| 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 ...
I suppose at that time I still thought you had views of your own.
>> Frankly that seems a bit disingenuous, don't you think?<<
Nope, when I find out that someone hides their own views for what appears to be fear it changes things.
>> Or you can put your theology to the test and respond honestly to all challenges put to you.<<
No thanks. If someone is afraid of their views being known there really is no sense.
>> But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: 1 Pet 3:15<<
I sincerely doubt that is your reason for asking.
I was going to say The Rich Young Ruler, but then I realized that the Rich Young Ruler came to Jesus and asked to be a follower. After setting forth a series of preliminary criteria which would be expected of a true follower, it seems that he turned Jesus down.
Perhaps someone else can give a better example.
And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.
And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand [of him whom] thou wilt send.
And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, [Is] not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart.
And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, [even] he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God. – Exodus 4:10-16
As far as post 274 goes and what has been posted, some feel I'm a little harsh so let's clear the air with the below questionaire and the opportunity to correct any theological errors.
1) God is not omnipotent. Man is capable of resisting God, at least in the area of salvation.
HarleyD: God calls men throughout creation. Men in general resist God. God calls to man through the internal call individually. Individual men cannot resist.
CB:
Metmom:
CB:
Metmom:
CB:
Metmom:
CB:
Metmom:
CB:
Metmom:
CB:
Metmom:
John 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
2 Peter 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
Then we have the parable of the sower. Some heard the word and just turned away. Then there were some who believed but later died and didn’t continue to grow. Certainly you would say that they had been called but turned back.
Matthew 13:5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: 6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
It’s even possible to turn away after receiving the knowledge of truth
Hebrews 10:26 - For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
So in your “predestination” scenario it gets a little murky when trying to fit those in I would suppose.
Jonah, until God put him in such dire circumstances that he relented.
But his heart wasn’t in it. He did it out of coercion, not a desire to serve God.
That’s simply disingenuous on its face. God is most certainly omnipotent. Knowing all does not preclude giving man a choice. Injecting that sort of hyperbole and attempting to set up a straw man won’t be given credible consideration by me.
>> 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.<<
Once again beginning with a false statement. Trying to inject that God is not omniscient to set up some sort of straw man argument won’t be responded to by me.
>> The conversions of Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Paul and others are anomalies throughout history.<<
You seem not able to help yourself with that type of nonsense.
>> God states that His desire is that all men be saved. "All men" means exactly that-all men. Since we know all men are not saved then the desires of God are not satisfied.<<
Or Calvinists totally misunderstand the teachings of scripture.
>> Hell is a punishment reserved for the angels. It was an after thought to cast disobedient men into the eternal flames of hell.<<
There you go again. Assigning human attributes to God. God doesn’t have “after thoughts”.
Nice try but trying to fit scripture into your pre-determined belief structure isn’t something I need to get involved in.
HD:1) God is not omnipotent. Man is capable of resisting God, at least in the area of salvation.
HarleyD: God calls men throughout creation. Men in general resist God. God calls to man through the internal call individually. Individual men cannot resist.
CB:?
Metmom: One of God's characteristics IS omnipotence. That does not mean that He is obligated to use it under all circumstances. He hates sin and must punish it, but the very fact that we exist and He sent Christ demonstrates that He does not always choose to use it. He doesn't have to otherwise, He would be a slave to His own nature, and He's not.
As a-g (IIRC) pointed out, God has a permissive will which is not the same as His sovereign will. Allowing us to be able to resist Him does not impugn on His nature in the least.
Man is not capable of resisting God because he is capable of it but because God permits it. So the conclusion that man being able to resist God does not mean a non-omnipotent God.
God's calling is God's calling. I see nowhere stated in Scripture that there is a difference and that one is capable of being resisted while the other isn't. Gleaning that from examples that may or may not support the theology is not really strong Scriptural support for it.
Differentiating between the two is basically theological hairsplitting. It's reminiscent of making the distinction between mortal and venial sins.
God bringing people to the breaking point does not mean that that doctrine is true. It could simply very well mean that God knows exactly what it will take to break us and does it.
Nowhere is that even suggested. On the contrary, in posts 117, 125, 129, 154, and 178, I stated the opposite, that God DOES know all because He is outside of time and can look in at any point in it that He chooses. I also believe that I stated that God can know every possible outcome of every action and situation that could have happened.
Not even a suggestion that God is not omniscient.
It appears that you are having trouble conceiving of God being outside of time looking in. And the suggestion that He can't do anything about it is pure reading into the comments. That was not suggested either. I suspect that it is because of your theology that determines how you interpret those comments.
God seeing something and not doing something about it isn't necessarily because He can't.
If God knows exactly what it will take to break us, then why doesn't he simply break everyone?
Why did he break you and me but not Nietzsche or Darwin or Fred the Atheist next door?
Maybe. Just because God does something one way one time does not mean He's obligated to do it that way all the time.
Nor does it mean that just cause He doesn't do something one way that He can't.
Nor is it to *get things moving* as if they weren't already. There is not any reason that He cannot step in and direct circumstances is it suits Him, or to let things go as they are if it suits Him. It's part of His omniscience.
Man is not capable of resisting God because he is capable of it but because God permits it. So the conclusion that man being able to resist God does not mean a non-omnipotent God.
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. - Jude 8-9
On the other hand, "Fred the atheist next door" is IMHO probably not serving a significant purpose.
1 Timothy 2:1-6 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.
2 Peter 3:8-9 8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
All is all. If you wish to claim that it doesn't mean what it says, then you may provide the Scripture that *all* means *some*. Do I think that God would rather have had men like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, et al, to be saved rather than be the evil men they were. Yes.
Scripture says that God desires all men to be saved and we know they are not. Does that mean the desire of God is not satisfied? Yes and no.
He after all, does give us the choice, so it's also His desire for us to choose.
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.”
Throwing men into hell as an afterthought cannot be logically deduced from our position, not did we imply it.
If hell is for the devil and his angels, or his followers, then that's where being who rebel against God go.
Ah, that is a good one A-G.
However, it should be noted that Moses still went and did God's will with Aaron tagging along. And, this was a decision that Moses soon learn was not without problems. It was Aaron that bowed to the people's wishes and created the golden calf that Moses later ground up and made them drink (including Aaron).
As for the example of Jonah that metmom brought up, it wasn't that he was "coerce". He later repented of his sin and follow God. BTW-one could say that Jonah's action was predestined since he was a type of Christ and our Lord used him as an example.
Of course in both of these examples we're talking about believers rebelling against God's commands. Believers, as we all are painfully aware, are constantly rebelling against God's commandments. That is why He chasten us as He did with Moses and Jonah. I should have been more specific about God coming to a non-believer and they're refusal to do God's work. Even the false prophet Balaam would not go against God.
Because they won’t be broken.
Something about people would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven.
So is God unable to break some people?
Is their will to resist stronger than God's ability to break them?
Something about people would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven.
Isn't that pretty much the natural state of Men before God changes their hearts?
Ah, but you forgot...
Joh 6:67 So Jesus said to the Twelve, "Do you want to go away as well?"
Joh 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life,
Joh 6:69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God."
Joh 6:70 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil."
Our Lord knew the hearts of people. As John states, "1Jn_2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.
As for 2 Peter 2:20, Matt 13:5, and Heb 10, those are not examples but doctrine. All of them talk about false prophets/believers.
So in your “predestination” scenario it gets a little murky when trying to fit those in I would suppose.
I wouldn't count on it. I have a whole internet to supply me with references. ;O)
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.