Posted on 10/24/2007 8:18:14 AM PDT by topcat54
I've FReepmailed A-G my change in perspective, too. I think the words "my leanings" and "my musings" tend to throw people a little. 8~)
The admonition against "private interpretation" can be seen as three-fold: 1) the necessity of like-minded saints rightly dividing the word of God with discernment and correcting each other in fellowship; and 2) understanding Scripture not by our own ability, but by the leading of the Holy Spirit; and 3) Scripture interprets Scripture.
Our own Westminster Confession makes the point clear --
The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture." (WCF: Of the Holy Scriptures)"The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.
Finally, it was when I went back to John Calvin and read what he so confidently wrote about the Holy Spirit leading the individual conscience that I began to see A-G's posts in a different light.
Because Scripture so testifies, Calvin would agree with Alamo-Girl that God shows Himself to all men everywhere throughout His creation and thus all men are without excuse (Romans 1:20); that God instructs all men in His word, although good fruit is produced only in the "good ground" as first prepared by God (Mark 4); and that the Holy Spirit moves in perfect love and truth within His elect, according to His good pleasure, for and through Jesus Christ, "by whom all things consist."
When A-G proclaimed God's election of His family from before the foundation of the world for His glory alone I realized we were often saying the same thing.
And I rejoiced in that knowledge because, as A-G often so eloquently reminds us...
"To God be all the glory."
"Without the interpretation of the universe by man to the glory of God the whole world would be meaningless" -- Cornelius Van Til; THE DEFENSE OF THE FAITH, pg 43
Absolutely agree
That's a good question. In studying these things, the question does come up; we can't deny the question.
But the answer seems more obvious than all the dispensational prophecies -- God will restore any men in Israel He chooses the same way and for the same reason He restores anyone -- through grace by faith in Jesus Christ for God's glory alone.
Ann Coulter was not wrong in her recent candor.
***Hmmmmm. You cannot restore [restitute] something that wasn’t in existence before, can you??? So then whatever these ALL THINGS are they must have been in existence previously, right??? Would ALL THINGS include the Kingdom of Israel which was in existence before this??? Would the Kingdom of Israel that the prophets said would be restored be included in ALL THINGS???
You do pray the Lord’s Prayer, don’t you: “Our Father Who art in Heaven Hallowed be Thy Name, Thy Kingdom Come....” Perhaps you should think about it the next time you pray it. You are asking the Father to send the Kingdom, which is still in heaven where the King is.***
You Dispensationalists are still ignoring the fact that if all things must be all things, then it must be a restoration of the Earth to its sinless state as well. The only problem is that you believe that it won’t happen for at least a thousand years. So much for the words that heaven must contain the Lord until the restoration of all things.
And, you are FALSELY presuming that just because something existed before it must be restored later. Will all kingdoms on earth be restored to their glory? Obviously, NO. So, you are still reading your restoration into the verse in order to prove it. Circular. You need to find another verse and you need to explain how the restoration of all thing isn’t the restoration of all things.
Thanks for the reply.
1. Agreed, yet leaves unanswered questions of the imago Dei and the functions of the conscience, reason and will and those relations to Revelation.
2. No doubt that experience and environment affect our understanding but it doesn’t answer the question of how God can reveal himself as ‘a’ to person 1 and ‘not a’ to person 2 and yet claim that both positions are correct. The gemstone analogy has merit but underlying the analogy is the unity of the light so that the light refracted is always the same light. Carrying the analogy further, light shone on coal is not refracted. Should we not discern between gem and coal? If someone claims their coal refracts beautiful light should we not dispute that claim? Since this side of glory none of us is a fully formed gem should we not be wary of the remaining coal in each of us or should we merely assume it’s a precious particularity?
3. Christ as unity. Christ undefined is not a unity. The Nicolaitans claimed Christ but Christ did not claim them. We must assume there was a unity amongst the seven churches about Christ that Nicolaitans did not hold. The Nicolaitans may have claimed to be lead by the Spirit through their experiences yet we know that not to be true. It seems clear there must be another grounds on which we judge beyond spirit and experience.
***I think that it would be reasonable to conclude that God will restore “All the Things” that He said He would restore — and part of that is the kingdom to Israel. Why is that so unreasonable???***
Well, if that is your reading then you can’t use this verse to prove that Israel will be restored. You can’t assume the restoration and then read it into that verse to prove the restoration.
Circular.
Pick another verse.
Plus, you still need to explain how, since we all agree that the earth will be restored, how the restoration of all things doesn’t mean the restoration of all things. (Hint: This is a game; set; match verse.)
There are only so many hours in the day. Instead of mulling future political possibilities, a better use of our time would be to work on perfecting the world in front of us today.
Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." -- Matthew 6:33-34"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
“Finally, it was when I went back to John Calvin and read what he so confidently wrote about the Holy Spirit leading the individual conscience that I began to see A-G’s posts in a different light.”
Calvin does hold a very high view of the conscience, especially the regenerated conscience. Yet he leaves quite a creative tension between the conscience and the Church.
I commend to you a book by William R Stevenson jr, entitled, “ Sovereign Grace: The Place and Significance of Christian Freedom in John Calvin’s Political Thought”, in which he works through these tensions.
Thanks for writing.
We judge all things according to Scripture. That's why it's such a marvelous plan. There's nothing hidden any longer; Christ proclaimed the truth in the light of day -- The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world has come. Mercy triumphs judgment. Christ reigns.
Mark ye well her bulwarks, consider her palaces; that ye may tell it to the generation following. For this God is our God for ever and ever: he will be our guide even unto death." -- Psalm 48:12-14"Walk about Zion, and go round about her: tell the towers thereof.
That's why these discussions among Protestants are so lively -- because we all use the same weights and measures to test our understanding -- the word of God in black and white.
Won't that happen??? Won't creation itself be restored???
The only problem is that you believe that it won’t happen for at least a thousand years.
There will be a restoration of the things God said that He would restore during the millenium.
So much for the words that heaven must contain the Lord until the restoration of all things.
You need to quote it right. Let me help you here: "So much for the words that heaven must contain the Lord until the times of the restoration of all things". There -- fixed it for you. Now it makes more sense. You're welcome.
And, you are FALSELY presuming that just because something existed before it must be restored later.Will all kingdoms on earth be restored to their glory? Obviously, NO. So, you are still reading your restoration into the verse in order to prove it.
I'm not the one doing the presuming here. You are. You are presuming that I said that and that is absolutely false. You must be still having trouble with the literal understanding of words again. You should get that checked.
I said that God would restore those things that He said He would restore and nowhere in the prophets does he say that He would restore any previous Gentile kingdom, nor any kingdom other than that of Israel.
You need to find another verse and you need to explain how the restoration of all thing isn’t the restoration of all things.
No -- you need to make a list of all the things that God said through His Word [OT and NT] that He would restore, which will include the kingdom to Israel and the city of Jerusalem. And when your list is complete, then you will have in your hand ALL THINGS meant by Acts 3:21. Get busy now. Make your list and check it twice --
Thanks for the suggestion which just prompted me to order it from Amazon. Looks very promising...
The Reformation thinker John Calvin had significant and unusual things to say about life in public encounter, things which both anticipate modern thinking and, says William Stevenson, can serve as important antidotes to some of modern thinking's broader pretensions. This study attempts to give a coherent picture of Calvin's political theory by following the stream that flows from his fascinating short essay, "On Christian Freedom," one chapter in the magisterial Institutes of the Christian Religion. Stevenson argues that a full examination of this essay yields not only a more thorough explication--and historical placement--of Calvin's political ideas proper but also a more complete and coherent picture of their theological underpinnings. "The Calvin scholarship in this work is impressive. Stevenson draws on Calvin's sermons, tracts, letters, commentaries, and other works. He has an excellent command of recent secondary material. Moreover...Stevenson draws out both the revolutionary and conservative elements of Calvin's thought. However,...he uses Christian liberty to reconcile them, rejecting the idea that Calvin is a schizophrenic thinker emphasizing both radical change and political order. Anyone who has ever worked on Calvin will appreciate Stevenson's learning."--Journal of Religion
***No — you need to make a list of all the things that God said through His Word [OT and NT] that He would restore, which will include the kingdom to Israel and the city of Jerusalem. And when your list is complete, then you will have in your hand ALL THINGS meant by Acts 3:21. Get busy now. Make your list and check it twice —***
You still don’t get it. You have assumed the restoration of Israel, read it into the verse, then used the verse to prove the restoration if Israel.
Your reasoning is circular. You NEED to pick another verse. Don’t try and get me to do your homework for you.
Additionally, you also presume that the times of restoration is a thousand years plus. Is this the same logic you use for the kingdom of God being near at hand to being 2000 years plus away? This verse clearly teaches that the return of the Lord will bring the restoration of all things, not the restoration of some divided by 1000 years to the restoration of others. That is another idea that you must read into the verse. IOW, you are still reading your Eschatology into verses instead of getting it out of them.
I have a verse which teaches that the return of the Lord will be accompanied by the heavens and the earth being flooded by fire. And we have a verse which teaches that the heavens must contain the Lord until the times of restoration or all things, not some as you need the verse to teach.
No you still don't get it. Those words there of Peter in Chapter 3 are following on the heels of those in Chapter 1 wherein in Jesus said that only the Father knows when the kingdom will be restored to Israel. And there are others --
Yo, Chipper, there is no restoration of the kingdom to national Israel in Acts 3. There was no national Israel before the Fall. Christ is restoring all things to the condition before sin entered into the world. National Israel was a temporary entity that God used to bring Messiah to the world. It’s role in that respect is fulfilled and there is nothing to restore.
Do you see it now?
Never again did they make mention of the restoration of national Israel.
= = =
Wrong again.
John makes it clear enough. Paul makes it clear enough.
Amen and Amen!
Sure there is, Topper. Right there in a general sense but more specifically in Acts 1.
There was no national Israel before the Fall.
So what? There was also no rain before the Fall, but it will still rain after Jesus returns.
but re Christ is restoring all things to the condition before sin entered into the world.
Not exactly true. Will everyone walk around without clothes? Several things will be different.
National Israel was a temporary entity that God used to bring Messiah to the world. It’s role in that respect is fulfilled and there is nothing to restore.
If that is so, then why didn't Jesus say so when the disciples asked him if it was time to restore the kingdom to Israel??? He said the times and the seasons [for the restoration of the kingdom to Israel] were in His Father's hands. And there is no way that you can get around it.
. . . racial nonsense . . . super classes of humans . . .
Wellllllllllll I think your labels are askew from the realties involved. Nevertheless to try and respond meaningfully . . .
It is evidently an issue that folks prefer to tell God He's a racist dork about . . . and that their values are so much loftier, fairer, more righteous etc. than God's are on the maters related thereto.
But personally, I wouldn't recommend that stance.
God makes abundantly clear in Scripture that HE CHOSE FOR HIMSELF A CHOSEN PEOPLE. FURTHER, THAT HE WILL SHEPHERD THEM THROUGH TO A RESTORED ISRAEL, A RESTORED JERUSALEM and that they will with Christians all accept Christ as their true Messiah after God's chosen route for them to do so--and will then reign with Christ throughout eternity.
The Replacementarians have no explanation for the 12 Patriarchs having thrones in Heaven--except maybe for some nostalgic purpose.
But, hey, go ahead and tell God He's doing it all wrong with the children of Jacob. Maybe He'll repent and hire you as His major events manager.
I thought you were clear the first time. But thanks for the elaboration.
masterful as usual.
I have a bias that when folks mangle Scriptue less, lots of things are less confusing and lots of things are clearer.
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.