Posted on 01/14/2011 5:57:52 PM PST by topcat54
Evangelical book catalogs promote books such as Planet Earth: The Final Chapter, The Great Escape, and the Left Behind series. Bumper stickers warn us that the vehicle’s occupants may disappear at any moment. It is clear that there is a preoccupation with the idea of a secret rapture. Perhaps this has become more pronounced recently due to the expectation of a new millennium and the fears regarding potential Y2K problems. Perhaps psychologically people are especially receptive to the idea of an imminent, secret rapture at the present time. Additionally, many Christians are not aware that any other position relative to the second coming of Jesus Christ exists. Even in Reformed circles there are numerous people reading these books. Many of these people are unaware that this viewpoint conflicts with Scripture and Reformed Theology.
(Excerpt) Read more at reformed.org ...
Who is “us?”
Our refusal to go beyond what is revealed in these two Scriptural truths is not "masked Calvinism" ("Crypto- Calvinism") but precisely the Scriptural teaching of the Lutheran Church as it is presented in detail in the Formula of Concord (Triglot, p. 1081, paragraphs 57-59, 60b, 62, 63; M. p. 716f.): "That one is hardened, blinded, given over to a reprobate mind, while another, who is indeed in the same guilt, is converted again, etc. -- in these and similar questions Paul fixes a certain limit to us how far we should go, namely, that in the one part we should recognize God's judgment. For they are well-deserved penalties of sins when God so punished a land or nation for despising His Word that the punishment extends also to their posterity, as is to be seen in the Jews. And thereby God in some lands and persons exhibits His severity to those that are His in order to indicate what we all would have well deserved and would be worthy and worth, since we act wickedly in opposition to God's Word and often grieve the Holy Ghost sorely; in order that we may live in the fear of God and acknowledge and praise God's goodness, to the exclusion of, and contrary to, our merit in and with us, to whom He gives His Word and with whom He leaves it and whom He does not harden and reject...And this His righteous, well-deserved judgment He displays in some countries, nations and persons in order that, when we are placed alongside of them and compared with them (quam simillimi illis deprehensi, i.e., and found to be most similar to them), we may learn the more diligently to recognize and praise God's pure, unmerited grace in the vessels of mercy...When we proceed thus far in this article, we remain on the right way, as it is written, Hos. 13:9: `O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in Me is thy help.' However, as regards these things in this disputation which would soar too high and beyond these limits, we should with Paul place the finger upon our lips and remember and say, Rom. 9:20: `O man, who art thou that repliest against God?'" The Formula of Concord describes the mystery which confronts us here not as a mystery in man's heart (a "psychological" mystery), but teaches that, when we try to understand why "one is hardened, blinded, given over to a reprobate mind, while another, who is indeed in the same guilt, is converted again," we enter the domain of the unsearchable judgments of God and ways past finding out, which are not revealed to us in His Word, but which we shall know in eternal life. 1 Cor. 13:12.
Don't hate me bro.
“Christ is truly present spiritually in the Lord’s Supper.”
The context of Jesus’ statements concerning the eating of His flesh and drinking His blood was the feeding of the 5,000 around Passover time. The crowd is looking for more bread (John 6:26, “Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled”) and Jesus directs their attention to the manna that the Children of Israel ate during the exodus right after the first Passover.
Jews identified manna with the Law (Torah) (Ex. 16:4, “Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no”) and the need to daily eat it and drink it in (Sirach 24:20-24, “He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.’ All this is true of the book of Most High’s covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob”). Jesus says He is greater than the Law (Torah) (John 6:35, “And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.”)
Jesus is explaining to the Jews that believing on Him was eating and drinking (John 6:29, “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”) just like they do with the Law (eating and drinking).
I keep asking if he’s hungry or what he’s gonna eat.. never heard back on that one either.
:D
Hoss
Excellent points.
Thx for the ping.
Well put.
Thx Thx.
Of course it's real food...It's real Spiritual food...You guys are proof of this...
You may eat the bread and drink the wine every day but you still eat supper when you get home...
Even tho the Apostles ate the bread and drank the wine at the last supper, I'll guarantee with confidence that the Apostles ate again the next day...
Joh 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
So now what??? You guys drink the water but you still drink every day...
You might want to notice that Jesus did not mention to the Samaritan woman that He really was not a literal glass of water that she could drink and quench her thirst forever if she would just take a sip...It's all Spiritual...
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
Joh 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
Of course that is not literal either...I have life in me, and so does everyone else who ever lived that did not partake in the 'eucharist'...
Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
Only in your stomach and then out thru the draught...Of course this is not literal...
Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Joh 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
So the Apostles never died...Your last pope never died...
Well their flesh died...It was their spirit that doesn't die...It's Spiritual...Not literal...Not physical...
To add to you exposition are some comments on John Wycliff:
“In 12 theses he (Wycliff) declared the Church’s doctrine unscriptural annd misleading. for the first time since the promulgation of the dogma of transsubstantation by the Fourth Lateran was it seriously called into question by a theological expert........
This prohibition (by the Duke of Lancaster) Wycliff met with a still more positive avowal of his views in his CONFESSION, which closes with the noble words,
“I believe that in the end the truth will conquer”. “
(Schaff’s Hisotry of the Christian Church, Volume VI)
Wycliff was of the view that the bread and wine were symbols of Christ’s flesh and blood and that they remained so.
"God foreknows nothing contingently, but foresees, and purposes, and accomplishes every thing, by an unchangeable, eternal, and infallible will. But, by this thunderbolt, Freewill is struck to the earth and completely ground to powder. Those who would assert Freewill, therefore, must either deny, or disguise, or, by some other means, repel this thunderbolt from them."The point is, according to Luther, that salvation doesn't depend on free will. Free will is merely an appearance to man, an illusion, if anything, and that everything in man's existence and in the existence of the universe he inhabits is controlled by the will of God both from "past eternity" and in the now as it is being executed. "Every thing" that God foreknows, has planned, and is executing means "everything" or there is something that is outside of his knowledge or planning or control. Luther denies that. Therefore, everything includes every act and thought and eternal destiny of every human being as a product of God's will, planning, and execution. It may be that some latter day Lutherans have attempted to soften this. Some who call themselves Calvinists have also done as much.
"Hence it irresistibly follows, that all which we do, and all which happens, although it seem to happen mutably and contingently, does in reality happen necessarily and unalterably, insofar as respects the will of God. For the will of God is efficacious, and such as cannot be thwarted; since the power of God is itself a part of his nature: it is also wise, so that it cannot be misled. And since his will is not thwarted, the work which he wills cannot be prevented ; but must be produced in the very place, time, and measure which he himself both foresees and wills."
"If God does not foreknow all events absolutely, there must be defect either in his will, or in his knowledge; what happens must either be against his will, or beside his knowledge. Either he meant otherwise than the event, or had no meaning at all about the event, or foresaw another event, or did not foresee any event at all. But the truth is, what he willed in past eternity, he wills now; the thing now executed is what he has intended to execute from everlasting; for his will is eternal: just as the thing which has now happened is what he saw in past eternity; because his knowledge is eternal."
How nice that you give your permission that aruanan may speak. Are you comfy in your litter?
On the contrary, they have been demonstrated many times. If you choose not to believe hem, nobody can help that.
To the contrary; they have never been demonstrated. There is no Trinitarian proof in Paul; one can never come up with the dogma of the Trinity by reading only Paul. Paul taught mostly a subordinationist Jesus to the Father and a subordinationist Holy Spirit to Jesus and the Father.
Can you prove who wrote the Gospels? Or much of the NT? Come on - I challenged you guys then and challenge you now.
What are the traditions that were passed down to believers in the churches to which Paul wrote? How do you know what they were? How can you verify them?What are the traditions that were passed down to believers in the churches to which Paul wrote? How do you know what they were? How can you verify them?
Okay; I will accept that you have given up on the idea that you know who wrote the Gospels. If not, please let me know.
I cannot verify the Church documentation any more than you can. I believe; I do not claim authority. I believe in the Faith, not the little bunch that you run with.
I seem to remember providing verses where Paul taught the Trinity, but in case you missed it, here are a couple that come to mind:
1 Corinthians 12: 4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
2 Corinthians 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
You think that these prove the Trinitarian belief in coequal and coeternal God within one God? Where does it say that?
What do I have? Apparently a conversation with someone who seems to say that God is not the source of scripture. Which means you are proving every point being put against you.
Where does the Tanakh say that it is written by God? Both Luke and Revelation say explicitly that they are not. Do you even read the Bible? Or are you only concerned with caricature?
And, it means I’m done with you as your heart is hardened against God’s truth.
Pronouncing judgement against me? Another fantastic Protestant trait. Just remember that if you ever wish to try Christianity, we are open to new members, just as we have been for 2000 years.
To the contrary!!! I grew up in the very south - I was only an hour away from Lake Erie.
The authority of the apostles was not established by self-proclamation but by spiritual virtue and power, and the greater the claim to authority the more such is needed, versus self-promotion, For the kingdom of God is not in word [mans say-so], but in power." (1 Corinthians 4:20) And i certainly need to seek more purity, passion and power, and daily so.
An interesting dissertation precedes this; I would agree with much of it. And I agree with this paragraph regarding the authority of the Apostles deriving from God, and not from man.
The Bible itself says that God did not author the Tanakh, Luke, or Revelation. Are you disputing the plain truth of the Bible?
Referring to my post as satanic merely means that you have no reply to the Biblical knowledge that the Tanakh, Luke and Revelation are not authored by God, by their own words.
It is not I who feels this way (ask my wife), but St. Paul. Take it up with him.
Are you saying that I am casting pearls before swine?
Was that intended to be taken as a rhetorical question or is the rather obvious answer expected?
It was intended to be a literal question.
EXACTLY!
Any actual Scripture to gainsay my posts from actual Scripture?
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.