Posted on 01/16/2015 5:56:35 AM PST by metmom
CLASSIFICATION IS ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT of all tasks. Even in the realm of religion there are enough lights and shades to make it injudicious to draw too fine a line between men and men. If the religious world were composed of squares of solid black and solid white classification would be easy; but unfortunately it is not.
It is a grave error for us evangelicals to assume that the children of God are all in our communion and that all who are not associated with us are ipso facto enemies of the Lord. The Pharisees made that mistake and crucified Christ as a consequence.
With all this in mind, and leaning over backwards to be fair and charitable, there is yet one distinction which we dare make, which indeed we must make if we are to think the thoughts of God after Him and bring our beliefs into harmony with the Holy Scriptures. That distinction is the one which exists between two classes of human beings, the once-born and the twice-born.
That such a distinction does in fact exist was taught by our Lord with great plainness of speech, in contexts which preclude the possibility that He was merely speaking figuratively. "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God," He said, and the whole chapter where these words are found confirms that He was speaking precisely, setting forth meanings as blunt and downright as it is possible for language to convey.
"Ye must be born again," said Christ. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." This clear line of demarcation runs through the entire New Testament, quite literally dividing one human being from another and making a distinction as sharp as that which exists between different genera of the animal kingdom.
Just who belongs to one class and who to the other it is not always possible to judge, though the two kinds of life ordinarily separate from each other. Those who are twice-born crystallize around the Person of Christ and cluster together in companies, while the once-born are held together only by the ties of nature, aided by the ties of race or by common political and social interests.
Our Lord warned His disciples that they would be persecuted. "In the world ye shall have tribulation," He said, and "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake."
These are only two of many passages of the New Testament warning of persecution or recording the fact of harassment and attack suffered by the followers of the Lord. This same idea runs through the entire Bible from the once-born Cain who slew the twice-born Abel to the Book of the Revelation where the end of human history comes in a burst of blood and fire.
That hostility exists between the once-born and the twice-born is known to every student of the Bible; the reason for it was stated by Christ when He said, "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." The rule was laid down by the apostle Paul when he wrote, "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now."
Difference of moral standards between the onceborn and the twice-born, and their opposite ways of life, may be contributing causes of this hostility; but the real cause lies deeper. There are two spirits abroad in the earth: the spirit that works in the children of disobedience and the Spirit of God. These two can never be reconciled in time or in eternity. The spirit that dwells in the once-born is forever opposed to the Spirit that inhabits the heart of the twice-born. This hostility began somewhere in the remote past before the creation of man and continues to this day. The modern effort to bring peace between these two spirits is not only futile but contrary to the moral laws of the universe.
To teach that the spirit of the once-born is at enmity with the Spirit of the twice-born is to bring down upon one's head every kind of violent abuse. No language is too bitter to hurl against the conceited bigot who would dare to draw such a line of distinction between men. Such malignant ideas are at odds with the brotherhood of man, says the once-born, and are held only by the apostles of disunity and hate. This mighty rage against the twice-born only serves to confirm the truth they teach. But this no one seems to notice.
What we need to restore power to the Christian testimony is not soft talk about brotherhood but an honest recognition that two human races occupy the earth simultaneously: a fallen race that sprang from the loins of Adam and a regenerate race that is born of the Spirit through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.
To accept this truth requires a tough-mindedness and a spiritual maturity that modern Christians simply do not possess. To face up to it hardly contributes to that "peace of mind" after which our religious weaklings bleat so plaintively.
For myself, I long ago decided that I would rather know the truth than be happy in ignorance. If I cannot have both truth and happiness, give me truth. We'll have a long time to be happy in heaven.
Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for (εἰς) the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
εἰς - Part of Speech: Preposition (aka not a verb) - (indicating the point reached or entered, of place, time, fig. purpose, result)
Baptism does NOT cause an action it is only a visible sign of and action that has already taken place. The forgiveness of sin happened before the baptising.
I have never said people should not be baptised. We are told to make a public acknowledgement of our confession for which baptism is one. All of your words do not change the fact that the word "for" is a preposition not a verb.
God commanded that the blood be drained on the ground prior to eating the meat. The apostles in the New Testament included the prohibition of eating blood in the few requirements they set forth. Which by the way was after the last supper. Now, do you think God knew what was left in the meat after the blood was drained? Do you really think the apostles would set forth the prohibition against eating blood while thinking they were actually eating blood?
>>But the word of God is very clear and you reject it.<<
No, I understand clearly when Jesus explained to the apostles that what He said was spiritual and was not referring to eating physical real blood. I also understand that Jesus would have been sinning had He actually eaten blood especially as a Jew born under the law. The word of God is very clear on that and you reject it.
>>First, any divine command that comes later modifies divine commands that came earlier.<<
The apostles words to NOT eat blood came after the last supper and Jesus words in Matthew.
>>Second, the command against drinking blood, like all of the Old Testament dietary regulations, has passed away<<
Read Acts 15:20 again. Those did NOT pass away. Never have and never will.
>>We know that these pastoral provisions were only temporary.<<
Show where the prohibition against eating blood was rescinded.
Intersting that you bring up 1 Corinthians.
1 Corinthians 8: But food does not bring us near to God
Yet here you are pleading your case that the Eucharist is bringing you close to God. Hypocrite?
You can try to justify all you want. Jesus was born under the law and thus would have been sinning by eating blood and encouraging others to do so. Take your Catholic magical mystery tour if you wish but don't expect those of us who trust what scripture teaches to ride along or stay silent when you promote your fallacies and corruptions of what it teaches.
.
>> “If you really seek the Truth, the best place is the Catholic Church” <<
.
Are you trying to be funny?
The catholic church is almost as much a bastion of untruth as Islam!
.
Why don’t you address the words of Jesus in the Bible regarding...
What 'gift'?
The Jews ate this stuff every year for CENTURIES.
Jesus was telling them what it represented.
After His resurrection it STILL 'represented' His body and His blood.
It never did change, miraculously into His body and His blood.
Your church has POUNDED this 'miracle' into your head so much you are on autopilot; not noticing the big iceberg ahead!
HMMMmmm...
It's strange that St. Paul didn't seem to feel this way.
1 Corinthians 1:17
For the Messiah did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel,
Rome makes statements with various bits and pieces of bible references; and then claims it's own 'authoritative' position to create doctrine.
Please print your list of them for the lurkers.
I see Rome's acceptance of visions by Portuguese children that adds to the Bible.
You are still rejecting the food that Jesus told you was necessary for your salvation. He repeated it because He knew people would not accept His word.
Jesus insisted that His words were literal, yet you reject the Word of God with your own interpretation.
It is amazing how far one can change the Word of God to suit your own religion.
Did you ever read post #55? Any comments?
God trusted the apostles and their successors to spread the Word and baptize in His name and promised to be with them until the end.
Why would I or God trust you? You are full of blarney and your own self-importance.
Your current pope is beloved by all TRUE Catholics worldwide.
John 6:..the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Do you even read scripture?
>>Did you ever read post #55? Any comments?<<
You can have your Catholic mystical magical mystery tour.
The first step for the catholics is coming out of denial.
It's stunning to watch them either ignore or outright deny what scripture actually says.
Yeah it’s very sad to be honest.
This current Pope is proven Dave Hunt right with each thing that comes out of his mouth.
The true non-believer.
Even disputes science.
Even when God gives you a literal sign, you do not want to accept.
Yes, I read the Catholic Bible and have responded with specific information or quotes, but you seem to provide your opinion or something irrelevant.
The one that says Mary will defeat Satan rather than Christ? The one that says to smear fish guts on your eyes? The one that says it's a shame to have a daughter?
Prove the Catholic church never erred
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.