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."
I would suggest you read the Bible for yourself. It’s in there.
God ordains everything in His plan, and that has necessarily involved the sin of others as we are told in the Bible. I have already detailed that what people do matters because God ordains actions within time. So, what we do matters since what God ordains must happen.
If this is what you believe, it is the devil's trap,Dear Brother?
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by "devil's trap". God ordains that some if not all sin happens, but He author's none of it. It goes back to the duty your side places on God. We place no duty upon God to protect man from his own sin nature.
I have a missionary friend(who is a very humble holy man) in Madagascar who does exorcisms and converts pagans.He has written me that this type of belief is what the devil uses to gain souls.
What, the devil uses the idea that God is sovereign and ordains what He wants to happen in order to get souls over to satan's side? Hmmm. I'm not sure how much sense that makes. I would say that the devil would much rather have men think that they are the ones who are sovereign and self-determined to be able to choose God (or not) from their own inner devices. Wouldn't it be much easier for satan to attack a man who thinks that HE himself is the captain of his own ship rather than a man who knows that God is the captain of his ship? I would think so. In my experience satan often if not always takes the path of least resistance. When I really blow it are the same times I am doing things my own way, forgetting that God is sovereign and in control.
Kosta pointed out the beatitude's in posts #5884 to Dr E . If we cannot grasp them,than our Salvation is in trouble.
The Beatitudes show us the fruits of salvation. God promises that He will continue the good work that He began in His children. True Christians WILL look like the Beatitudes.
Here is a wonderful article on them by Fulton Sheen..
Let Him come into the world which denies Absolute Truth, which says that right and wrong are only questions of point of view, that we must be broad- minded about virtue and vice, and let Him say to them, “Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after holiness,” that is, after the Absolute, after the Truth which “I am”; and they will in their broad-mindedness give the mob the choice of Him or Barabbas; they will crucify Him with thieves, and try to make the world believe that God is no different from a batch of robbers who are His bedfellows in death.
Thanks for the article, and a special AMEN to this part. :) Much of the world doesn't believe in absolutes any more.
Let Him come into a world which tries to interpret man in terms of sex; which regards purity as coldness, chastity as frustrated sex, self- containment as abnormality, and the union of husband and wife until death as boredom; which says that a marriage endures only so long as the glands endure, that one may unbind what God binds and unseal what God seals.
And in light of recent conversation in general, a double special Amen to this! :)
Actually, my interpretations come much closer to what the Saints actually wrote, but you are very correct that they disagree strongly with what many of your early Fathers said. And, I'm afraid that I have never for a single moment trusted your early Fathers to have given me the Bible or the Canon. I have only ever trusted the power of God's breath to create the books, and God's Providence that the whole of God's people accepted the correct ones. All of that was ordained too.
Good night to you too, and I also wish you to have peace of mind always. Really! :)
Here is a question for all of you...
How would you handle Acts 2:22-23? I make note of this because it was the basis for the sermon today at church.
FK-These are all deeds (or mindsets that necessarily result in deeds) which can be measured by God.
STF - I would expect this response from the devil who would not want man to sacrifice and bear a cross out of love for others!
Here I just paraphrased what you said. Your addition is to list two more deeds that can be measured by God under a point system. I think satan loves the idea of a point system because he knows full well that man cannot live up to it no matter how many men insist on it.
Well, a command or a law is one and the same thing. So, then, why do you disagree with aruanan when he says that God commanded Adam to sin.
From the excerpts I have read it would seem that Calvin would see "command" and "ordain" as the same thing. I do not in today's language because I have too much experience with how that concept would be misused by the loyal opposition. Kosta, you still harp on Pecca Fortier even after I posted an extremely lengthy dissertation on it that I don't remember you even challenging. My memory is that you just ignored it. I surmised that was because you wanted to keep bringing it up. For that reason I am not going to use the word "command". That is, I do not want you to quote me the way you quote Luther. :)
If Adam was destined to sin by God's design, it was obviously not Adam's choice, but God's.
It was God's choice by ordination, and Adam's choice by execution. Adam and Eve had no chance against the serpent and God let it happen.
God made sure Adam's choice was as God wished (that Adam sin) and not as Adam wished. In other words, in the Reformed theology, God is the source of sin. If God did not wish any sin, there would be no sin.
Good start, bad finish. :) Of course Adam wanted to sin. He wanted to listen to Eve and agreed with her that the fruit was pleasing to the eye and good to eat, etc. God just didn't prevent them from going after their desires. God wishing sin is not the same as God authoring it. Now, if you want to blame God for all sin because He created Adam with the capacity for sin, then you can make a case. But that's where you have to go. For your side, either man is sovereign and autonomous above God's will, OR, God authors all sin. We disagree.
Your theory then—that all God has to do is leave us to our depraved nature for us to sin—is not Reformed theory, but Forest Keeper's creation. For, if that is true, then who if not God gave us our "dead" nature? If God is behind everything, then He is behind sin too.
God creates all individuals, and the original sin they are born with is directly a result of Adam's free will choice to sin. That is God's justice. Again, if you want to blame God for having and following His own justice then fine. But that's where you have to go. I didn't invent God's justice or declare what I want it to be. I just report what the Bible describes. God saw it fitting that Adam's sin be on all the people who followed. God also saw it fitting that an innocent man on the cross could pay for all the sins of all time for all the elect. I didn't make that up either.
In other words if God didn't predestine us to have sin-loving nature, we would not be desiring sin.
Yes, in a manner of speaking. We would also not be "humans" as we understand the term now. We would be something else. God could have created all of us without the capability of sin, but He didn't. He had His reasons.
No matter how you turn it around, God is the author of that too.
God IS the author of the arrangement, but not the author of sin itself. He desired for man to fall and He desired to save His elect. None of this was ever outside of His control. Under the Apostolic view, God appears to let His children run amok, doing whatever they want at all times. This is a description of a totally irresponsible and UNLOVING parent. But then, that's what it takes for man to be the boss. :)
Which is what the Orthodox and Catholics on these treads have recognized long time ago about the Reformed, which is that, with this kind of theology of Calvin, the Reformed are on the fringes of Christianity, if not completely outside of it, like the LDS or the JW.
That would seem to be a fair opinion from the Apostolic POV. Any faith that holds to the scriptures as closely as the Reformed faith does MUST seem like it's on the fringes of Christianity from the extra-scriptural and contra-scriptural perspective of Apostolic Tradition and thought.
Well, it says here clearly that "one act of righteousness was justification that brings life to all men." That is exactly the Apostolic view. God made it possible for all men to come to Him, as He desires all men to be saved. The only reason this doesn't happen with all men is because God gave man freedom to choose. (emphasis added)
Well, my interpretation of your statement is that you agree that at point blank face value IT DOESN'T MATCH YOUR THEOLOGY EITHER! :) So, since you have to throw in the bolded part above (which is implied nowhere around here) you know that the verse has to be interpreted. I agree it has to be interpreted because the facts on the ground simply don't match that all men do or will have life.
Obviously, the section you zoomed in on has nothing to do with why I quoted the passage. However, it is always perfectly legitimate for you to take issue with any scripture I ever quote. (I just want to say that my originally intended point stands. :)
But women don't have the Y chromosome (except in special cases) and the X chromosome that a girl got from her father somewhere back along the line was randomly obtained from one of his predecessor's mothers.
I honestly don't know if original sin is a blood born pathogen or not. :) What I do know is that for SOME reason Adam gets all the responsibility for original sin, even though Eve sinned first. So, I surmise, that whatever that reason is IS also the reason why original sin is passed down through the father only, WHATEVER the mechanics of that are.
The point that Morris was making was that Mary's flesh was sinful human flesh and, being sinful, could not have been perfect and since it was not perfect, could not have been the source of his human body since as the perfect lamb of God he had to be without defect in order to be a perfect sacrifice for humanity.
For the sake of argument, and I'm just speculating here, but it would seem to make sense to me that if we first accept that Mary's flesh was sinful, that at the precise moment that Mary's DNA met with whatever DNA the Holy Spirit contributed to form Jesus, that the Spirit's DNA would have purified Mary's (egg), resulting in a purified embryo. God purifies.
So I see no stretch in supposing that whatever corruption Mary was bringing to the table was erased immediately upon being touched by the Holy Spirit's "DNA". The same would apply to the nutrients that flowed from Mary to Jesus in the womb. That Jesus was simply physically surrounded by the rest of her corrupted flesh is irrelevant since He spent His whole life being surrounded by, and closely touching, the same thing. I admit I have no scripture for this, but it beats the alternatives of having Jesus not being fully human, OR, Jesus being born with original sin. :)
Acts 2:22-23 : 22 "Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
I may be misunderstanding, but if the issue is over "set purpose" and "foreknowledge", I see those as being just as close as saying "I praised God with joy and happiness". To me, foreknowledge by God HAS to include ordination or it doesn't mean anything. I don't think the two things listed were in contrast at all, but rather as compliments to each other.
***How does one reject His grace under Catholicism? Or, what is the nature of that grace? I thought that God “gives” the grace to all, and the method of purchase of that grace (acceptance) is the doing of enough good deeds to merit salvation. ***
How can one purchase a gift freely given? You can’t. Grace is the Way; we must still walk it.
***I thought this was the nature of the conditional gift that you believe is all God gives. ***
The gift is not conditional.
***Is the method of rejection simply a failure to perform well enough?***
To reject God’s Grace is to wallow in sin. Unlike Martin Luther’s idea of going and sinning boldly, we believe that sin itself is the rejection.
***If you call our view of God’s predestination enslavement (presumably pejorative) then you disallow God HIS FREE WILL to choose whom He wants to be with Him in Heaven.***
I disallow God nothing. I merely quote Scripture in which He has said what He wants us to know. God can do whatever He wants - He is, was and will be all at the same time.
***You insist that it is man’s choice, NOT God’s choice. We think the Creator deserves the ultimate choice, not the creation.***
It is not a matter of God deserving anything; you may think He deserves this or not that, but we have to go with His revealed Word and His Church.
***Correct, and that is why it is error to characterize the Reformed view as frogmarching. The word “frogmarching” connotes “against one’s will”. The fact is that no one is dragged kicking and screaming to true Christian faith.***
Predestination under Reformed theology means that one is forced - there is no free will. The Reformed Holy Spirit comes upon the elect and there is a change in the individual so that the means are established for that individual for him to go to Heaven. Therefore terms like frogmarching and brainwashing, although somewhat perjorative, seem adequate.
***Instead, I see before us a choice - eternal bliss and love in the presence of God versus eternal torment and damnation. As believers, to you and me this choice is a no-brainer. We UNDERSTAND the choice.***
A choice in which there is no choice, in other words?
***The part you call frogmarching is when God chooses to change the hearts of some SO THAT they can understand what is so simple to us. With that new heart they are enabled to freely choose Christ, and they DO, every time. So instead of “frogmarching”, it would be more accurate to say that God does a really, really, really good job of changing hearts. In fact, God is good enough to do such a good job that He doesn’t need to force anyone. Everyone coming to Christ does so freely and willingly.***
If you program a robot to turn to the left and you then change the programming to turn to the right, it is still a forced conversion.
***Your position appears to be that either man has freedom on the same level as God, or he has no freedom at all. It doesn’t work like that. Man was not created as machine, and man does have volition.***
Of course man does not have the same level of freedom as God; he does work within Creation and God is beyond Creation. The Reformed, though, take the position that man is not responsible for anything whatsoever - the perfect teenage fantasy. :)
***You place a duty upon God to create all such that they have a “chance” to go to Heaven. Please tell me the origin of that duty that you assign. ***
I place no duty. All I know of God is what He has revealed to us.
***We see it as absolute, and you all see it as limited by man’s (presumably superior) free will. I maintain that the freedom that your side so vigorously defends is freedom FROM and AGAINST God. For some unfathomable reason, this is prized and treasured by your side. ***
God has created us with the ability to reject Him, as is more than adequately demonstrated by much of humanity.
***You quoted John 3:14-17. Your interpretation of verse 17, that Jesus came to save the world, meaning to you all people, has Jesus being one of the greatest failures of any leader in history. We do not see Jesus as the failure that your side does, so we do not interpret those verses as you do. ***
If ‘the world’ does not mean ‘the world’, and it simply means whatever one wants it to mean, then no wonder our faiths are so different.
***You also quote 1 John 2:1-11. This also mentions the concept of “the world”. It is the same.
.....
Finally, you quote 1 Tim. 2:1-6, which says that God “wills everyone to be saved” in your version. Again, for the sake of man’s autonomy you are forced to admit that God’s will is pathetically weak and ineffectual. We don’t agree with that interpretation. ***
When these verses are open to misterpretation, then no wonder that some of the more difficult verses wind up with different meanings.
*** It appears that in Catholicism there are way too many cooks in the kitchen. This town we call the universe is simply not big enough for one omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God and the Apostolic idea of man’s sovereignty. Every single theoretical elevation of man, and there are many in Apostolic theology, corresponds necessarily to a diminution of the God revealed to us in the scriptures.***
You have just demonstrated that the Reformed view of Creation does not allow for all Scripture; indeed, right from the beginning of the Reformation, Martin Luther axed the Deuterocanicals and was preparing to remove James, Revelation and most of the Epistles except for some of Paul.
***Every single theoretical elevation of man, and there are many in Apostolic theology, corresponds necessarily to a diminution of the God revealed to us in the scriptures. God knew this mindset was coming so He reminded us of how to think:
John 3:30 : He must increase, but I must decrease. KJV
In my opinion, Apostolics have this reversed.***
Jesus spent most of the Gospels instructing us on what to do. If nothing that we do matters, then why did He instruct us over and over, both plainly and in parable?
***Either man is free to sin or he is not.
No, that’s too narrow. You could say that man is free to sin to the extent it does not thwart God’s will. I would agree to that, whether committed by the saved or lost. For example, if God has a specific plan for me to accomplish His will tomorrow, then no one is “free” to murder me as I type this.***
It is not too narrow. If we are free to sin, then we are free to sin. I think that you’re mixing up sin in general with specific actions upon an individual.
***It is not contradictory. It is true by experiential perception. ***
Back to the Gnosticism? It is not apparent to others.
***If I am of the elect then God ordained me to come to Christ from the foundations of the world. And when that point came I asked Christ into my heart with a free will. ***
I thought that the Reformed view was that nobody could ask God to come into his heart because all men were made evil and unable to do so until the Holy Spirit made the change. Therefore something doesn’t fit. Either you can ask Christ to come into your heart with a free will (and the corollary to that is that you can decline to ask with the same free will), or that something is wrong with the Reformed view.
***How would you handle Acts 2:22-23? I make note of this because it was the basis for the sermon today at church.***
Acts 2:
You who are Israelites, hear these words. Jesus the Nazorean was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.
23
This man, delivered up by the set plan and foreknowledge of God, you killed, using lawless men to crucify him.
I think that Peter is saying that even though Jesus was a great man who did mighty deeds and was obviously sent by God, you guys killed him. I think that this is early notification that the Good News was going out beyond the Jews since they weren’t going to accept it anyway.
That means you don't know.
No you believe that Jesus is your savior but also that God is the source of evil and sin. You are right, the catholic faith never taught that and never will.
Then what we do is not our will but God's will. And if ti is not our will then it is not our responsibility.
We place no duty upon God to protect man from his own sin nature.
No, God has no duty to protect, as long as you admit that in the Reformed theology God created man with the specific intent to be evil and that, by the will of this Reformed "God" man is evil by design and not by choice.
Wouldn't it be much easier for satan to attack a man who thinks that HE himself is the captain of his own ship rather than a man who knows that God is the captain of his ship?
No, because a man who believes that God ordains good as well as evil will be unable to discern what is from God and what is from Satan.
The Beatitudes show us the fruits of salvation
False. The Beatitudes tell us what we must do and what we must be like in order to be saved.
True Christians WILL look like the Beatitudes. No, true Christians will receive mercy, will inherit the kingdom, will see God, WILL be saved because of the way they ARE.
That's right, and by that fact alone Jesus would have not been a male. Obviously, Incarnation was not a simple genetic process involved in the conception of human beings but a supernatural act. Which makes us wonder how can Jesus then be a 100% human like the rest of us.
We have had this discussion on another thread and the answer FK came up with was that the Holy Spirit "fashioned" a Y chromosome but didn't say whose? LOL!
The point that Morris was making was that Mary's flesh was sinful human flesh and, being sinful, could not have been perfect and since it was not perfect, could not have been the source of his human body since as the perfect lamb of God he had to be without defect in order to be a perfect sacrifice for humanity
Look, the way the Church circumvented this issue was that Mary was cleansed of all sin at the moment of this supernatural conception, so the sinfulness of her flesh is irrelevant.
Just as God could make (actually fashion, sculpt) man out of mud with His own "hands," and by bretahing His breath into him made him a living man, the same can apply to woman's flesh, after it has been previously cleansed of sin. Obviously, the material from which a man was fashioned by God is irrelevant.
Thowing in genetics is pointless. God doens't have to follow genetic laws, but it also takes a leap of faith to believe all this really happened. Rather it is obvious that these stories simply reflect the common beliefs of the time.
Let's look at verses 21 and 24, for some context (all emphases are mine; this is supposedly Peter addressing the Jews at the Pentecost):
But Mat 7:21 contradicts this. It quotes Jesus as saying "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter."
Notice the emphasis on doing the will. It's what we do, our deeds, that determine it. Oh, no! Works-based salvation in the New testament!!!
Obviously, Jesus and God are two different entities according to Peter at this time, echoing Paul's (and indeed the entire Jewish) idea that the messiah is a man.
And what does he mean by "again?" How many times did God raise Jesus?
And verses 22-23:
It doesn't get much clearer than this that even at Pentecost Peter could not bring himself to say that Jesus is God, but a man. He didn't even call Jesus by His messianic (but human title) the "Son of God" (the term used for angles and kings).
The plain fact is that calling Jesus God would have resulted in Peter being crucified for blasphemy, and even calling Him a messiah, the Son of God, would have had the same consequence because Jesus didn't satisfy the seven Judaic requirements for a messiah (He satisfied only one—being Jewish!), so Peter would have been nailed to the cross for spreading untruth.
And what are we to make out of signs? Mat 12:39, Mark 18:12 and Luke 11:29 all say that could will not give sings. But Mark contradicts himself in 16:20, and besides Acts you mention, it is only John who says Jesus gave sings (John 3:2, and 20:30). Hello, Houston, we have a problem, bleep.
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.