Posted on 12/17/2010 7:31:07 AM PST by marshmallow
I do, daily.
By the way, what did you make of the Westminster Confession, article 10?
CHAPTER 10
Of Effectual Calling
1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.
2. This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.
3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
4. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And, to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested.
Is that your belief?
And by the way, what about Matthew 2:10-12, Matthew 2:13-15 and Matthew 2:19-20? Not only that, what about what Elizabeth said to Mary when she saw her?
Keep reading it and pray for the Holy Spirit to guide your study.
Sure, but how do you reconcile that with John 3-16?
Saying “She is the parent of Christ’s humanity” is very much of the essence of the Nestorian heresy, as you would see if you took the time to read up on it.
She is the mother of the whole Jesus, the mother of His Person, the mother of Him. He is one Person, with the Divine and human natures united from the moment of His conception in her womb. He is God, and she is His Mother, from that moment onward.
Simple as that.
PS, WHAT scripture? Mind giving references? Because I don't agree.
That’s what the Westminster confession says, too. Funny Dr. E. doesn’t know that.
That’s been discussed countless times on other threads.
Look them up.
God does love the world. God made the world. And He loves those in the world who are His children.
However, there are others in this world who lie and cheat and deny Christ and give to human beings the glory that belongs to God alone.
He’s not too happy with those people. Read your Bible.
And for the umpteenth time, Elizabeth was correct. Mary was blessed by God to carry the Christ child to term.
That’s been discussed countless times on other threads.
So what? So has Mary, as the Mother of God. Doesn't stop you (plural) from bringing it up again. Can't you answer?
Some men are so blind that no amount of logic or reason can reach them.
And sadly, even the word of God falls on deaf ears.
Pray for guidance. Guidance to follow Christ alone. Not His mother, who was a sinner like the rest of us.
The Scriptural references are at the following site. Look them up yourself. (That’s what the little numbers in brackets are referring to - the Scriptural proofs. Look real hard)
http://reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/index.html
So far this evening, you have not posted any "word of God." Did you miss Elizabeth's salutation to Mary, by the way? That was great!
Did you miss my response to your question?
Twice?
So your mother was no longer your mother after she carried you to term?
When did she stop being your mother?
When did Mary stop being Jesus’ mother?
Now I know where all those unconnected and confused cherry-picked verses of scripture come from.
Thanks. ;-D
Bookmarked the site.
You mean Joseph isn't the stepfather of God??? ;o)
I think I grasp what you’re saying. Mary did not give birth to the divine nature, only to the human nature, the two being united at conception (and I assume it follows disunited at the death of the human nature) so that there was one nature, then two natures and finally one nature again but one person throughout.
So was it the PERSON (with two natures) of Jesus that died or just the human nature that died? If it was the latter, what was resurrected? If the former then was BenKenobi correct when he said:
“Yes, God died on the Cross and resurrected on the third day.” (Sun Dec 19 2010 12:33:56 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time) · 886 of 1,416
BenKenobi to count-your-change)
I think that those with . . . Nestorian tendencies (as opposed to a fully developed Nestorian theology) fail or refuse to understand or believe that "the Word became flesh." They seem to have a different -- and fuzzy -- understanding that the flesh somehow at some point involved the Word, maybe the flesh became the Word, more likely Christ's flesh somehow became the locus of the Word in some undefined fashion -- neatly avoiding the true miracle of the Incarnation and denying the Hypostatic Union.
So they claim to believe in the Divinity of Christ, but still can see the "Christ child" as something different and divorced from divinity.
I think you’re right from the context even if one could see a broader principle that would suggest marriage to an infidel would be a damaging and unequal “yoke” to the believer.
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.