Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
AMEN. We DO need miracles. Christians are in just as bad shape physically and emotionally as non-Christians. Only God can heal our pain, our bodies, our emotions, etc., etc. He is still in the miracle business, just as He’s always been. Jesus did miracles and He said his disciples would do even greater things than He. The only reason we don’t is because the church has told us this was for HIS time. Well, that’s why we’re weak. Unbelief has held us prisoner. It’s time to lay hands on the sick and expect them to recover!
Maybe you should answer why YOU haven't done those and greater things than what Christ did first.
Good night.
Don't forget to rub the cover of "The Tongue: A Creative Force" three times before turning in for the night.
Psychics say that all the time.
Pretty general stuff, thus setting the hook.
Try another tact. Nevermind, I know most all the tricks.[grin]
I have that book. I also had a prophetic message regarding reproaches that God may have put on our lives through the generational sins. It came as a 40 day spiritual exercise on Elijah List. I’m going to go through it. Has a lot of scripture and admonitions to praise. Unforgiveness is also a hindrance to healing; unbelief and doubt; all sort of things can hinder us from receiving the healing God wants to give us (curses, generational problems, occult practices, etc.).
That's as good an explanation as I've read. If we believe the miracles of the Apostolic era continue to this day, then we'd almost have to believe men can forgive other men's sins.
Which, of course, we don't believe. So I think it's a lot more Scriptural to believe all the Apostles gifts ceased with the Apostles.
That doesn't mean men can't rise to become wonderful teachers, ordained by God. It's just that the overt, supernatural things have ended because Christ risen is all the miracle any of us truly needs.
Like Harley said, by faith and not by sight.
No. But Risky has requested that I not ping him, so I removed his name from the To: box in my reply to his post.
Protestants, like any Christian on the planet, should be able to join Paul in testifying with confidence -- "I know whom I have believed."
Of course. The Catholic Church concurs.
-A8
Notice that instead of addressing my explanation of the compatibility of magisterial absolution with Christ's work on the cross, you respond by issuing two imperatives.
-A8
To your interpretation of the scriptures. Therefore, you are still the authority. And in that case, it is just lip service to church authority.
-A8
But of course this statement itself is exempt from being 20% incorrect.
-A8
Quix, they read it, but interpret it differently. What is needed is a magisterium to provide an authoritative interpretion.
-A8
Oh and that's been brought up before countless times and discounted... Somehow, the Church for 2000 years can't read simple words and figure that this is not what Peter meant!
Almost as much as James 2. Obviously, he wasn't talking about salvation, although it clearly says he was.
The obstinate who continue to reject Christ's Church only have themselves to blame for their upcoming perdition.
Regards
St. Paul would say just what he taught everywhere, that if we do not persevere we can be "severed from Christ", and "fall from grace" (Gal 5:4), and that even he himself, after preaching to others, could be "disqualified". (1 Cor 9:27) He never told anyone that we could know we are elect to glory. That is one of the Calvinist errors.
-A8
No, I believe that God teaches me how to sit in the back seat and behave like a good boy. :)
The Scriptures tell us that things happen even though God doesn't desire them. Are you denying that?
Ultimately, Yes! :) Of course there is plain meaning scripture that says that God wants all to be saved. There is no denying that. But there is also scripture that says that God needed directions in Eden, that God changes His mind, and that God was "wrong". These scriptures clearly need interpretation because they appear to conflict with the more clear understanding we are given elsewhere in scripture that God is omniscient, and omnipotent. The interpretation that is MOST consistent with the latter clearer understanding is that God always gets what He wants. We have a rational, omnipotent Being. What else can we conclude? We can say that sometimes God gets what He doesn't "enjoy", but that is different from what you are saying.
God wants us to have freedom. We do. He gave us the intellect and the means to not to be helpless little morons, but rather to be a reflection of His image and likeness, not as His little robots but as His people. And we failed. In your theology, that means, your omnipotent God either isn't omnipotent or He simply wants us to fail!
God did not cause Adam to sin, but ultimately, it is clearly what He wanted, under my theology. He could have easily prevented it in multiple ways. God always gets what He wants. He, for His own reasons, has chosen this existence for us. How do you answer people when they ask you why God allows so much suffering in the world if He is a loving God? Omnipotent God could get rid of all of it with a finger snap. Yet, He lets it persist. The answer is NOT that God turned over the control of history to humans. The answer is that for reasons we may not even be able to comprehend, this is the way God wanted it. We can make reasonable speculation such as not being able to worship and give glory to good, without knowing evil, etc. But in the end, sovereign God remains in full control, and it is not for us to question Him.
I really think the Reformed suppress the idea that this is what their theology subliminally teaches. It's a defense mechanism because it would crumble the whole foundation of their faith.
I "hope" I'm being pretty open about it. :) I don't see any crumbling. The main difference here is in Who is really running the good part of this place we call earth. We say God is directly, and I think the Apostolic Church's position is that God turned over that responsibility to man. Given the authority of the Church (more so with the Latins), God has really become "God Emeritus".
Of course He loves the damned; He loves all His creation. That's why He desires for all men to be saved. They are damned not because He created them damned (as you believe!) but because they chose to be damned by rejecting God.
You are right that the damned are damned because they chose to be damned. Damn! :) You are also correct that I believe that God created them that way, with that specific predestination. I realize this is a difficult thing for very many people to agree with. However, the ultimate responsibility still lies with the individual. God had no duty to save them, and God does all the saving. In addition, we are specifically told that God hated Esau, and from that we can extrapolate that He also hated Judas, and others. God saved only those whom He loved. An omnipotent God's sacrifice would be meaningless if He failed to save all He loved.
There is that false dichotomy again. Either God is running things or man is. We don't have to choose between occasionalism and deism. We do not have to choose between divine omnipotence and human free choice. We do not have to choose between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. These false dichotomies spawn a host of errors.
-A8
A8: And you misconstrue strength as forcing people to do what you want them to do.
Omnipotence means not NEEDING to force anyone to do anything. For the elect, they are given a new heart because God loves them. Their eyes are opened, etc. No one drags the elect kicking and screaming to salvation. They want it, fair and square. Every time. For the non-elect, God leaves them to their sinful natures, and they choose damnation, fair and square. Every time.
My construction on Biblical reality is not identical to yours . . . as you know.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
No.
I am not that inclined to kowtow to cheekiness that much.
Your perspective is the one challenging the Biblical descriptions and mandate . . . I’ve answered plenty of your questions.
It’s YOUR turn.
I was merely speaking out of my own experiences and observations . . . no great spiritual insight. And, such hunches are far from perfect or flawless or error free.
However, all things being equal . . . I have tended to see God confront such attitudes in interesting ways far more often than not.
You will know it, when it comes, if it comes . . . and will remember such exchanges.
He’s not very fond of smugness exercised against His Scriptural standards, priorities and mandates.
-A8
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.