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."
“Even if there were ten verses that strongly supported a point, they would all be interpreted away if they disagreed (at face value) with what the Church teaches today.”
FK, what The Church teaches dogmatically today is what it taught from the beginning. Today, 1800 years ago, it makes no difference. Its the same Faith.
FK, surely you don’t believe that the Bible is some sort of self defining, self authenticating, self created “something” which presides over mankind? That’s what Mohammedans believe about the Koran, FK. Our salvation is from The Word Who became Flesh, not the word a bunch of Greek bishops put together 1700 years ago.
Where does it say in the Bible that man cannot break God's seal? The fact that men continue to sin even after Baptism shows that God allows such breaks. This all goes back to the Reformed denial of God's gift of free will and reason and a Mohamedan-like distortion of Christianity, with God being the tyrant and a micro manager.
This is a good description of someone who lives under the Law and not under grace
The Beatitudes are in the NT, so your statement is nonsense. It is just that the Beatitudes clash with Paul's innovations (which were necessary to spread Judaism to Gentiles), so you reject them or ignore them. This is another fine example where the Reformed choose Paul over Jesus' own words.
Paul spoke often of this
I am sure he did. If you think about it, why did God give the Law if it was supposed to be discarded? But was there any other way to bring the Gentiles to accept this new form of Judaism? He had to cater to the "customers," if you think about it, and was many things to many different groups.
I have repeatedly asked the Reformed to stop quoting Paul to make their point, and they can't because without Paul Protestantism would be dead. It is a Paulian cult and I know this irritates a lot of people, but in order to "prove" their point they either depend on the OT or Paul, with the Gospels' eyewitness message relegated to a distant third place.
Kosta: Yeah, we should be like Christ in our hearts, pure, and we shall see God. Is your heart pure?
FK: Sure, Matt. 5:8 says that those who will see God (the elect) are blessed and given a pure heart.
I am sorry, FK, you can't (or won't) even quote from the Bible the way it reads in order to make your point, but rearrange and add words to suit your agenda. Mat 5:8 says "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." It doesn't say anything about them being "given" a pure heart. And for you to claim that your heart is pure is like saying you don't sin. How prideful is that?!
Everyone knows that man is autonomous and self-determined
More distortions. God gave man reason and freedom. If we are free and rational, it is because God willed it so, not because man somehow earned it or because was somehow obliged to yield to man. God wants man to come to Him freely because love doesn't force, and true love can only be free.
Dr. E, is it possible for you to stay in context? Where in Beatitudes does it say you need faith to be saved, to see God, to be comforted? Matthew was an eyewitness and He is quoting Christ in Beatitudes and you are spouting Paul's opinion. Does Paul trump Jesus in your book?
What does Jesus say? He says
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Are you poor in spirit (humble)? Does it require faith to be humble? NO it doesn't!
Jesus says "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted." does it require faith to mourn? No it doesn't! "
"Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth." No faith required there either!
"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied." No faith required.
"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy." Are only faithful merciful? What a crock!
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Children, who can't even speak, are pure in heart. No faith required.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." Are only the faithful peacemakers? I don't think so.
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Have only the faithful been persecuted for righteousness' sake? Of course not.
"Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me." Not all Christ's followers believed He is God, not even the original Apostles until the very end (cf Mat 28:17).
Nothing here says faith is necessary. Nothing.
How is a man saved?
The Bible is full of "options" on this. I suggest you research it. You will be amazed what saves us according to the Book your worship. But if you wish, I will be happy to repost the list. It's quite impressive.
No wonder Luther was so furious when he opened the Bible and read it and saw how far the then-prevailing church had strayed from God's word.
Luther was furious because the Church apparently interfered with his carnal desires, so he devised a man-made "church" to be able to commit "one thousand fornications a day" (his words) and know that he is still saved.
It's not the Bible that differs, but our eyes and ears...Psalm 119:7
People believe what they choose to believe.
Look, the subject was that God gives devil children to some (unlucky) parents. My point was that the Christian God (the one we know from the Gospels) doens't make and wouldn't make devil children. Either you agree with that or you hold the Reformed view that God creates devil children. One of these views is un-Christian. Care to try an educated guess which one?
God decided to give man freedom and reason. The creation follows the laws under which it was created and not by God's micromanagement (of humans or the rest of His creation). While we can postulate that an omnipotent God would have the power to intercede and change the order of creation, the creation seems pretty much a perpetuum mobile as much as man seems pretty much in a position to make choices for which he will be judged later.
Many simply don't like to admit that. :)
My point was that God picked individuals from the same group (Hebrews) and not from the diverse pool of ethnic humanity. I never said the nation of Israel was redeemed as a group; I said the burden of righteousness was places on individuals or groups (hich could be as much as the entire nation of Israel, or as small as 12 apostles).
You don’t need to. My question was rhetorical.
Tremendous work, sir.
I’ve been off doing Memorial day things; barbeques, family outings, nearly dying of asthma and spending quality time in the ER (first time I’ve ever called 9-1-1).
I am very much in debt to you and your answers and discourse and will try to pick up some more of my Latin slack. :)
Mark
So salvation doesn’t require faith? Is that what you are saying? All we need to do is be mournful, humble, and salvation is ours? Works! That’s all it takes? Make yourself worthy of God? Well, good luck with that.
"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" -- 1 Corinthians 4:7
Likewise from Scripture we know that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." (Romans 14:23)
Therefore all the good things we have received and all the good attributes we possess in life are not sin but gifts from God by and for and through the faith of Jesus Christ.
"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied." No faith required.
No faith is required to hunger for righteousness???
Who has the ability or even the desire to "hunger for righteousness" if it is not by faith? Do you figure all men "hunger for righteousness?"
The reprobate does not "hunger for righteousness."
I don't recognize your faith in the slightest.
DR.E: How is a man saved?
KOSTA: The Bible is full of "options" on this.
"Options" on "how a man is saved???"
Wonder what the EO thinks about your self-proclaimed multiplicity of methods of salvation?
Amazing, isn't it? Apparently there are other "options."
One of the problems that the cherry pickers face is that they do not read and accept the whole Bible. The Beatitudes are ignored since they do not fall into the Calvinistic Pauline elite elect misinterpretation of non-responsibility.
Not that Paul preaches irresponsibility, far from it, but that he says enough about the elect for the misinterpretation of it to allow for a distancing of it.
Many of the children of the Reformed talk the talk but do not walk the way. If I recall correctly, a Reformer claimed that her duties included teaching her children to kneel to Christ. I asked (and have done so in the past) how much kneeling she actually did. No reply. No significant replies in the past.
We are castigated for not enough literal interpretation of the Bible; yet this literal command to kneel before God in prayer and worship is continuously and haughtily ignored. The Eucharist is summarily dismissed. And so on. I am not singling out this individual, far from it; she is merely a typical example and fits in well with the caricature.
***Luther was furious because the Church apparently interfered with his carnal desires, so he devised a man-made “church” to be able to commit “one thousand fornications a day” (his words) and know that he is still saved.***
Luther furiously abridged the Bible and was prepared to do more in the NT, including removing all the Catholic letters and Revelation as well.
If God predestines everyone, and she overcame predestination, then she overcame God. The scriptures just don't teach that man can overcome God, but these are the inevitable results with the idea of man being sovereign and autonomous.
What I mean by faith, FK, is an incredible example of a blind Orthodox woman who, having heard people pity her for her affliction, said "But I am so blessed! Imagine, the first thing I will see will be the face of God." That is the kind of biblical faith I am talking about. It humbles. She turned her disadvantage into a blessing and thanks God for it! She overcame her destiny.
If she did the overcoming, then her faith was self-generated. However, the Bible teaches that faith comes from God. I really wonder what her response would be to a question about where her faith came from. Would she pat herself on the back for reaching into her inner goodness to save herself, or would she give thanks to God?
***If God predestines everyone, and she overcame predestination, then she overcame God. The scriptures just don’t teach that man can overcome God, but these are the inevitable results with the idea of man being sovereign and autonomous.***
New Advent says:
The theory of predestination post prævisa merita
This theory defended by the earlier Scholastics (Alexander of Hales, Albertus Magnus), as well as by the majority of the Molinists, and warmly recommended by St. Francis de Sales “as the truer and more attractive opinion”, has this as its chief distinction, that it is free from the logical necessity of upholding negative reprobation. It differs from predestination ante prævisa merita in two points: first, it rejects the absolute decree and assumes a hypothetical predestination to glory; secondly, it does not reverse the succession of grace and glory in the two orders of eternal intention and of execution in time, but makes glory depend on merit in eternity as well as in the order of time. This hypothetical decree reads as follows: Just as in time eternal happiness depends on merit as a condition, so I intended heaven from all eternity only for foreseen merit. — It is only by reason of the infallible foreknowledge of these merits that the hypothetical decree is changed into an absolute: These and no others shall be saved.
This view not only safeguards the universality and sincerity of God’s salvific will, but coincides admirably with the teachings of St. Paul (cf. 2 Timothy 4:8), who knows that there “is laid up” (reposita est, apokeitai) in heaven “a crown of justice”, which “the just judge will render” (reddet, apodosei) to him on the day of judgment. Clearer still is the inference drawn from the sentence of the universal Judge (Matthew 25:34 sq.): “Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat” etc. As the “possessing” of the Kingdom of Heaven in time is here linked to the works of mercy as a condition, so the “preparation” of the Kingdom of Heaven in eternity, that is, predestination to glory is conceived as dependent on the foreknowledge that good works will be performed. The same conclusion follows from the parallel sentence of condemnation (Matthew 25:41 sq.): “Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat” etc. For it is evident that the “everlasting fire of hell” can only have been intended from all eternity for sin and demerit, that is, for neglect of Christian charity, in the same sense in which it is inflicted in time. Concluding a pari, we must say the same of eternal bliss. This explanation is splendidly confirmed by the Greek Fathers. Generally speaking, the Greeks are the chief authorities for conditional predestination dependent on foreseen merits. The Latins, too, are so unanimous on this question that St. Augustine is practically the only adversary in the Occident. St. Hilary (In Ps. lxiv, n. 5) expressly describes eternal election as proceeding from “the choice of merit” (ex meriti delectu), and St. Ambrose teaches in his paraphrase of Rom., viii, 29 (De fide, V, vi, 83): “Non enim ante prædestinavit quam præscivit, sed quorum merita præscivit, eorum præmia prædestinavit” (He did not predestine before He foreknew, but for those whose merits He foresaw, He predestined the reward).
***If she did the overcoming, then her faith was self-generated. However, the Bible teaches that faith comes from God.***
Catholic dogma of predestination keeps the golden mean, because it regards eternal happiness primarily as the work of God and His grace, but secondarily as the fruit and reward of the meritorious actions of the predestined. The process of predestination consists of the following five steps: (a) the first grace of vocation, especially faith as the beginning, foundation, and root of justification; (b) a number of additional, actual graces for the successful accomplishment of justification; (c) justification itself as the beginning of the state of grace and love; (d) final perseverance or at least the grace of a happy death; (e) lastly, the admission to eternal bliss. If it is a truth of Revelation that there are many who, following this path, seek and find their eternal salvation with infallible certainty, then the existence of Divine predestination is proved (cf. Matthew 25:34; Revelation 20:15). St. Paul says quite explicitly (Romans 8:28 sq.): “we know that to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints. For whom he foreknew, he also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Son; that he might be the first born amongst many brethren. And whom he predestinated, them he also called. And whom he called, them he also justified. And whom he justified, them he also glorified.” (Cf. Ephesians 1:4-11) Besides the eternal “foreknowledge” and foreordaining, the Apostle here mentions the various steps of predestination: “vocation”, “justification”, and “glorification”. This belief has been faithfully preserved by Tradition through all the centuries, especially since the time of Augustine. ***
The dogma of double predestination assumes that God is the author of sin and death. We reject that. If God gives the whole world His grace, then He has made it possible for everyone to be saved.
I don't know about any particular person other than myself, but the Bible describes people with varying strengths of faith. While "sin is sin" in terms of being worthy of Heaven, the Bible also gives different levels of punishment for different sins. So, it seems logical that if among the saved, some have stronger, more mature faith than others, that among the lost some are farther away from God's standards than others.
Sin is sin, and unrepentant sinner who goes on sinning (because God "paid" for His sins) is lost.
That's right, and is indicative that the person never had true faith to begin with.
Repentance means changing your lifestyle and never wishing to commit sin again. It's an attitude, not a parking ticket. Either you are proud or repentant. There is no middle ground.
AMEN! :)
That's not how the Church sees predestination. ......... We must try to overcome our predestined status by desiring to be on that narrow path that leads to God. Everyone has a task to overcome their predestination and come to the Lord.
Yes, that is a completely different understanding of the word than we have. We look at verses like these:
Rom 8:29-30 : 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those he predestined , he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Eph 1:4-5 : 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—
Eph 1:11 : 11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, ...
So as you can see, we as believers have no interest in overcoming God's predestination as it is explicitly found in the Bible. It also makes no sense to us that man is powerful enough to overcome God anyway.
Well, if deception is not of God, then sending deceiving spirits by God would constitute "authoring sin." Knowing Christ of the Gospels, I would say most Christians would say that God doesn't do that. However, some people who left their marks on the Bible did. The OT-mindset allows that. The NT-mindset doesn't.
I think you have caused me to reexamine my position on this, so thank you for that. :) Originally, it didn't occur to me that there was such a thing as "righteous lying", but then I thought that since the Bible is clear there is such a thing as righteous killing, why not? So, I looked for it and sure enough it's right there in scripture:
Ex 1:15-21 : 15 The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, 16 "When you help the Hebrew women in childbirth and observe them on the delivery stool, if it is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live." 17 The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live. 18 Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, "Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?"
19 The midwives answered Pharaoh, "Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive." 20 So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. 21 And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own.
It is clear that God condoned this particular lie, therefore there is a precedent for "righteous lying". A real world example I found was Christian Germans hiding Jews during WWII and lying to the Gestapo. I can see God condoning that too. So, in this light it doesn't look so bad for God to send deceiving spirits. Since it was done in righteousness, it cannot be sin.
Why are men blamed for their nature? This is the kind of attitude that allowed people to "blame" someone for the color of their skin!
I know it DOES sound very unfair. But it is even more unfair for an innocent man, indeed God Himself, to die on a cross for sins He never committed. I'd say it all balances out in favor of the elect. God made one set of people whom He loved and wanted with Him in Heaven. He also made all the other people and every other thing in the world. That is really God's prerogative as the Creator. We are in no position to complain, as the Bible says.
So for you the road to salvation is paved with good intentions??? :)
FK: "The whole of verse 10, which you omit, says that the Covenant is with the "House of Israel". Paul shows us who the House of Israel is, all believers, not Jews by birth."
That is Paul's invention, and I would say a necessary one in order to save the Church from extinction in Israel. And how good that invention worked! You think that what I am saying is negative. It's not. It only shows that the narrow (OT) idea of what constitutes the "people of God" is obsolete and that the fullness of God's revelation through Christ dying for everyone's sins reveals that God desires to save all men, not just the Jews.
I think it's negative because it raises up man and diminishes God. You have been telling me that God's Holy word was written by fallible men all on their own, and most of what they wrote was flat out wrong factually, and even spiritually in many cases. You have men like Paul determining spiritual things all on their own, as marketing techniques. That raises men above God, which is always negative.
Those who choose to follow God or not to follow Him do so on their own. They are free to serve whomever they wish.
That is definitely my understanding of the Apostolic faith, so I'm glad I had that right.
I sure will, and thanks so much for your most kind words. I continue to learn from you every day.
Lots of tribes mutilated their bodies precisely for that reason: it cannot be undone. So, what you are saying is that God wanted man to mutilate himself as a permanent "seal" and yet Paul says circumcision we can do without? (of course he did, because the Gentiles would not have come in numbers; smart move).
You call it mutilation, and God calls it a seal. It's a difference of opinion. Paul, as he was taught personally by Christ, said that under the New Covenant the important thing was to be circumcised spiritually, and that the Holy Spirit would be the seal:
Rom 2:25-29 : 25 Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised . 26 If those who are not circumcised keep the law's requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised ? 27 The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.
28 A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.
Eph 1:13-14 : 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession — to the praise of his glory.
Paul was simply relaying what Christ told him. In the OT, God wanted the physical mark. After Christ it was no longer necessary. The same type of thing can be said of many practices.
Where does the scripture say we cannot break the seal?
See Eph. above. Is God's guarantee any good? If it is then God's seal cannot be broken by man. See also:
Rev 5:1-5 : 1 Then I saw in the right hand of him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides and sealed with seven seals. 2 And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, "Who is worthy to break the seals and open the scroll?" 3 But no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth could open the scroll or even look inside it. 4 I wept and wept because no one was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. 5 Then one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals."
Now, I know how much you like Revelation, :) BUT this treatment of a seal is absolutely consistent with how the people at the time treated seals. They could not be broken by anyone unauthorized. With the power of God behind the seal, that REALLY meant couldn't.
BTW, you are wrong about not being able to undo the circumcision. Circumcision is actually reversible without surgery.
I have no idea what that means, and I don't want to know. :) Doing something further in a physical manner cannot undo what was done first. In any event that would not apply to spiritual circumcision, which is ultimately what mattered anyway.
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.