Posted on 01/20/2002 5:02:48 PM PST by CCWoody
My genetic makeup, the laws of society, economic limitations, laws of 'nature' (God). No man is ever born totally free and no one who denies Total Depravity but accepts depravity (Original sin) ever states that.
ftD who is it that decided who your parents would be? Who is it that decided what your genetic makeup would be? Who is it that determined the time and place of your birth? Your personality and your wealth?
You act like that was random chance .
"I know the plans I have for you..."
You do need to give God more credit "Before you were born I knew you..."
Do you suppose he means the "visible" church as opposed to the "Bride of Christ"? And I do mean "opposed" to..
Just silliness here Jerry....to my mind "predestination "to much of that church is predestination to hell .. (sadly so)
You may be interested in a sound biblical study about the Lost Tribes as well.
Lost Tribes
The first thing I do note is the assertion "...it's plain Jesus is addressing the Jews as Israel, his lost people. Jew and was Israel synonymous." This means the author is making the easy and traditional mistake of not properly separating the Northern and Southern Kingdoms. To fail to account for the migrations of the Northern Kingdom after their escape from Assyria is a fatal flaw in any analysis. To say they just "assimilated" is the lazy way out. To say "Jesus was really saying something else" is to ignore the mounting archeological evidence that they were the same people as the Celts and accept intellectual defeat.
It is unfortunate the Bible uses words and phrases like "Israel", and "Children of Israel", and many more to mean different things at different times and different places. Without parsing them carefully to identify their intended subjects leads to all sorts of mischief.
-Regards
Yes, God knew each and every one of us and He chose to create us for His glory. He made a way of salvation for each and every one of us. He did not exclude Jimmy in order to save Bobby. He did not place more value on one's soul than the other. Do you not think that it grieves God that His beloved creation turns away from Him? God did not handpick a few out of the many that He created. Over and over He has shown mercy to His creation even though He was grieved that He ever created us. Hell was not created for man but rather for the devil and his angels. Because many have chosen to neglect and reject Jesus hell will be their eternal place also. Jesus died for each and every one of us. The Holy Spirit draws each of us. What we choose to do with Him is the key.
Have you not read C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, do you not understand 'Natural Law'? I have never met a person who did not understand that they are a sinner. Many of them do not know the answer to their 'sin problem', but they know they have a problem. God places the knowledge of right and wrong in the heart and soul of every man. It is part of the nature of man. God created us with this knowledge.
On what basis do you conclude that the document drafted and approved at the Counsel of Dort, from which TULIP was formed, should be put on the same level as the Word of God, the Bible? Isn't it possible they got it wrong?
Which denomination are you a member of?
My doubts are enhanced by the fact that those spreading the word of these teachings had an agenda of conversion, and knew the claim of a miracle here and there would enhance business.
But the final product, whatever the changes, substitutions, add-ons, etc.. is still pretty darn good, IMHO.
You don't get out much, do you?
I remember a very troubling conversation that I had with my grandmother many years ago when I was sharing the Gospel with her. She stated that she did not believe that she had ever sinned, in fact, her exact words were: "I may have swatted a naughty boy a time or two, but I don't believe that I have ever sinned". And then, there is the Orthodox Jewish rabbi I witnessed to once who stated "Since childhood I have not transgressed the law of God".
These are not isolated instances, I have discovered that before anyone can be saved they must first come to the realization of their lostness. Most people think they are just "hunky-dorry", and have no need for a Savior.
You need to get out more often. These people are all around you.
[Husker] John 3:16. 'nuff said.
But the Calvinist, taking a cue from our former President Clinton, would say, "But that depends on what the definition of 'all' is."
May you be blessed in your study of God's Word.
It is unfortunate the Bible uses words and phrases like "Israel", and "Children of Israel", and many more to mean different things at different times and different places. Without parsing them carefully to identify their intended subjects leads to all sorts of mischief.
Actually, I see this as one of the many beauties in God's Word, it causes me to depend on Him all the more...as He tells us in
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
One really has to submit to the authority of the scriptures and have a teachable heart. That, praise God is the work of the Holy Spirit.
1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Acts 17:10-12 10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
...and may the Lord bless YOU as you travel lifes journey. May He open your mind to that which has been a mystery to you. May his rewards to you be as bountiful as those to me, both spiritual and financial, and may you see the error of Your ways as you read His Word and review his works.
May the ambiguity which pervades your thinking be replaced by certainty in Gods larger plan, and may you not confuse that which You write with the word of god.
"Therefore by the deeds of the 'law' there shall NO flesh be justified (made acceptable) in His sight:..."
Romans 3:20
So is C S Lewis your spiritual guide?
Conscience was a result of the fall..yes we all have a conscience ..but for many sin is something that makes them feel bad..once they feel "better" it as my granddaughter says "all gone "
Most people if asked will say that people are "good"..only a few say they are "dirty rotten sinners" :) Intellectual understanding of sin is very different than spiritual awareness. Most people do not think they will go to hell because they are "good people" Just listen to the self deception at any funeral.
On what basis do you conclude that the document drafted and approved at the Counsel of Dort, from which TULIP was formed, should be put on the same level as the Word of God, the Bible? Isn't it possible they got it wrong?
*grin* Is it possible CS Lewis is wrong ?*grin*
Which denomination are you a member of?
Irrelevant
I understand and appreciate the possiblity of errors and additions creeping into an ancient text. But just for comparison purposes, some observations and a table:
"The great scholar F.F. Bruce in The New Testament Doctrine vividly pictures the comparison between the New Testament and ancient historical writings: "Perhaps we can appreciate how wealthy the New Testament is in manuscript attestation if we compare the contextual material for other ancient historical works. For Caesar's Gallic War (composed between 58 and 50 B.C.) there are several extant MSS, but only nine or ten are good, and the oldest is some 900 years later than Caesar's day. Of the 142 books of t he Roman history of Livy (59 B.C.-A.D. 17) only 35 survive; these are known to us for not more than 20 MSS of any consequence,- only one of which, and that containing only fragments of Books IIIVI, is as old as the fourth century. Of the 14 books of the Histories of Tacitus (c. A.D. 100) only four and a half survive; of the 16 books of his Annals, 10 survive in full and two in part. The text of these extant portions of his two great historical works depends entirely on two MSS, one of the ninth century and one on the eleventh.
"The extant MSS if his minor works (Dialogus de Oratoribus, Agricola, Germania) and all descend from a codex of the tenth century. The history of Thucydides (c. 460-400 B.C.) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest belonging to c. A.D. 900, and a few papyrus scraps, belonging to about the beginning of the Christian era. The same is true of the History of Herodotus (B.C. 488-428). Yet no classic scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest MSS of their works are of any use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals." 7/16f.
The following is taken from F.W. Hall, "MS Authorities for the Text of the Chief Classical Writers," Companion to Classical Text (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913).
| AUTHOR | When Written | Earliest Copy | Time Span | No. of Copies |
| Caesar | 100-44 B.C. | 6900 A-D. | 1,000 yrs. | 10 |
| Livy | 59 B.C.-A.D.17 | 20 | ||
| Plato (Tetralogies) | 427-347 B.C. | 900 A-D. | 1,200 yrs. | 7 |
| Tacitus (Annals) | 100 A.D. | 1,100 A.D. | 1,000 yrs. | 20 |
| also minor works | 100 A.D. | 1,100 A.D. | 900 yrs. | 1 |
| Pliny the Younger (History) | 61-113 A.D. | 850 A.D. | 750 yrs. | 7 |
| Thucydides (History) | 460-400 B.C. | 900 A.D. | 1,300 yrs. | 8 |
| Suetonius (De Vita Caesarun) | 75-160 A.D. | 950 A.D. | 800 yrs. | 8 |
| Herodotus (History) | 480-425 B.C. | 900 A-D. | 1,300 yrs. | 8 |
| Horace | 900 yrs. | |||
| Sophocles | 496-406 B.C. | 1,000 A.D. | 1,400 yrs. | 100 |
| Lucretius | Died 55 or 53 B.C. | 1,100 yrs. | 2 | |
| Cattillus | 54 B.C. | 1,550 A.D. | 1,600 yrs. | 3 |
| Etiripedes | 480-406 B.C. | 1,100 A.D. | 1,500 yrs. | 9 |
| Demosthenes | 383-322 B.C. | 1,100 A.D. | 1,300 yrs. | 200* |
| Aristotle | 384-322 B.C. | 1,100 A-D. | 1,400 yrs. | 5 + |
| Aristophanes | 450-385 B.C. | 900 A-D. | 1,200 yrs. | 10 |
* All-from one copy.
+ Of any one work.
| Illiad | 500-600 years | 12 copies |
| New Testament | 50-300 years | 14,000 copies and counting |
Writings of Church Fathers
90-150 A.D. - 36,000 quotations covering all but 19 verses of the New Testament
10,000 places of error
9,600 are easily replaceable
350 are insignificant
Of remaining 50, none are in important doctrinal texts
98.33% accuracy"
excerpt from "Evidence that demands a verdict"
My doubts are enhanced by the fact that those spreading the word of these teachings had an agenda of conversion, and knew the claim of a miracle here and there would enhance business.
Yes, they did have an agenda of conversion, but the question is, were they lying in order to increase business, as we see in some of our beloved TV hucksters today? About the only 'enhanced business' I can see most of the early disciples got got was being put to death. They might risk death to spread such a message if they were somehow deceived into believing that Jesus had actually risen from death, but how would that have happened? Did Jesus somehow manage to convince his disciples that he had risen from death when he really hadn't? How could he do that after his execution by the Romans, even if he had wanted to? And if he somehow managed to do so, what does that say about his moral character?
On the other hand, would his disciples knowingly risk death for spreading what they knew was a lie? What would that say about their moral character?
Cordially,
So you do not think that God knew we would not be obedient?
There is a Greek adjective similar to our English adjective "many". In Greek -- as in English -- when one says "many bears are brown" one can safely deduce that not "all" bears are brown.
However, there is another Greek phrase best translated as "the many". It is a noun and not an adjective. It is comparable to the english word "multitude." It is NOT a subset of "all".
It is difficult to convey this in English. Let me try again.
Many sinners in this world will die.
(The reader can safely assume I am not talking about ALL the sinners.)
The many sinners in this world will die.
(The reader can safely assume I am talking about ALL sinners and making the additional comment that there sure are a bunch of sinners in this world.)
Does that help?
In one, "many" is being used as an adjective and in the other "the many" is being used as a noun.
One more note...
If the 1st 'many' must mean 'all' since we know from Rom.3:22 that all have sinned, the second 'many' must mean all also.
In the first clause, Paul writes of "THE MANY" sinners. In the second clause, Paul writes of "THE MANY" righteous. The two occurences do not refer to the same thing. You are still thinking of "many" as an adjective modifying "people". That isn't correct. The Greek doesn't use an adjective -- it uses the noun "THE MANY."
About the only 'enhanced business' I can see most of the early disciples got got was being put to death. They might risk death to spread such a message if they were somehow deceived into believing that Jesus had actually risen from death, but how would that have happened? Did Jesus somehow manage to convince his disciples that he had risen from death when he really hadn't? How could he do that after his execution by the Romans, even if he had wanted to? And if he somehow managed to do so, what does that say about his moral character?It was red, wet ground over which the feet of the saints spread the Gospel and it will be red, wet ground which will finish the Great Commission given to those of us who love Him. The end is in sight and the known number of unreached nations, tongues, tribes and people groups is down to a handful. How long O God!
I'm less concerned with that, or about any of the personal flaws of the messengers, than the truth of what was said as regards those teaching i hold in high regard.
I guess what I mean is that something like the Golden Rule or love thy neighbor doesn't require the backing of a perfect or supernatural moral authority for me to recognize it as a good thing. I'm already sold on that. My own reason and judgement tells me that, just as it rejects certain elements of that same Sermon on the Mount as incompatible with my concept of morality.
I can't accept the miraculous claims because I see no convincing evidence to suspend my acceptance of natural, objective reality. But whether the claims of miracles were invented or added here or there, or for what reason, or by whom, is less important to me than the good of the message.
After all, I don't (and neither do you) believe for one minute the idea that Buddha ascended into a higher plane because of his Enlightenment, but there are many things in Buddhist teachings we both regard as true and good. I don't believe for a minute (nor do you) that Mohammed was the spokesman for any god, but here and there in the Qu'ran are self-evident and good truths.
That's where I'm coming from on this. Hope that wasn't too wordy. Just trying to be clear.
"Therefore by the deeds of the 'law' there shall NO flesh be justified (made acceptable) in His sight:..."
Romans 3:20
No flesh='pasa'= ALL= idom [the One (unique)vs the Many (all)]
No flesh=NO FLESH (ALL)
KJV=Textus Receptus=THE MAJORITY TEXT=The King James (Authorized) Bible Text.
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.