Results 2181 - 2200 of 2452
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
2181 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14365 | ||
God gets the ONLY vote where ultimate reality is concerned! Yes, Tim, I know we agree--again! --Joe! |
||||||
2182 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14364 | ||
And, of course, the Reformed point of view distinguishes between the outward call (given to all men), and the inward, effectual regeneration by the Holy Spirit which enables and persuades a person to answer the outward call. Therefore, one could argue that all who hear the message of the gospel are "called" but only those "chosen" will answer the call. Hence, full agreement! Picking up my horse-beating stick, I have a question for you, Tim: do you believe that the Gospel was extended to Gentiles SOLELY because of Jewish unbelief, or was extending salvation to the Gentiles part of God's plan from eternity past? --Joe! |
||||||
2183 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14362 | ||
Ed: I am glad you brought up the question of how each side of this intramural debate views evangelism differently. I hope you will indulge me here, and Tim, I am sure you will correct me where I am wrong! Both Arminians and Calvinists believe that all who put their trust in Christ will be saved. Both believe that justification comes through faith, and that it is the human who places his faith in Christ. However, the question of WHOSE choice it is greatly impacts how we do evangelism differently. For example, as a Calvinist, I can make terribly persuasive argumants for the gospel of Christ, but I hold that unless the Holy Spirit actually regenerates the heart of the unbeliever, he will continue in his unbelief. Tim, on the other hand, believing that it is God's desire for all to be in heaven with Him, will normally focus on a more "personal appeal" (e.g. the "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life" approach) than I would, since I do not know whether God truly has a wonderful plan for each individual. I would present the Gospel in a more general way, seeing my duty as glorifying God by proclaiming the truth whether anyone is saved or not, without focusing on "convincing" someone into the Kingdom. The basic point is the way that we view God's character and how He operates affects the way in which we worship him. What attracted me to Reformed theology in the first place (to which I have only formally adhered for a few years) is the extreme God-centeredness of the system of thought, the sovereignty of God, the high view of God and low view of man which clearly puts him in the category of creation to be used as God pleases. While Tim holds to God's sovereignty, he undoubtedly makes a larger space in his theology for man's individual role in choosing to be saved. This changes how we pray and what we pray for, and also how we view ourselves in light of God. I do not hold that Arminianism is "Word of Faith" (if you were alluding to that system rather than Calvinism!). However, I see a great deal of problematic situations have arisen from a departure from historic, Reformed theology. For example, the "openness of God" controversy that is currently raging in evangelicalism is clearly an Arminian struggle rather than a Reformed one, simply because the idea of God changing his mind and not knowing the future is simply ruled out completely at the outset of Calvinist thinking. Also, we see that a lot of the cults, such as the Watchtower Society and the Mormons, grew out of the "burned over" district of New York where Charles Finney basically threw the Westminster Confession of Faith out the window and turned the Secong Great Awakening as a "revival-by-human-technique" rather than a sovereign work of the Holy Spirit who chooses when and where revival will occur. Granted, this was not a particularly Arminian phenomenon, but it was very anti-Calvinistic. Perhaps I am being myopic in my criticism of other theological views, but other than hyper-Calvinism (which I reject as unbiblical but not necessarily dangerous--just ineffective Christianity), I see no heresy threatening evangelicalism from within the ranks of Reformed, confessional thinking. Perhaps someone else could enlighten me if I am wrong. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
2184 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14360 | ||
Tim: 1) The part that says "yet one of you is a devil" is enough distinguishing for me. I think you agree that Jesus didn't select these disciples for salvation in this context. 2)Perhaps it is just late, but I don't understand the point of your question here. Pleas elaborate for me. --Joe! |
||||||
2185 | Hello!Martin Luther KING???Really?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 14358 | ||
Praise God for your conversion! Where did your beliefs previously lie? --Joe! |
||||||
2186 | book of barabus | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 14357 | ||
Thanks for the info! Know where I can read more about it? --Joe! |
||||||
2187 | If God knows all,why create the universe | Deut 29:29 | Reformer Joe | 14290 | ||
Gee, I kinda like the "Sunday School" answer. the fact is that we are the creation and He is the Creator, and understanding our place in the "pecking order" is what we humans struggle with the most. Selfishness? I think that is putting God on a human level. The Potter has a right to do with the clay as He wishes (Romans 9). All of this is His. All of this is for His glory. It cannot really be called selfishness when no one else has a claim on anything in existence but Him. The universe is God's self-expression. Just as a painting reflects the thoughts and character of the painter, so the universe was designed to point to and glorify the Creator. Note that this isn't pantheism, where the universe IS God, but rather a theism in which the universe's purpose is to display the marks of the One who made it. --joe! |
||||||
2188 | What's God's purpose in life? | Deut 29:29 | Reformer Joe | 14284 | ||
Bill: God's purpose is to glorify Himself. I recently read an article in Discipleship Journal which explained this in the most excellent fashion. It went something along the lines that God, being holy, must honor and esteem that which possesses the highest moral perfection. And God, being infinite in His perfection, must be what He honors and esteems the most. That is indeed self-centeredness, but self-centeredness is only sinful if the self is not worthy of being the center of one's existence. God is, of course, worthy. Therefore, He created not out of a need of companionship (the Trinity from all eternity has provided blissful, perfect companionship for each Person therein). He did not create out of a need, because that would be stating that God needs something outside of Himself, which is clearly contrary to Scripture. Everything God created and every way that He interacts with His creation is ultimately for His glory. That includes saving sinners (showing his love and mercy), and demonstrating his justice and wrath to those who do not repent. Why is God's motivation? To bring glory and honor to Himself. And our chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever. --Joe! |
||||||
2189 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14201 | ||
Ed: This thread can be ignored by you. --Joe! P.S. The difference between Arminianism and Calvinism influences a great deal beyond whether one is saved or not. It greatly affects how we do evangelism, and also how we view God and how he acts in the universe, affecting our worship. They are both within the pale of Christianity, but they are completely different worldviews which make a great deal of difference in worship, prayer, and every other aspect of our Christian walks. |
||||||
2190 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14196 | ||
Tim: Judas was not chosen for salvation, but for the betrayal of Jesus. Calvin didn't invent the idea of effectual grace and unconditional election. Read Augustine. --Joe! |
||||||
2191 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14111 | ||
Tim: Following my clarification of different views on free will, where is the biblical support that God's grace only makes salvation possible rather than makes salvation a reality for all who receive it? And the biggest question: what makes one person who receives God's prevenient grace trust in Christ and another who receives God's prevenient grace continue to reject him? Seems that in Arminian view, the former person would indeed have reason to boast, whether it be on the basis of his own goodness, or his intelligence, or his wisdom, or his clear-sightedness, or something. If anything in ourselves is required for God's grace to be salvific, even if it is only cooperating with His prevenient grace, then we do indeed have a reason to boast, and Paul was wrong. Calvinists do not take a few obscure words to try and "explain away" clear statements in Scripture. Calvinists realize that there are verses which are apparent contradictions when taken in isolation. However, when examined in the context of the passages in which they were written, the contradictions can easily be explained away. For example, in Romans 9-11 it is you who are trying to take straightforward statements such as 9:15 and say that God "really doesn't only show mercy to some and not others," despite the fact that almost anyone reading that without a predisposition to reject such a notion would come precisely to that conclusion. One has to ignore Pharoah's hardening of heart as an active choice on God's part. One has to ignore the fact that the very author of Romans was apparently not given a choice as to whether he was one of the elect or not (show me one shred of evidence in Acts 9 that points to Paul's free will in initiating his salvation). Despite your claim that it is Christ who was chosen/elect (same word in the Greek), God makes it very clear that it is a set of individuals who are chosen. Who does the choosing? Let's see: "Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness" --Titus 1:1 " Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure." --1 Peter 1:1-2 "And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven." --Mark 13:27 (Christ isn't gathering Himself here) "knowing, brethren beloved by God, His choice of you..." 1 Thessalonians 1:4 "So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience" Colossians 3:12 "But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth." -- Thessalonians 2:13 "...just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will" Ephesians 1:4-5 Over and over again we see that: 1. God chooses. We do not see one NT passage which suggests that God chooses us because we choose him. Every time a form of the word eklegomai, God is the subject and one or more Christians are the direct object. Never is it used of humanity in general, and the very nature of the word "choose" implies that some are placed in a different category than others. Scripture makes this clear that is is not based on us (or we would have reason to boast), but rather on the wise counsel of God (Ephesians 1:11). It is the Arminian who seeks to "explain away" the clear statements of Scipture. You may accuse the Calvinist of insisting that "all" doesn't mean "all" in all cases (without indicating the contextual basis for his doing so), but it is you, Tim, who are guilty of insisting that "chosen by God" doesn't really mean "chosen by God," but rather "chosen by God because man really made the choice." --Joe! |
||||||
2192 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14108 | ||
Tim: Semi-Pelagianism is not Pelagianism, nor is it Arminianism, as I clearly distinguished between the two in my post. Semi-Pelagianism suggests that our wills are not TOTALLY depraved, but rather just weakened, and therefore is required to cooperate with God in salvation. John Cassian, a contemporary of Augustine, was the primary proponent of this view. Some semi-Pelagians even insist that it is man who initiates salvation, and that God provides the grace to compensate for what power the human lacks in placing full saving faith in Christ. In other words, the human is not so fallen that he cannot initiate his own salvation, inviting an "assist" from the Holy Spirit. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Synod of Orange in 529, even though it is pretty much the idea behind the salvation we find in modern Roman Catholicism. Arminius avoided the extremes of semi-Pelagianism by saying that God must initiate salvation (since we are indeed spiritually dead, not weakened), but that His grace is not necessarily effectual, nor is it irresistible. This is the idea of "prevenient grace" (grace that "comes before" salvation) which frees the will and enables the person to accept Christ. Of course, as you will agree, once that prevenient grace is present, it is up to the individual sinner to accept or reject that grace and "seal the deal," so to speak. Calvinists, in contrast, go further than just saying God's grace is only savingly given to some. They say that God's grace is effectual, that it accomplishes God's purpose, and that it inevitably changes the disposition of the sinner's heart so that he will willingly embrace Christ. --Joe! |
||||||
2193 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14089 | ||
I am not saying that the wor dis not being used in the same way. My agrgument is that one cannot conclude that the diect object is necessarily the same in every instance. Ofr example, the fact that the Greek word for "stoned" is used by Luke in Acts several times does not mean that the same person is being stoned in each situation. We see Stephen stoned. We see Paul stoned. The word is the same; the meaning is the same; the direct object is different. You write: "I believe that 'whom He foreknew' is a technicule term for Israel. " It may be a technical term, but what does it MEAN to foreknow? And are you talking about the Hebrew race when you say it refers to Israel, or the spiritual Israel which includes Gentile believers? On Ephesians, the fact that the exact word is not being used has nothing to do with the fact that Paul is obviously speaking about the same idea. The Greek word for predestined is used in both places, so obviously there is a connection. Incidentally, Peter uses the term "proginosko" twice himself, when speaking of foreknowing Christ's death in Acts 2:23. The word is linked to God's "predetermined plan." He also uses it in 1 Peter 1, when he speaks of being chosen according to the foreknowledge of God. Nothing about our role in God's choice. I am glad you believe in election. The problem is in whom you think does the electing. Calvinists believe that justification takes place through faith as well, just that regeneration occurs logically prior to that faith. Arminians have to invent the notion of "prevenient grace" in order to not fall into either the Calvinist position or the semi-Pelagian one. As far as Psalm 44, we need to be cautious in making a sweeping statement that a New Testament quote of an OT passage must refer to the specific group that it does in the original passage. For example, many Messianic prophecies come from the Psalms, where the apparent referance is to the Psalmist (e.g. David) rather than to the coming Christ. This is an interesting avenue to explore, however, as I have been keenly interested in how the Jewish peoples viewed such Psalms as messianic in nature. Later, --Joe! |
||||||
2194 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14066 | ||
Tim: You wrote: "The word "proginosko" is only used by Paul twice in the entire New Testament, in Rom. 8:29 and 11:2. In Rom. 11:2, the word is clearly a reference to Israel. So, why does almost every commentator consider the word in 8:29 to be a reference to individual Christians?" Maybe because most commentators understand that just becuase a word is used in one instance in one way, that doesn't mean it is bound to the same direct object in all situations. How do you reconcile Romans 8:30 with Ephesians 1:4-5,11, which definitely is NOT talking about Israel? "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will...also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will" --Joe! |
||||||
2195 | earth 6-10000 years old | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 14032 | ||
Just impish spite, I guess! --Joe! |
||||||
2196 | For Joe. | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 14029 | ||
It is indeed wrong for Christians to seek for answers to the nature of God's existence and of His chararcter and the state of man outside of the Bible. What we see here is more than just a pondering of things that are not revealed in Scripture; what is being demonstrated in this thread is a complete ignorance of what God has said about Himself in the Bible. If we believe in the Bible (and I do), let's believe what the Bible says about God and humanity and sin and salvation and judgment and mercy. It is simply ridiculous to say, "I wonder" when the truth is there for all believers to pick up and read. --Joe! |
||||||
2197 | Hello!Martin Luther KING???Really?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 13987 | ||
You are mistaken in several ways. Martin Luther is the 16th-century German Reformer. Martin Luther King, Jr., is the 20th-century American civil-rights activist. Martin Luther stood on justification by faith, and never removed books from the Bible. --Joe! |
||||||
2198 | Who created god? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 13985 | ||
God didn't come from anywhere! If you believe the Bible, there is no denying that God has always existed. This is one of the most basic characteristics of God! "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, From everlasting to everlasting. Amen and Amen." --Psalm 41:13 "Before the mountains were born Or You gave birth to the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God." --Psalm 90:2 "Your throne is established from of old; You are from everlasting." --Psalm 93:2 "But the lovingkindness of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him, And His righteousness to children's children," --Psalm 103:17 "Are You not from everlasting, O LORD, my God, my Holy One? We will not die. You, O LORD, have appointed them to judge; And You, O Rock, have established them to correct." --Habakkuk 1:12 With all due respect, this is not a forum for speculating the nature of things apart from the Bible. The Bible specifically states that God has eternally existed. If we want to know God's character and what he is like, the last place I would look for an example is at fallen humanity (Romans 3). Rather, I would look at the Bible, which is not only a book ABOUT God, but also a book FROM God, telling us everything that we need to know about what He is like. It is his autobiography, and anything that contradicts what is revealed there is simply false. Pick up the Bible. Read it. Learn about God from His self-revelation rather than trying to figure Him out by using your imagination. Anything else simply is idolatry, and will continue to lead you astray from the truth of Christianity. --Joe! |
||||||
2199 | Who created god? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 13984 | ||
No one created God. He is uncreated, always having existed. he is the First Cause, from which all effects have their ultimate origin. --Joe! |
||||||
2200 | book of barabus | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 13983 | ||
There was an epistle written to Barnabas that circulated during the early couple of centuries, but it was never universally recognized as being part of the biblical canon. In other words, while many thought it was an insightful work, it was never considered by a large number of people to be inerrant and divinely inspired. Darrell L. Bock, research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, puts it this way in his book, "Can I Trust the Bible?": "Works like the Epistle to Barnabas and the Didache were cited by some in the early period as if they were Scripture...these later works, though they continued to be read and studied as valuable, were not ultimately ranked in the exclusive category of canon. Rather they became associated with a collection that came to be known as the Apostolic Fathers." Therefore, your Muslim friend is misinformed about books being taken out of the Bible. While the epistle was held in high regard (as a book by a Christian author would be today), it was not Scripture that someone decided to remove from the Bible. Hope this helps! --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 ] Next > Last [123] >> |