Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
January 25, 2008
ESV Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
In recent days I have spent time in Lima and Sullana Peru and Mexico City and I have discovered that people by nature are the same. Man has a heart that is inclined to selfishness and idolatry. Sin abounds in the remotest parts of the land because the heart is desperately wicked. Thousands bow before statues of Mary and pray to her hoping for answers. I have seen these people stare hopelessly at Mary icons, Jesus icons, and a host of dead saints who will do nothing for them. I have talked with people who pray to the pope and say that they love him. I talked with one lady who said that she knew that Jesus was the Savior, but she loved the pope. Thousands bow before Santa Muerte (holy death angel) in hopes that she will do whatever they ask her. I have seen people bring money, burning cigarettes, beer, whiskey, chocolate, plants, and flowers to Santa Muerte in hopes of her answers. I have seen these people bowing on their knees on the concrete in the middle of public places to worship their idol. Millions of people come into the Basilica in Mexico City and pay their money, confess their sins, and stare hopelessly at relics in hope that their sins will be pardoned. In America countless thousands are chained to baseball games, football games, material possessions, and whatever else their heart of idols can produce to worship.
My heart has broken in these last weeks because the God of heaven is not honored as he ought to be honored. People worship the things that are created rather than worshiping the Creator. God has been gracious to all mankind and yet mankind has hardened their hearts against a loving God. God brings the rain on the just and unjust. God brings the beautiful sunrises and sunsets upon the just and unjust. God gives good gifts unto all and above all things he has given his Son that those who would believe in him would be saved. However, man has taken the good things of God and perverted them unto idols and turned their attention away from God. I get a feel for Jesus as he overlooked Jerusalem or Paul as he beseeched for God to save Israel. When you accept the reality of the truth of the glory of God is breaks your heart that people would turn away from the great and awesome God of heaven to serve lesser things. Moses was outraged by the golden calf, the prophets passionately preached against idolatry, Jesus was angered that the temple was changed in an idolatrous business, and Paul preached to the idolaters of Mars Hill by telling them of the unknown God.
I arrived back at home wondering how I should respond to all the idolatry that I have beheld in these last three weeks. I wondered how our church here in the states should respond to all of the idolatry in the world. What are the options? First, I suppose we could sit around and hope that people chose to get their life together and stop being idolaters. However, I do not know how that could ever happen apart from them hearing the truth. Second, I suppose we could spend a lifetime studying cultural issues and customs in hope that we could somehow learn to relate to the people of other countries. However, the bible is quite clear that all men are the same. Men are dead in sin, shaped in iniquity, and by nature are the enemies of God. Thirdly, we could pay other people or other agencies to go and do a work for us while we remain comfortably in the states. However, there is no way to insure that there will be doctrinal accuracy or integrity. If we only pay other people to take the gospel we will miss out on all of the benefits of being obedient to the mission of God. Lastly, we could seek where God would have us to do a lasting work and then invest our lives there for the glory of God. The gospel has the power to raise the dead in any culture and we must be willing to take the gospel wherever God would have us take it. It is for sure that our church cannot go to every country and reach every people group, so we must determine where God would have us work and seek to be obedient wherever that is.
It seems that some doors are opening in the Spanish speaking countries below us and perhaps God is beginning to reveal where we are to work. There are some options for work to be partnered with in Peru and there could be a couple of options in Mexico. The need is greater than I can express upon this paper for a biblical gospel to be proclaimed in Peru and Mexico. Oh, that God would glorify his great name in Peru and Mexico by using a small little church in a town that does not exist to proclaim his great gospel amongst a people who desperately need the truth.
I give thanks to the LORD for allowing me the privilege of going to these countries and broadening my horizons. The things that I have seen will be forever engraved upon my heart. I will long remember the pastors that I spent time with in Peru and I will never forget Adolfo who translated for me in Mexico. I will relish the time that I spent with Paul Washer and the others. When I think of church I will forever remember being on top of that mountain in Sullana at that church which had no electricity and no roof. I am convinced that heaven was looking down on that little church on top of that mountain and very few people on earth even know that it exist. Oh, God I pray that the things of this world will continue to grow dim and that God’s people will be caught up in his glorious presence.
Because of the truth: Pastor: J. Randall Easter II Timothy 2:19 "Our God is in heaven and does whatever He pleases."(Ps. 115:3) "He predestined us according to the good pleasure of His will."(Eph. 1:5) Those who have been saved have been saved for His glory and they are being made holy for this is the will of God. Are you being made holy? Spurgeon says, "If your religion does not make you holy it will damn you to hell."
You can do whatever you want. But if you wish to communicate with anyone other than those coached in that version, you will have to switch to spoken English.
Funny. Been using the 17th century KJB for 31 years. Along with thousands and thousands of pastors, missionaries and evangelists. We coomunicate every day using it in three countries, and we watch people come and receive Jesus Christ as their Saviour, preachers trained, and young people learning it for ministring to others. Training families in married life and child rearing. We are communicating with men and women and children, and with great blessings from the Head of the Church, Christ.
This afternoon we sat with a couple who plans to be married soon, and helped them in the writing of their vows. All substance was derived from that 17th century Bible, and they understood it very readily. It’s a very powerful text; a very powerful instrument.
Jesus did not mislead anyone. The idea that the anointed one was divine was alien even to the Apostles. It is clear from the Gospels that they did not fully and consistently belive Him, and did not become full converts until after the Pentecost.
Again, this is your choice. Communicating between pastors who use the same source is not an effort. They probably know some Greek and word meanings, but your laity swho read the Bible must be coached to understand it. Jesus did not preach in Biblical Hebrew but in the spoken (judaized Chaldean, Aramaic) language that everyone understood.
All ministers “coach” people, regardless of the text of Scripture used, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Thousands in America couldn't understand the NIV’s words or the Jerusalem Bible's words if not “coached” either. And we have already stated that people should get good English dictionaries.
The list of so-called archaic words in a KJB would actually be very short. One Bible Society placed a list of them with current usage “equivalants” on a page in the back of their edition, and it was only about a third of the page altogether. And they are only so-called archaic words. Webster's Collegiate 11th Edition only lists about half of those as “archaic.”
If accused of “coaching” people to learn the English words in the KJB, I will plead GUILTY with great joy. My own children memorize large portions of it, and by age 6 or 7 they all could read the KJB without much “coaching.” They were also taught early how to use dictionaries and other language-learning tools.
***We’ve explained that it’s not the free pass you guys make it out to be, but nobody listens. POTS teaches that God will prevent His children from committing sin SUCH THAT it would cause the loss of salvation. It IS theoretically possible to lose salvation, but God promises it won’t happen.***
You’ve explained it, but it still doesn’t make sense or have theological proofs.
***Either God would prevent it by changing my mind, or He would take me out before I took anyone else out***
Back to God the puppet master (sigh). In other words, you still have no responsibility for anything you do or don’t do.
***No one can know who the elect and the unelect are, save God.***
Hold on now. I have been told here on FR by a number of the Reformed that they are most definitely of the elect and therefore are going to Heaven and there’s nothing that anyone can do about that. Is this a different branch of Reformed theology?
***Actions do matter.***
How?
***God is glorified because they are used to fulfill His purpose, such as at the crucifixion.***
How were people used to fulfill His purpose at the crucifixion? I thought that Christ Himself was crucified. I guess I’m not understanding this. Could you clarify please?
***Perhaps some believe that the crucifixion was just a wild coincidence that happened to work out so that we could be saved.***
A strange belief indeed. I’m not aware of anyone who believes this.
But I thought you have said that in Paul's time THE TRADITION was full blown Judaism.
Then you are saying that the Book of Enoch is God's word? Why is it not in the canon?
No, I'm saying that that sentence in the Bible is God's word. If the full Book of Enoch was reproduced in the Bible, then that would be a different story, but it isn't. I quote from scripture all the time. That doesn't make my whole post God's word.
FK: "We know that it came from God if it is in the Bible."
And how do we know that?
Alright, "I and other Bible-believing Christians" know it. :) The Bible claims it is from God, and internal/external tests show that it is. Ultimately, Holy Spirit confirms God's word for us so that we can know it.
FK: "It seems fairly implausible to me that God would create an error-filled Bible (that winds up in men's hands) for the purpose of flawed men coming in later to repair it."
And how do you know it's not part of God's "plan?" If it is happening, isn't it God's will according to the Reformed theology?
The keys words are "for the purpose". First, for God to proceed as you suggest would be to admit error on its face. I don't think that the Bible ever shows that happening. Second, if He committed error for the purpose of man repairing His error, then He would be raising man up above Himself, thus showing His need for man's help. Also something He never does according to the Bible.
However, it certainly is, for whatever reason, God's plan for some men to think they are worthy to repair God's errors. He allowed it to happen by choosing not to protect them against their own aggrandizement.
I said "IN control", which is a different idea from God pushing a button and all things happen. God does not push a button and then sin happens. There are no "sin buttons". If anything, God DOESN'T push a button and the inevitable result is sin. That makes us responsible for our own sins, since God has no duty to push the button that would protect us. Sometimes God chooses to push the button that protects us, but sometimes He doesn't.
Your sin is your own,FK, like it or not ,and you need to do penance for it as well.
My sin IS my own and with it I am doomed to hell. Thankfully Christ chose to pay for all of my sins that I might be saved. As far as post-salvation sins, I should confess them, and God is there and meets out punishment as He sees fit. Dealing with sin against God is God's department, not man's.
Kosta: "Indeed. In the Orthodox tradition, the confession begins with "I confess to God, before you, venerable father (priest, as our witness), that I have sinned out of ingratitude to God...
WHAT?! :) Kosta, you argued to me strenuously on this thread that Jesus had no friendship at all with His disciples, and there was no personal family-type relationship among them. You believe in an unknowable and impersonal God per your posts. That really seems to undercut the point you are trying to support.
It seems you contradict yourself ,Dear Brother
Do you remember this series of posts we had.....
From post #4911 FK said -However, if He wanted you to prevent a mugging at the nudie bar, then you're going.""
Stfassisi said-First, even the thought of going to the nudie bar is a sin,adding to more sin by actually going there.
FK responded-Of course it's sin, but so is nailing Jesus to a cross. I don't think that was an accident or by random chance.
The whole scenario you posted has God pushing the button for sin.
No offense ,Dear Brother,but I think you're confusing yourself
I wish you a Blessed evening!
FK: But I thought you have said that in Paul's time THE TRADITION was full blown Judaism.
St. Paul said "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." [2 Thes 2:15] He was specifically referring to his gospel [v. 14] .
I don't think he was refering to Judaism. I tink you are confusing another issue.
No, I'm saying that that sentence in the Bible is God's word
Ok.
That doesn't make my whole post God's word.
I thought God is in control of your life. Are you now saying He is not?
FK: "We know that it came from God if it is in the Bible."
Kosta: And how do we know that?
FK: The Bible claims it is from God
Oh, boy, if I have ever seen circular reasoning! This one is a keeper, Forest Keeper! :)
Why? Because we consider sin ingratitude to God? Are you stressed out, because lately your posts make very little sense to me.
Does one have to have a family-type relationship in order to know what ingratitude is? What if you lost your wallet with $1,000 in it and all credit cards and your family pictures, and some perfect stranger took the time to bring it to your home and all you did was take the wallet and slam the door in his face?!
You believe in an unknowable and impersonal God per your posts.
Again, I hope whatever is burdening you comes to pass because that is just plain silly, FK. Christ, in His humanity, is knowable and personal (but He is not your buddy!) and we would never say He anything other than that. But, God is unoknable to us in His essence.
Strange. I have beeng getting the same impression.
Not according to Luther.
Many people do not understand Luther's style of writing. It was pretty simple actually, but nevertheless it is too much for some to handle. Fortunately, those of us who revere Luther understand the points he was making. I don't know if it makes any difference to you, but none of us Reformers have ever condoned the views that you have ascribed to him. They are your own views that neither Luther nor Reformers follow(ed).
FK: "No one can know who the elect and the unelect are, save God. Therefore, we treat everyone as presumptively elect and preach to everyone."
Who's "we?" The "elect?" I though you just said no one know who the elect are.
No, "we" are Bible-believing Christians who believe that the Great Commission was directed to us also. It is certain that not all who profess to being Bible-believing Christians are of the elect. And, none of us knows who the whole group of the elect are, but we CAN know about our individual selves. That is the assurance given in God's word. (Some choose not to be honest with themselves about their relationships with God.)
Remember that Jesus specifically says He was sent for the lost sheep of Israel and not the Gentiles.
But Paul tells us who "Israel" is, which includes Gentiles, as it was taught to him directly by Christ.
If they are not saved then they are not elect. If they are "saved" they are "saved" and no amount of preaching or teaching or praying will change anything according to the Reformed theology.
The elect are predestined to be saved (remember the different uses of the word "saved" within time?) which IS AS GOOD AS BEING saved. However, certain things must still happen within time, although there is no doubt that they will happen given the predestination. One of those things is (normally) belief, and that comes through hearing the word. That takes some type of communication which commonly includes preaching of some kind. Normally, the predestined elect WILL be preached to, and WILL HEAR the word, and then believe. Whether you want to categorize these things as pro forma is up to you, but they do matter.
His purpose is to eternally torture those who had been condemned before they existed? What "God" is that? Baal?
Whenever I hear complaining like this I am forced to ask if you would prefer a God who treated us as we deserved to be treated?
FK: "Perhaps some believe that the crucifixion was just a wild coincidence that happened to work out so that we could be saved."
It was a rescue, God's intervention. It was ushering the New Covenant, redemption of humanity.
Given the Apostolic view of free will and non interference, what exactly do you say was God's intervention? That Jesus showed up and whatever happened, happened? That's not much of an intervention.
Do you suppose God planned the Flood too? Or does God just delight in premeditated drowning and killing in general?
Of course God planned the Flood, He said so in no uncertain terms and planned for its aftermath. He fully intended to and did wipe out everything except for what He put on the ark. Mark, as a Catholic, how would you and/or the Latin Church answer this?
But if God planned everything than He is the author of everything, good and evil, and his name is probably Baal.
Nah, but one of my favorite Bible stories was when Elijah had fun toying with that god. :) That was hilarious.
Oh, no doubt, simple it was. It is not too much for others to handle. It's just too disagreeable. Big difference. But my point was that God would not take you out before you took out someone any more than God would have taken out a Lutheran who decided to fornicate 1,000 times a day, as Luther said. You may wish it, and believed that God would not let you commit crime, but that just doesn't fit the reality on the ground.
[Who is "we?" The "elect?"] No, "we" are Bible-believing Christians who believe that the Great Commission was directed to us also
There were 11 remaining disciples, not of all whom believed, at the the Great Commission. Jesus gave it to them (presumably the believing ones) and they gave it to those whom they made their successors.
It seems to me that the "Bible-believeing Christians" believe something that's not in the Bible, namely that the Great Commission applied to every Tom, Dick and Harry who decided to preach.
And, none of us knows who the whole group of the elect are, but we CAN know about our individual selves
That is very reassuring FK. /sar/
But Paul tells us who "Israel" is, which includes Gentiles, as it was taught to him directly by Christ
No, the Bible says Paul and Barnabas went to the Gentiles because the Jews repudiated the word of God and judged themselves unworthy of eternal life, so they turned to the Gentiles. [cf Act 13:46]
Jesus never taught that Israel included Gentiles to any of His disciples. It was a dire necessity for the Church to survive that led to the idea that the Gentiles are in the "club."
Besides, the word Gentile simply means "non-bliever." In the OT, even the non-believing Jews are referred to as goyim (Gentiles). Looked at it this way, all of humanity is potentially "Israel."
The elect are predestined to be saved (remember the different uses of the word "saved" within time?) which IS AS GOOD AS BEING saved
Then, how come Paul says "Let no one in any way deceive you" [2 Thes 2:3] and "[T]he Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons." [1 Tim 4]?
How can anyone "let" himself be deceived if he is predestined to be deceived? Is this not as good as being deceived? And how would you know either way?
And who will do the deceiving according to Paul? Well, it seems to me he pulls the OT card and says—God! "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false" [2 Thes 2:11]! Deluding influence is "different" from deception—how?
From the OT, we have "a spirit" [angel?] deceiving. Here is how it goes [my emphases]:
21 "Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD and said, 'I will entice him.'
22"The LORD said to him, 'How?' [sic] And he said, 'I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' Then He said, 'You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.'
23"Now therefore, behold, the LORD has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the LORD has proclaimed disaster against you." [1 King 22:20-23]
I would be curious to hear what the Church has to say about St. Paul saying that God put deceiving spirits in the mouths of those He doesn't like, or is this one of those Pauline statements we never talk about?
Kosta: His purpose is to eternally torture those who had been condemned before they existed? What "God" is that? Baal?
Whenever I hear complaining like this I am forced to ask if you would prefer a God who treated us as we deserved to be treated?
How can you "deserve" to be treated either way if you are predestined to be pardoned or condemned before you even existed and "deserved" anything???
Given the Apostolic view of free will and non interference, what exactly do you say was God's intervention? That Jesus showed up and whatever happened, happened?
No, the Christians believe God intercedes on our behalf and rewards those whose will is in harmony with His wiill and their intentions are pure. We don't believe He forces us to commit acts by predestination and has already pronounced our sentence based on none of our doing.
God's intervention was one of extreme humility, that He became Incarnate and suffered and died so that He can offer Himself as ransom for our freedom (the NT is clear about that). In doing so, He freed mankind to come to God, if they so choose. He paid for us with Himself, so that we can be free. If we show ingratitude, that's our loss, and not because He wants to see us perish.
That's not much of an intervention
Well, that's between you and Him.
Of course God planned the Flood, He said so in no uncertain terms and planned for its aftermath
Of course He did, but it doesn't match the Reformed God formula because the Book says He was "sorry" for having made man. Did He not make man and predestined him to be wicked? So, why was He "sorry?" or "surprised?"
Nah, but one of my favorite Bible stories was when Elijah had fun toying with that god. :) That was hilarious
Sure, but nothing like Jacob wresting with God all night long and "winning!" That was hilarious too. In fact, all those legends are quite hilarious.
***Huh? How do you come to that conclusion. We sin; we corrupt the creation around us. I would say it is the Reformed who have the deformed idea that somehow they can go on sinning and still be forgiven.***
Actually, it was the Lord that CURSED the creation for our sakes. And, yeah, if the Lord didn’t want it that way, it wouldn’t be that way.
Also, I’m into the “deformed” idea that I can go on sinning and still be forgiven. God isn’t an Indian giver. The plain truth is that all the saints “go on sinning” every day. It was this FACT which prompted Paul to cry out “who will deliver me from this body of death” (from memory).
It is the Catholic and her sister traditions that have promoted the truly deformed ideas about our justification. Ultimately, these ideas have led many down the path of the Galatians.
However, I do reject the absolute insanity which did pervade some Protestants that felt they could demonstrate their salvation by sinning wilfully and engaging in all kinds of debauchery. The simple fact is, as I noted by my reference to Paul, we are Simul Iustus et Peccator. I exist, not in some kind of uncertain LIMBO, but as an already perfect forever saint who still sees his sanctification being worked out by the Lord.
“Those whom, God effectually calls he also freely justifies, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for anything wrought in them or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them as their righteousness, but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith, which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God”
I HAVE BEEN SIGNED. “My name is written upon the palms of my Lord.”
I HAVE BEEN SEALED. “I have been sealed with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee.”
SURELY SHALL I BE DELIVERED. “I await on the redemption of my body.”
Do not grieve the Holy Spirit. You have already been SEALED for the day of redemption. (Eph 4:30) Set aside false ideas of justification and faith. Embrace the Reformation and be reformed by the TRUTH.
It is relevant because that's what they were asking: questions relevant to their faith.
But if Jesus came (in part) to teach then by your statements Jesus FAILED to correct them in the proper faith and let them languish in error. In fact, by your statements, Jesus purposely misled them. That doesn't sound like the Jesus of the Gospels. I'm sure your own Church calls purposely misleading another in the faith a grave sin (or whatever the Orthodox equivalent is).
FK: "Jesus claimed to be God (John 8:58 : "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
John was written at the end of the century. Earlier Gospels do not share John's memory [of/or] Christ's divinity.
The subject was whether Jesus claimed to be God and you said "No". You also have the Gospels in conflict with each other concerning the identity of Christ. Given how important that is, how can you read the OT through the prism of a Gospel that you say denies the identity of Christ?
FK: "The Bible is absolutely clear on the matter. And if you reject the Bible's teaching and only believe that Jesus is God because the fallible men of your Church command you to, then at least you have that one right."
...... I guarantee you that the Church commands no one to believe that Christ is not divine. To claim that it does is ignorant and untrue. You could spend the rest of your life trying to prove that it does and will die trying. You could not find a single example in anything the Church teaches that would support your claim.
What are you talking about? Please re-read my statement. I make no such claim because I know better. In my statement I ACKNOWLEDE that both you and the Church accept Christ as divine. Otherwise there could be no Christianity and I have already acknowledged elsewhere that I consider you and the Church Christians.
My criticism was over rejecting the Bible's claims of the same thing. How else could one know that Christ is God? I figured your answer would be that since the Bible doesn't say it, the only way to know it would be by following the Church, thus elevating the Church over the scriptures again. I disagree with that approach. I meant no insult. :)
Man's transgression caused it. The cause of corruption is sin. Adam did not repent and ask for forgiveness but blamed God for giving him "that woman."
God was not behind any of this, as God is not behind any of our sins. As we continue to sin, we continue in Adam's fashion, and God continues to curse the ground for our sake, for God can not bless our sin.
And, yeah, if the Lord didn’t want it that way, it wouldn’t be that way
Then read Gen 6:6. Why was He "sorry?" Because things were going His way?
Also, I’m into the “deformed” idea that I can go on sinning and still be forgiven
Not without repentance! The deformed idea of the Reformed theology is that one doesn't have to, because the elect have been forgiven before they even existed.
The plain truth is that all the saints “go on sinning” every day. It was this FACT which prompted Paul to cry out “who will deliver me from this body of death”
And the answer is: repentance.
It is the Catholic and her sister traditions that have promoted the truly deformed ideas about our justification
I can't vouch for the Catholics, since they drifted away from the Orthodox mindset long time ago, but I can say that justification is not what Christ's work is all about.
Christ, the Messiah, is the Liberator. He offered Himself as payment for our sins, a ransom paid to death, so that we may be free (again) to come to God. In doing so, He did not "justify" us but restore us.
And when we no longer sin, God no longer curses the ground for our sake, but blesses it. Just as sin corrupts, theosis (our obedience to God) restores.
Kosta: Sometimes. For instance the very important hesychastic Jesus Prayer (not practiced in the West) says "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, the sinner."
...........
FK: "As in, "Jesus, this is just for you but not for the Spirit"?"
Kosta: No, it shouldn't really matter because a prayer to one is a prayer to the same God.
OK, then I think we're good on this. :) Thanks for the prayer examples.
He could have taught Pilate and He could have just 'changed' everyone's hearts and avoided all this. He was not there to educate the Sanhedrin. It was necessary that He die for our sins, to pay for our sins and offer Himself to death in exchange (ransom) for our freedom from death. Why would God choose such path is beyond me. But that's what the Gospels tell us.
In fact, by your statements, Jesus purposely misled them. That doesn't sound like the Jesus of the Gospels. I'm sure your own Church calls purposely misleading another in the faith a grave sin (or whatever the Orthodox equivalent is)
1 Kings 22:20-23 tells us that (the OT) God does purposefully deceive, and Apostle Paul echoes that in 2 Thess 2:11. But, I agree, Christ of the Gospels would never do that. How can you deceive the deceived? If He told them the truth they wouldn't have believed Him anyway.
The subject was whether Jesus claimed to be God and you said "No". You also have the Gospels in conflict with each other concerning the identity of Christ.
Christ didn't say "No." He answered affirmatively to the question if He was the christos (the anointed) Son of God. But those who asked Him understood those words meant the anointed (moshiach) a human warrior-king (son of God) sent by God to restore the Kingodm of Israel. The Sanhedrin never asked Him if He was God (divine).
Given how important that is, how can you read the OT through the prism of a Gospel that you say denies the identity of Christ?
The Gospel of John is very different and not always in agreement with the other three (which are a product of borrowing and copying form each other anyway).
But we accept all the Gospels because the earlier ones see Christ in His humanity and the Gospel of John sees Him in His divinity, and both reflect the Chirst we know and believe in.
It was absolutely necessary to write John's Gospel and the timing is not accidental: Ebionites and Gnostics were becoming a prominent factor in denying Christ's full divinity which the Church came to realize ever so slowly.
But when we read the OT through the prism of the Gospels, we do not ask if this is the human or divine Jesus we are looking for; we ask "where is Christ (that we know from the Gospels) in all this?" Or "is this what Christ taught?" Where is compassion and forgiveness spoken of in the Gospels? Where does the anger and hatred and prejudice of the OT fit into the Christ of the Gospels?
Judaism was a semi-pagan religion with strong pagan roots at the time of Abraham, and it was only slowly and gradually evolving into the spiritual Gospel-like understanding we find in the Psalms and the messianic Judaism that evolved after the Babylonian and Persian dominance resulting in the emergence of such apocalyptic groups as the Essenes, etc.
One can find a lot of Christ in the Psalms but not as much in other sections of the OT, in God-sponsored genocides and deceptions, all of which reflect the degree of revelation received. The general rule is: the fuller the revelation, the closer to Christ of the Gospels it is. For example, I find Christ in Genesis but not much in Leviticus.
My criticism was over rejecting the Bible's claims of the same thing. How else could one know that Christ is God? I figured your answer would be that since the Bible doesn't say it, the only way to know it would be by following the Church, thus elevating the Church over the scriptures again
I apologize for misunderstanding. The Bible does say that Christ is divine, but it does so at the very end (chronologically speaking). If the Bible until then (the end of the 1st century) did say it outright as John's Gospel does, then Ebionites and Gnostics would have had nothing to go by. They apparently reject John once it was written because by that time *end of the 1st century) such groups have already come into existence.
And, the Church never elevates itself above the Scriptures because the Scriptures are what the Church agreed was what was believed.
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.