Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
Now, let us recognize frankly at the outset, that the reason why these new teachers of an unchristian Christianity do not find Christianity in the parable of the lost son is, briefly, because this parable does not set forth Christianity, but only a small fragment of Christian teaching. The turn they have given to affairs is therefore merely the nemesis that treads on the heels of the mistaken attempts to read a full Christianity into this parable. The parable was not given to teach us Christianity, in its essence or its sum. It was given to teach us one single truth: a truth of the utmost value, not only full of emotional power, but, when placed in its relation to other truths, of the highest doctrinal significance; but not in itself sufficient to constitute Christianity, or even to embody its essence. How little what this parable teaches us can be conceived as of itself Christianity may easily be made plain by simply enumerating some of the fundamental elements of Christianity which receive no expression in it: and this negative task seems to be made incumbent on us at the outset of any study of the parable by the circumstance of its perversion to the uses of the propaganda of unbelief. We observe, then, in the first place, that there is no atonement in this parable. And indeed it is precisely because there is no atonement in this parable that it has been seized upon by the modern tendency to which we have alluded, as the norm of the only Christianity it will profess. For nothing is more characteristic of this new type of Christianity than that it knows and will know nothing of an atonement. The old Socinians were quick to perceive this feature of the parable, and to make use of it in their assault upon the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction for sin. See, they cried, the father in the parable asks no satisfaction before he will receive back his son: he rather sees him afar off and runs to meet him and gives him a free and royal welcome. The response is no doubt just that other Scriptures clearly teach the atonement of which no hint is given here; and that we have no "right to expect that every passage in Scripture, and least of all these parables, which exist under necessary limitations in their power of setting forth the truth, shall contain the whole circle of Christian doctrine." This answer is sufficient against the Socinian who appealed to Scripture as a whole and required to be reminded that we "must consider not what one Scripture says, but what all." But it scarcely avails against our modern enthusiast who either professedly or practically would fain make this parable the embodiment of all the Christianity he will profess. For him, Christianity must do without an atonement, because it is quite obvious that there is no atonement in this parable. Nor is that more than the beginning of the matter. It must do without a Christ as well. For, we must observe, the parable has as little of Christ in it as it has of an atonement..." "...For the exaggerated estimate which has been put upon this parable has borne bitter fruit in the world. Beginning with an effort to read into it all the Gospel, or at least the essence of the Gospel, it has ended by reading out of the Gospel all that is not in the parable. And thus this parable, the vehicle of a priceless message, has been transformed into the instrument of a great wrong. The worst things are often the corruption of the best: and the attempt to make the parable of the lost son the norm of the Gospel has resulted, I will not say merely in the curtailment of the Gospel, — I will say rather in the evisceration of the Gospel. On this platform there take their stand today a growing multitude the entire tendency and effect of all of whose efforts it is to eliminate from Christianity all that gives it value in the world, all that makes it that religion which has saved the world, and to- reduce it to the level of a merely natural religion. "The Christianity of the prodigal son is enough for us," they declare: and they declare this with gusto because, to put it briefly, they do not like the Christianity of the Bible or the Christianity of Christ, and are happy not to find them in the parable of the lost son.
MB:All right, let’s examine it again.
You just don't want to get it do you?
I’ve searched for the post with the “kidnapped” sheep. Too far back to find I guess. At any rate, only Satan and sin can kidnap a sheep, and even then the sheep has a foreleg in it. Jesus has defeated Satan and sin so the sheep, even though “kidnapped” is still His. He will do with it as He wishes in due time.
GOD won't tolerate sin in his presence, so he's partial to righteousness.
GOD sent his son to save some of us, so he's partial to those that are clothed in the righteousness of JESUS the CHRIST.
AMEN! God is not partial towards sin. He hates all sin and He judges all sin and all sin must be repaid.
But from the foundation of the world He has set His love upon those who are His, and for them He gave His Son to pay their sins -- an act of supreme, perfect and death-defying partiality.
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." -- Ephesians 2:3-10"But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith he loved us,
Even our "good works" were ordained by God for His glory.
AMEN.
Isaiah 1:2 Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the LORD hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.
1:3 The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master's crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.
The rebellious do not know who owns them, but those who have repented and returned,do.
LOL. Read the text, Mark. Not "would believe," but "shall believe."
"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word" -- John 17:20
The "general" is very specific here. "Those who will believe within the world of men;" not "all the world of men."
Jesus is saying here that God's love is for all men
That is not what the words say, Mark. The words on the page say Christ only prays for those whom the Father has given Him -- the Apostles in the room and all those in the future who will believe in Him.
Take off those magisterium spectacles and read the words for yourself. They could not be any clearer.
Of course it's full. His death made it possible for all men to be saved, as God desires. He is the master phyiscian who offered to save anyone's life if they come to Him. The condition does not make it partial.
OK, then I suppose if you agreed to sell me something for $200, and I gave you $100, then you would stamp the bill of sale "paid in full" because the condition of my paying you the other hundred does not make my first payment partial. I would find these terms very acceptable indeed. Do you sell on e-bay much? :)
Because it was God's good pleasure to appoint me to His righteousness and not to His wrath.
Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him." -- 1 Thessalonians 5:9-10"For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
How do I know this? Because I have Trinitarian faith in His Son as my Lord and Savior, the only propitiation for my sins God will accept.
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
It is good to know that you have told God that you are part of the flock. And here I thought God decided who was part of the flock.
God has told me I am part of His flock by the words of Scripture.
"I will never forget thy precepts: for with them thou hast quickened me." -- Psalm 119:93
The Holy Spirit quickens us by the word of God. Yes, Jo kus, I believe that. And it is a sad situation that your church does not reaffirm this truth in your mind.
And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him." -- 1 John 5:13-15 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
I believe John. I believe Paul. I believe Peter. I believe Jesus Christ, the Son of God. I believe that Jesus Christ, God Himself, died on the cross to pay for every one of my sins so that I will stand before God blameless, and loved by Him who created me to glorify Him and to enjoy Him forever.
Your church tells you to be uncertain, fearful and not "presumptuous."
Scripture tells us to presume all we can in and by and for His name.
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." -- 2 Timothy 3:14-15"But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
Yes, Scripture is a map and by this map we learn of God's will for us through Jesus Christ, the "X" that marks the spot.
"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." -- 2 Timothy 3:15
"Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it." -- 1 Thessalonians 3:24
Does God call you, jo kus? If so, then relax; He is faithful and He will do that which He has promised.
A scriptural definition—Yes. Our theology must be in concert with the Gospels. A theology based on the Gospels will correctly interpret the rest. The Gospels represent the God's full revelation to man. Without the Gospels, there is no Christianity. Te rest of the scriptures become meaningless.
There is a reason why only the Gospels are on the altar. There is a reason why everyone stands when only when the Gospels are read (at least in TLM), or why only clergy read form the Gospels.
Bingo! We've seen evidence of that on this very thread. They dismiss Paul; they call him a Gnostic; they say He is not part of the Gospel message; and most of all, they forget he was chosen by God to preach Christ risen.
Next to Jesus Christ, who has given us a more certain testament to God's truth than Paul?
The fact that Paul articulated the Good News so clearly is part of what they resent. It doesn't jive with their unBiblical mumbo-jumbo.
Amen!
And a Christian receives the Holy Spirit NOT through any ritual or sprinkling of "holy water" or by the incantations of "another Christ," but by the will and design and purpose of God alone.
yes
John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Yes I have. Look up "partial" or "biased" and see what you come up with.
GOD won't tolerate sin in his presence, so he's partial to righteousness
He is NOT partial to anything. He IS righteousness (i.e. just) all the time and to everyone. He doesn't like you; if you are righteous in His eyes then you are truly righteous, not because he "feels" so or because He "thinks" so, but because it IS so!
We were talking about His judgment, which is always just and impartial. The Bible says He is impartial. You and the rest of your community have a problem with what the Bible says.
"The way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble." -- Proverbs 4:19
lolol
“OK, then I suppose if you agreed to sell me something for $200, and I gave you $100, then you would stamp the bill of sale “paid in full” because the condition of my paying you the other hundred does not make my first payment partial. I would find these terms very acceptable indeed.”
That’s a very odd analogy, FK. In all honesty, your problem, and so far as I can see, the Protestant West’s problem, is that it doesn’t understand what the ransom was for or to whom or why it was paid. You should re-read +Athanasius the Great “On the Incarnation”. Sadly, this couples with what would appear to be a basic misunderstanding of man’s original created nature.
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.