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."
*** Do I understand correctly that you believe that God actually does have a “plan”, which He takes infallible steps to implement, that cannot be thwarted by man’s free will? From your statement it sounds like you do think He has a plan, but it is just on a much smaller scale than we think God’s plan is. But, I don’t want to put words into your mouth so I would just ask if you would care to elaborate a little bit.***
Okay. God does not have a “plan”. He is everywhere and everywhen and experiences/experienced/will experience all of Creation in a single instant. There are things that He has ordained, sure. But I would consider that to be the framework of Creation. Man sure isn’t going to upset that.
The instance of the neighbour? I’m not sure of the extent that it happens. God created the Flood and nobody got out alive that wasn’t supposed to. But one can take it to ridiculous lengths and claim that because God is not stopping me shooting my neighbour, then He authorizes me to do it. I’ve heard that argument (not taken that far, admittedly) from some of my Protestant brethren right here.
That is not what the Church ever believed or believes to this day. That is a Protestant innovation, among many. The Church taught for 1,500 years before Luther came on stage that man's will is mortally wounded but not dead, in need of a phyisican (cf Mar 2:17, Mat 9:12, Luk 5:31), and that's exactly what it teaches today.
Perhaps for the same reason Jesus is saying the same thing in Luke?
But FK will tell you these never really believed. To which I say, but they claimed they "knew" they were saved until they were tempted.
Sure, it's easy to be "certain" when things go well. True Christians showed their colors when things got rough.
Isn't that what the story of Peter betraying Christ is all about: those who thump their chest and claim how they "know" they believe and are saved, and would never leave God, are the first to do just that?
34Jesus said to him, "Truly I say to you that this very night, before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times."
35Peter said to Him, "Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You." All the disciples said the same thing too." [Mat 26:33-35]
So much for "certainty."
Bingo! Yet another works-based salvational tip from Christ in the New Testament! :)
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil. [2 Cor 5:10]
Even from Paul.
Mat 25: 31-46..."
More of the same....
But in all fairness, the Bible is somewhat wishy-washy about this too.
Salvation is works-based according to Ps 62:12 "for you render to each according to his works," and Prov 10:16, Jer 17:10, Eze 18:27, Mat 5:20, 12:37, 16:27, 19:17;, and 25 which you mentioned. (5/9 or 56% NT and 44% OT)
Faith-based salvation has no OT counterpart. It starts with Mark 16:16, then it contnues Acts 16:30 (mostly Paul), and the rest is Paul! (Rom 1:16-17, 3:20, 28, 4:2, 13, 5:1, 10:9, Gal 3:11-12, Eph 2:8-9, and Titus 3:5), and ends with with John 3:18, 36. (11 out of 14 or 79% Paul, 86% if you count Acts as Paul or Paul-based)
Cleraly, Matthew is out of sync with Mark and John and Luke/Paul, but no one will talk about that! :) Protestants have no problem quoting from the Psalms and Proverbs when nit suits them, but cleverly avoid those works-based verses because Paul claims God told him otherwise.
Clearly, the faith-based salvation is overwhelmingly a Pauline theology.
You see the metaphors Christ used as absolutes. They are not. Clear declaratives by God give the hard truth. Take it up with Him, not Luther - these Scriptures weren’t written by him:
Gen 5:3 “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth”
Eph 2:1-10 “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins: Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”
Col 2:13 “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses”
1 Peter 2:24 “Who (Christ) his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”
This verse shows that the healing (this relates to Isaiah as well as to the verses you cited) is the spiritual resurrection to new life in Christ that takes place when one is born again.
The penalty of sin is death. All men are born in sin - spiritually dead. The blood of the Lamb covered the sins of many, giving new life to those who believe on Christ.
If people are merely ill, sin’s penalty is not death and saving faith would nor result in new life in Christ.
The Bible’s teaching about unregenerate man is not contained in those 3 verse you cited.
Where I'm going with this is as follows....
God's creatures are created by God (who is Love),so God's intention can not be flawed from the very moment God thought of each one of us or God would be flawed.Free Will is also God's intention because love cannot force
The mistake you're making is not understanding that love must be freely given by God in order to be love, and man must be free to accept that love.
Once love becomes SELF seeking it ceases to be love and becomes pride and sin,as in the case of the devil
If God took Free Will away from His creatures than all of God's creatures would have to be sinless or God would be flawed.
The reformed take away free will and say God ordains evil,but if you follow that concept to it's original source it points to God being the creator of evil.
More Aquinas
That there is not any Sovereign Evil, acting as the Principle of All Evils
A sovereign evil should be without participation in any good, as that is the sovereign good which is wholly removed from evil. But there cannot be any evil wholly removed from good, since evil is founded on good (Chap. XI)http://www2.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/gc3_11.htm.
2. If anything is sovereignly evil, it must be evil by its very essence, as that is sovereignly good which is good by its essence. But evil has no essence (Chap. VII).http://www2.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/gc3_7.htm
3. That which is a first principle is not caused by anything. But all evil is caused by good (Chap. X). There is therefore no evil first principle.http://www2.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/gc3_10.htm
5. The incidental must be posterior to the ordinary. But evil happens only incidentally and beside the intention (Chap. IV). Therefore it is impossible for evil to be a first principle.http://www2.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/gc3_4.htm
Hereby is excluded the error of the Manicheans.
Also ending the error of the reformed and John Calvin!
I'm tired of going round and round on this.
I wish you a Blessed day!
I said that because your interpretation of the Bible has it contradicting itself in MANY places. I see that as "going after" the credibility and authority of the Bible itself, since it is incomprehensible that God would breathe a false or even flawed document. Contradictions would be flaws. OTOH, our interpretation of the Bible has it being one harmonious and TRUE revelation from God, without true contradiction. From my reading of the Catechism, my guess was that the Latin Church's position would be much more in line with ours, and not in agreement with your analysis.
For Acts 2:24 my NIV does not have "again" and neither does the KJV, and neither does the ESV, which many Reformers also use.
I'm saying that He DID take Mary's nature because He took her blood. Whether we say that the sin nature is only passed down through the male, or that Mary passed on the sin nature but it was instantly cleansed, the result is the same. Sinless Jesus. The Bible just doesn't give us those mechanics.
FK: Plus, if Mary was only a surrogate then prophecy is broken since Jesus did not come from the Davidic line. "Son of David" would be a complete lie.
Jesus' Davidic line is as wishy-washy as it gets. His genealogies don't match, and Jesus denies it Himself when He says "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?..."For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother." [Mat 12:48, 50]
I'd say it is more than a big stretch to say Jesus was commenting on His genealogy here. :) But if we go with your view, then the Bible contains false prophecy, something other scriptures warn against as being from satan. I cannot go to that place so I disagree with your take. Also, I like the verse you quoted because it helps to put Mary in the proper perspective. The Church certainly doesn't appear to like this verse very much.
In the ancient Middle East, there are no female genealogies.
God wanted it in, so it's in. :)
Also note another "works-based" reference to those who are Jesus' brothers and sisters.
Just like the many others like it, it is a true statement. It just doesn't give the whole time line. The people God selects as His elect will be touched by God and will come to faith. THEN, they will all seek to do the will of the Father and be brothers and sisters, etc. of Christ. Perseverance is required and guaranteed to happen by God.
It's not "new" life; it's the same life, but changed. It's not a new heart, but a changed heart. It's not new will, but changed will.
You die to your old ways and are "born again" in new ways. It's like being a habitual smoker and kicking the habit with God's help.
If you are truly a reformed smoker or a reformed alcoholic, you will never go back to either.
The penalty of sin is death
Yes because unrepentant sin is separation from God, who is life. He is our life-support System.
The blood of the Lamb covered the sins of many, giving new life to those who believe on Christ.
That is not the uninterrupted teaching of the Church. Christ took the sins of all mankind on himself as ransom for our freedom from death. That was a gift.
With the freedom He gained for us, those who come to Him freely in Baptism and Faith are justified in God's eyes. That we have to work for by dying to our old ways and living a life of imitating Christ.
The Bible’s teaching about unregenerate man is not contained in those 3 verse you cited
So what makes Paul greater authority than Matthew, Mark or Luke? The teaching about the unregenerate man is Paul's theology, not the teaching of the Bible as a whole, or for that matter the Church as a whole.
I suggest you read both genealogies and explain why they can't agree who Joseph's father was, among other discrepancies. The easiest thing to say is "it's a false eprophesy and I reject it" and stick your head in the sand and pretend the sun doesn't shine, FK.
You expressed that beautifully,Dear Brother.May God Bless you
I'm not changing any common meanings, I am using them. :) The distinction I am drawing is that "command" is from a superior TO a subordinate. God gives His children many commands in the scriptures. "Ordain" means to decree that "X" will happen by means I determine. Many times an ordination will include commands, but it doesn't have to. Therefore, God does not communicate to His children saying "I command you to do evil". And no one has cause to say "I hear and obey you God, I will do evil". That doesn't happen.
FK: "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."
Guilty as charged, FK. I can't answer all lengthy diatribes from a dozen or so concurrent posters. If I found something new or something that hasn't been rehashed in the past, or if I had changed my mind vis-a-vis Luther's pecca fortier, I would have replied. My silence is usually an indication that something is "same old, same old."
I have never seen you address any of the arguments in that paper so I just assumed you couldn't refute any of the arguments. I suppose I am forced to continue to do so until I see otherwise. I gave you access to a good refutation of your view of pecca fortier (coincidentally six months ago today) and you dismissed it with virtually no comment. That just tells me that you are uninterested in what Luther was really talking about.
FK: It was God's choice by ordination, and Adam's choice by execution.
Huh? It is my choice by "ordination" and the computer's "choice" by execution?
No, I reject the premise of any comparison between God and man, and man and computer. It doesn't fit at all. If anything, there are some on the Apostolic side that see man as machine, but none on the Reformed side.
If God wills us to do things then we do it, like a computer. No choice of execution here.
No, not like a computer at all. Man has a will.
No, according to the Reformed theology, God specifically made the serpent, and placed him in the garden so as to deceive Eve and make Adam fall for it. God didn't just "let it happen." He orchestrated the whole thing—out of "love" no doubt.
While God certainly made the serpent, the Bible says no where that God "commanded" him to go into the garden and do what he did. He just appears and we presume that a sovereign God must have allowed that. But, it WAS a knowing allowance.
If I put my "power" over you (i.e. by hypnosis), so that you cannot resist, and make you commit a crime while in that state, claiming that I am "guilty" only of "allowing it to happen" would not stand.
No. Hypnotism is a positive act. I was fine before, but then you acted and I was hypnotized. God does nothing like that when sin is ordained. By comparison God just leaves the room, leaving the person to his own devices. God leaves him CLOSER to his born nature. That is moving in the opposite direction of hypnotism.
FK: Of course Adam wanted to sin.
This means you are suggesting that Adam's created nature (before the Fall) was sinful? That's a new one!
No, I am not suggesting anything of the sort. Adam was not created with a sin nature. The Bible is clear about that. I was saying that Adam wanted to sin at that particular time, i.e., that he was not compelled to sin by God acting directly on him. If you disagree that Adam wanted to sin, then who do YOU say forced him to sin?
Reformed theology leads exactly to that end: if God didn't want evil in the world, then evil would not be in the world. The only reason evil exists in the world is because God made it.
Evil is not a "thing" to be made, it is not a creation. It is the absence of God. If God had put His positive protection on all things for all time in the universe, then there would be no such thing as evil. However, God chose differently. If you blame God for that, then you place a duty upon Him.
So, God creates all men with defective will because of Adam?
Defective nature, yes. Paul talks extensively about this.
Or is it that Adam's nature changed after the Fall and fallen humans have fallen offspring by nature?
No, that can't be the case because for example:
Jer 1:5 : "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."
There are several other examples just like this. God creates each one of us.
Thus, like a drug-addicted baby, whose addiction is not his, but his mother's fault, man's addiction to sin is a consequence of Adam's sin and not his sin.
It sounds like you're sort of trying to take both sides of the position. :) Man does not create man, God does. God creates all things. When God creates us now, Adam's sin "goes into" the new creation. God obviously set it up that way, since there was no requirement that Adam's sin be passed down, but by God's ordination.
FK: Under the Apostolic view, God appears to let His children run amok, doing whatever they want at all times.
Nonsense, FK. The Church doesn't teach that, and you know that. :)
I don't know that. :) I have been told a thousand times that God never interferes with the free will of men. When does He do so?
There are some things that appear to contradict each other, at least on the surface. That is why we understand that the Bible is not completely self-evident and needs to be interpreted by the same authority that put it together in the first place.
Wow! I agree 100% with your whole statement, word for word. :)
ordain "1: to invest officially (as by the laying on of hands) with ministerial or priestly authority 2 to establish or order by appointment, decree, or law [Marriam-Webster's Dictionary]
Seems to me you are not only changing the common meanings, but inventing them. :) Convenient. Ordination contains is synonymous with command or expresison of authority in every instance.
I have never seen you address any of the arguments in that paper so I just assumed you couldn't refute any of the arguments. I suppose I am forced to continue to do so until I see otherwisep
Well, in all fairness, perhaps I should have and I apologize. If you still have a copy, please resubmit and I will make sure I respond.
My previous experience with Luther leads me to believe that he was not irrefutable.
No, I reject the premise of any comparison between God and man, and man and computer. It doesn't fit at all
And I reject your rejection! How's that for an FK argument? :)
No, not like a computer at all. Man has a will
But, it's God's will one way or another. That's what the Reformed believe. So, what good is it that you have a will if you are predestined to do as God wants you to do?
While God certainly made the serpent, the Bible says no where that God "commanded" him to go into the garden and do what he did
Well, is it the serpent's will or God's will working through the serpent? Or was God caught off guard? /sar/
God leaves him CLOSER to his born nature
which is God's creation! certainly that nature doesn't exist independent of God.
If you disagree that Adam wanted to sin, then who do YOU say forced him to sin?
In the Reformed theology, Orthodox Judaism and Islam, the answer is God. Or else God is not in control. :)
No, that can't be the case because for example: Jer 1:5 : "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."
Then where does the "original sin" come in? Man's nature changed after the Fall in that man became mortal and all his offspring are mortal; that's what is meant by "nature."
Man does not create man, God does. Then our sin-nature is made by God intentionally! Then we are manufactured into sinners by God's own hands. I will use the FK argument here: I reject that.
i>God obviously set it up that way, since there was no requirement that Adam's sin be passed down, but by God's ordination.
Did you get that in the Bible?
I have been told a thousand times that God never interferes with the free will of men. When does He do so?
He doesn't interfere but He intercedes.
***Seems to me you are not only changing the common meanings, but inventing them. :) Convenient. Ordination contains is synonymous with command or expresison of authority in every instance. ***
ordain: 1. to appoint ceremonially to the Christian priesthood, 2. to destine, 3. to appoint or decree authoritatively. (Oxford American Dictionary)
All depends on what you read, it seems to me.
Should have pinged you, too. Sorry.
Then why does Paul say that it is possible to lose one’s salvation? Rom 11 [21-24]: ...
Kosta is right that my answer is that the ones who remain in unbelief never had true faith. I zoom in on verse 23:
Rom 11:23 : And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
This describes a lot of people who are given true faith, but then fall away for a limited time. I did that in college. But then, all those who have true faith always come back. Christ promises this. Christ loses NONE of the sheep the Father gives Him. Only believers are sheep. So, if Paul is saying we can lose salvation here, then he is also calling Jesus a liar in John 10:25-30. Here, Paul acknowledges that Jesus did not mean that true believers are sinless after salvation, some do fall away, but only for a time. In the end, Jesus always gathers them back. Perhaps Paul never fell away like this after he was touched by Christ, but he acknowledges that it does happen.
OK, maybe I should have known that. I suppose by extension then, you would say there are many people in hell who received God's gift of saving grace. Of course we would say that's impossible. It wouldn't be saving grace if people in hell had it.
FK: ***There is consequence for sins after salvation. These consequences can take any form.***
Such as? You are not very clear in differentiating hardships endured on Earth versus some sort of nebulous something or other in Heaven. What are the punishments that you think will happen in Heaven?
I wasn't talking about anything in Heaven. As I was using the term, salvation happens at the point of belief on earth, and I was talking about the discipline God metes out to us on earth. Any hardship we suffer may or may not be a discipline. There can't be punishment in Heaven because there can't be sin in Heaven.
FK: ***That matches the Catechism. So there really is no such thing as “saving grace”. The best that God offers is “enabling grace”.***
Well, if you don’t have it, then you cannot be saved. The thief on the cross didn’t have it until the very end; it was of his own volition that he asked to receive it. The other thief didn’t. An illustration, anyway.
Wait a minute. :) A person has to ask? I thought that saving (enabling) grace was given to everyone and the trick was to accept it. Maybe that's what you meant. I just wasn't sure if there was an extra step in there I wasn't aware of, i.e first you have to ask for it and then you have to accept it. :)
FK: ***Jesus spent most of the Gospels telling us if we do not obey him that we will lose our salvation???
Let’s see what He said: ....................
Those who believe in God and have done good will be resurrected and those who have done evil (regardless of belief) will be condemned. Liar?
Where does it say regardless of belief? I just don't see how this first passage says anything about having true salvation and then losing it.
2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil.
The elect do good and the lost do evil in God's eyes. What has this to do with having salvation and losing it? I'm afraid it is the same with Matt. 25.
Jesus does not lie. The Reformed appear to have left the mathematical operator “and” out of their vocabulary. You must fulfill all of God’s requirements, and not just the ones that you wish to acknowledge.
I don't understand what you're saying. We have always maintained that perseverance is part of salvation.
We understand that there is no free ride so therefore life is a Way, a Path that we must tread. We must repent for our sins - all of them.
Some adults convert to Catholicism. How do they repent for all prior sins, and given whatever that answer is what is the purpose of Baptism for them in that case? Wouldn't that be "double counting"?
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.