with the consequences of his actions ("So he went and joined himself to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would gladly have fed on the pods that the swine ate; and no one gave him anything."), he was still the father's son. And when he came back to his senses and went back home, he was still the father's son.
Another interesting thing: the father did NOT go to the distant country, to the fields, or anything else -- or, at least, it's not recorded -- to drag his son back home. The son had to take the initiative to come back home. But, as soon as the son took that initiative, the father came and met him ("But while he was yet at a distance, his father saw him and had compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.")
A couple of things that I infer from this (I believe they are reasonable inferences, too, by the way...but they are inferences):
#1, it is explicit that the father-son relationship remained throughout, even though the son sinned against his father and totally squandered what the father gave him. That calls to mind 1 Pet 1:23 ("You have been born anew, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;")
#2, it is implicit that the father did not grab his son by the collar and drag him, kicking and screaming, back home. He allowed his son to make his own decision, even though that decision was the wrong one.
Inference #1: I can reasonably infer from this that, had the son not come to his senses and made a decision to come back home (for example, had the son thought to himself, "I have sinned against heaven and before my father. He will never welcome me back. Oh, woe is me,") there is no indication that the father would have forced the decision.
Inference #2: Thus, had the son finally starved to death in the distant country, he would have starved to death.
However, none of what the son did changed his state of being the father's son. The son voluntarily removed himself from his father's presence by his actions...but that didn't change the underlying fact that he continued as his son.
That is, at least IMHO, an important lesson to consider when we talk about whether a person is born again in baptism or whether they are saved in baptism.
As you know, the Church teaches baptismal regeneration. Ex opere operato (in the doing of it). The Church teaches that, in baptism, all previous sins, actual or imputed (i.e., original sin), are utterly washed away. A person becomes a son of God at that point in time. However, that does not remove the responsibility to live as a son of God. God gives us the graces to do so and His Mercy provides us a way back if we make the decision to walk away, realize the error of our ways, and then decide to come back.
Have you ever noticed how few people have a real serious interest in the nature and work of God? So many are happy to go through the motions and never examine the nature of God. A priest once told me to always ask the Holy Spirit to guide me in my scripture study. I think that was very wise advise.
Yes, I have noticed this in a whole lot of folks who call themselves Christians.
I heard one man say may "professing Christians" are busy building idols as they are building the god they want to have in their hearts. They are not worshiping the God as revealed in the scripture. Another man opined that most Christians rebuke and deny the God of scripture because they find him too harsh and judgmental . They want a god that will let them live as they want to live .
LOL -- I agree fully, no matter what your religious affiliation is, that is absolutely a true statement.
Matthew 6:9. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father Which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name.
Matthew 5:45. That ye may be the children of your Father Which is in heaven: for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Matthew 6:14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you;
15.But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
There is a distinction in our heavenly Father and our earthly father. As vs. 15 shows, even when we err He is still our Father.
Psa 14:2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, [and] seek God.
Because we are "children of men" does not mean He is not our Father, our heavenly Father.
If all men are born as the sons of God then Mary did nothing special did she? She just gave birth to another son of God
A virgin birth is special. He is The Son of God, or God Himself - "When you've seen the Son you've seen the Father". We are children of God through our earthly fathers but He was Son of God and Son of man, through The Father.
The children of God are born of the spirit.
I believe we are all "children of God" as He is our heavenly Father but in order to receive eternal life with Him we must believe on Him. Whether that comes in this age or the next, millennial age, or never, is our choice.
Sometimes I have to stop and think about a single line of that prayer. It’s anything but mindless repitition. I should say, if you’re mindlessly repeating it, you might as well sit down and have a coke - you’re wasting time.
A personal decision or a personal awareness?
Okay, I had to print it out! They need a “printer-friendly” option on the site :-).
Their name adam, plural. Adam is both a proper name for one individual, "the Man", Adam, but when it is clear in context that we're talking about more than one individual it is "men". If he had been talking about Adam & Eve to find the plural, you'd see that the passage would be calling Eve Adam, not just Adam Adam. Check the word "adam" in a concordance.
Whether the understanding of it to be "men" is all inclusive or "mankind" depends on the way you understand "created". Was creation of mankind a one time thing or is it something that is ongoing? The sixth day & then a day of rest... plus or the sixth day all men were created, (tho not all of them have been born or reborn in water, through their mother's womb) into this this earthly life?
I think the other son shows that sometimes our "righteousness" can be sin :)
LOL Ping, that is what started the discussion
All scripture has to be read in context, you need to look at the time, the place and the audience.
It was the disciples of Christ that asked him how to pray. GOD WAS THEIR FATHER .
This does not say He is the father of all humanity .
Because you have a theology where sin can send you to hell, and salvation depends on your law keeping you see sin as breaking the relationship between Father and Son.
The scriptures indicate the opposite, He is still the father to the saved.
Because we are "children of men" does not mean He is not our Father, our heavenly Father.
Just show me a scripture that God says He is the father of all humanity . There is no such scripture. Those that believe that are building a non scriptural God that meets their expectations . He is not the God of the bible.
Again PING, you are free to believe what you like, but what we believe is not the test of truth the word of God is, and in it he says
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked [one];
Jhn 8:44 — Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Act 13:10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, [thou] child of the devil, [thou] enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
All the human children of God are adopted by faith.
I think it also reveals the spirit of envy, which causes us to compare ourselves with others.
I would add that the older son was counting on his own abilities to justify himself before his father. While the younger one was justified by grace. He asked for, and received, mercy from his father and his father bestowed graces on him that exceeded his wildest expectations.
Wonderful analogy for all of us to consider.
Worth repeating!
Who knows what graces our Father wants to give us ... if we could get past sibling rivalry and desire Him with all our hearts!
BTW, that was a rhetorical “Who knows ...” rather than a request-for-information, “Who knows?”.
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.