| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/07/2013 8:58:03 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 01/16/2013 8:57:49 AM PST by marshmallow
General audience, Benedict XVI defines the Incarnation as "something unimaginable, the face of God can be seen, the process that began with Abraham is fulfilled." The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, he asks "for the great gift" to "proclaim together that Jesus is the Savior of the world."
Vatican City (AsiaNews) - "The desire to know the face of God is in every man, even the atheists," but this desire is only realized by following Christ, in whom, in the Incarnation, "something unimaginable took place, the journey that began with Abraham is fulfilled. He is the Son, the fullness of all Revelation; the mediator who shows us the face of God. "
And "to proclaim together that Jesus is the Saviour of the world" Benedict XVI asked for incessant prayers for "the great gift" of Christian unity in the forthcoming week, which begins on the 18th of this month.
Previously, in his catechesis, he again reflected on the meaning of Christmas, in a commentary on John's Gospel in which the apostle Philip asks Jesus to show them the Father. The answer of Jesus, "introduces us to the heart of the Church's Christological faith; For the Lord says: "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" (Jn 14:9).This expression summarizes the novelty of the New Testament, the novelty that appeared in the cave of Bethlehem: God can be seen, he showed his face is visible in Jesus Christ".
The theme of "seeking the face of God" is present throughout the Old Testament, so much so that the Hebrew term "face", occurs no less than 400 times, 100 of which refer to God." The of Jewish religion which the religion forbids all images, "for God can not be depicted," and "can not be reduced to an object," tells us that "God...
(Excerpt) Read more at asianews.it ...
Justice. There, now you have.
Ok, that’s enough. No where have either metmom or I “stated indirectly”, insinuated, or in any other way indicated any of those accusations you just stated. You’ve gone down a road we are all too familiar with and I for one will finish it right here. Assign meanings that aren’t there and you can take your discussion and have it with someone else or among you fellow Calvinists to make each other feel good. I’ll not give credibility to your assumptions. Have a great evening.
All of them are incorrect.
And that means all. Not some of all. Or all of some. Or some of some that seems like all.
ALL of them.
Deuteronomy 30:15-20 15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you today, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. 19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, 20 loving the Lord your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that the Lord swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.”
Choose means choose. Unless it doesn't.
Or maybe God was just implying that man has a choice and is leading us to believe that we do when we really don't.
That's a tad dishonest, dontcha think?
I hear you.
We’ve gone down to what the meaning of is is.
Got Scripture to back that up?
You want the quick answer?
God created Hell for His Glory.
He created you for the same purpose.
Coincidence?
Incorrect bb. Please note the following by Lorraine Boettner:
Predestination holds that events come to pass because an infinitely wise, powerful, and holy God has so appointed them. Fatalism holds that all events come to pass through the working of a blind, unintelligent, impersonal, non-moral force which cannot be distinguished from physical necessity, and which carries us helplessly within its grasp as mighty river carries a piece of wood.
Predestination teaches that from eternity God has had one unified plan or purpose which He is bringing to perfection through this world order of events. It holds that all of His decrees are rational determinations founded on sufficient reason, and that He has fixed one great goal “toward which the whole creation moves.” Predestination holds that the ends designed in this plan are first, the glory of God; and second, the good of His people. On the other hand Fatalism excludes the idea of final causes. It snatches the reins of universal empire from the hands of infinite wisdom and love, and gives them into the hands of a blind necessity. It attributes the course of nature and the experiences of mankind to an unknown, irresistible force, against which it is vain to struggle and childish to repine.
According to the doctrine of Predestination the freedom and responsibility of man are fully preserved. In the midst of certainty God has ordained human liberty. But Fatalism allows no power of choice, no self-determination. It makes the acts of man to be as utterly beyond his control as are the laws of nature. Fatalism, with its idea of irresistable, impersonal, abstract power, has no room for moral ideas, while Predestination makes these the rule of action for God and man.
Fatalism has no place for and offers no incentives to religion, love, mercy, holiness, justice, or wisdom, while Predestination gives these the strongest conceivable basis. And lastly, Fatalism leads to skepticism and despair, while Predestination sets forth the glories of God and of His kingdom in all their splendor and gives an assurance which nothing can shake.
Predestination Versus Fatalism
2) A fatalist would say Adam fall was destined to occur by unknown forces. He was meant to take the fruit just by chance and his fall just happened.
3) A free will person would say it was Adam's decision to take the fruit but Adam failed to understand the full ramifications of his decision. But what is not discussed is God's involvement.
Dear brother in Christ, I do not believe it is true that "man can't make the right choices. But this is the way it has been designed."
While I appreciate your personal beliefs bb, with all due respect this is not what the scriptures teaches us. No one does what is good, no not one. It not only teaches this in Romans but in the Psalms. Our Lord plainly told us we are evil. And, yes, God designed us like this so that we would understand grace and mercy. He placed the tree in the garden. If nothing else He knew and understood what we would be like.
I would serious recommend reconsidering your position as 1) you are stating that man can make the right choices for God which is the Pelagius heresy, and 2) you are stating that none of this was by design.
I'm well aware of the "righteous indignation" that posters tend to display. When I parrot back their comments, they get all huffy about. Rather than produce evidence to the contrary they simply say, "I didn't say any of those things." I've been down this road many times before. After all, only Calvinists are wrong and legalistic in their views. And we're very nasty, disagreeable people.
No, I don't think it's a tad dishonest. I'll stand by my points. I'd suggest going back through your posts and match my points up against what you have written. It may be illuminating.
Inward calling....
Act 9:1 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest
Act 9:2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.
Act 9:3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him.
Act 9:4 And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?"
Act 9:5 And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
Act 9:6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do."
Act 9:7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
Groan...why me... ;O)
So God just put this whole world together to just use man in such a dastardly way as to plan to create him knowing that it was just to send some of them to eternal torment in a plan to bring glory to Him! Wow! I just can’t get over that statement. “Adam was ordained to fall according to God’s plan”. Calvinists can’t think of any way that an omniscient, omnipresent, infallible God could create a system that would bring glory to Him without the eternal torment of the creatures He created? Seriously? And you don’t see how sick and twisted that theology is?
All right let’s do that metmom.
Here are some statements you made:
“In looking back you and CB have stated indirectly:”
1) God is not omnipotent. Man is capable of resisting God, at least in the area of salvation. If so, then there is no need to pray for the salvation of others since that is their choice.
Show us where either one of us said or implied or “stated indirectly” that “God is not omnipotent”.
2) God is not omniscience. God does not know whether a man will come to Christ or not. Someone who has not yet been born has not yet made their choice. [Note: there was the time corridor discussion but although God can look down through time, He can't do anything to stop it.]
Show us where either on of us said or implied or “stated indirectly” that “God is not omniscient”. We’ll start with those. Show us the post you say shows that either of us implied, or “stated indirectly” either of those accusations you made.
That’s one instance. You stated it applies to all those God calls. Or are you saying that all who God calls are struck blind until they believe?
Parrot back? You read into our comments something that you would like us to have said and claim that as “parroting back”? Not in the real world it isn’t.
Here's your problem, cyn.
He did.
Do you deny the existence of Hell?
Do you deny that God will consign certain people to a place of eternal torment?
Was Jesus a liar, or was he misquoted?
What makes no sense is the outrage about why hell was created in the free will paradigm because if God knew that some people would make bad choices and choose to reject God and end up in hell why would God create it?
When the Reformed position is not only that man can only make bad choices because God predetermined it, only chooses to save some, holds the rest responsible for their actions that they had no choice about committing because God predestined them for it, and then punishes them for those decisions they had no choice over.
The reformed position does not explain why God chose to create either man or hell if He planned on sending the majority of the human race there with no option for avoiding it.
I’m not following you here.
Which ones?
Not these......
In post 274 you start out with.... In looking back you and CB have stated indirectly:
OK, that is NOT parroting back. That is suggesting based on your interpretation.
So show me where either CB or I ever stated these things.....
1) God is not omnipotent. Man is capable of resisting God, at least in the area of salvation. If so, then there is no need to pray for the salvation of others since that is their choice.
2) God is not omniscience. God does not know whether a man will come to Christ or not. Someone who has not yet been born has not yet made their choice. [Note: there was the time corridor discussion but although God can look down through time, He can't do anything to stop it.]
3) The conversions of Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Paul and others are anomalies throughout history. These are special times when God had to step in to do something-anything-to get things moving.
4) God states that His desire is that all men be saved. According to your view "all men" means exactly that-all men. Yet we know from evidence around us that all men are not saved. Since you don't believe in universalism, the desires of God are not satisfied.
5) Hell is a punishment reserved for the angels. It was an after thought to cast disobedient men into the eternal flames of hell.
6) Some of Christ's teachings like, "You did not choose me but I chose you." are meant strictly for the disciples. Others are for all of us. The scriptures are unclear as to which is which.
One example that doesn’t specifically state that someone or anyone cannot resist God’s inward calling.
It’s only an account of what happened, not of what was going on in Paul’s heart or behind the scenes.
As someone said upthread, God knows all possible outcomes and based on that can do what is needed to ensure the best possible outcome for everyone. It’s based on foreknowledge, but foreknowledge does not equate to orchestrating every detail.
Otherwise, you’d have God responsible for all the evil in the world because He created it and caused it to happen.
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.