Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | New Creature | 126367 | ||
Put the following events in order of occurance. Which one precedes the other. And which event comes first, second, etc. etc. Repentance Regeneration Salvation Faith Holy Spirit's convicting the sinner I put the above events in random order, not the order I personally believe they occur. New Creature |
||||||
2 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 126411 | ||
Funny how we humans have to get things synched up chronologically for them to make sense to us. :-) I think this through all the time. However, you left out a couple of items: atonement, justification, and sanctification. I might add one or two others, but then it might incite fits in certain of our members. Frankly, I think that some of these things happen simultaneously. But I'll try to answer as best as I can without fomenting adverse reaction. Regeneration must come very early in the process -- Eph 2:4-5 "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)" -- which, from this verse immediately is followed by salvation Now, without faith, it is impossible to please God and because faith is a necessary ingredient to salvation, it must be gifted to us somewhere right near that same moment, else we would not be saved. The prompting of the Holy Spirit could come before, during, and after. However, we have to see repentance in the mix. But I tend to see repentance not as a single act, but as an ongoing process. Repentance is changing direction. Direction can only be deduced over time. You know, the Puritans had all this broken down into over 12 steps that I recall. I think when we insist on piecing it altogether time wise, we can over analyze the thing. I think the best example of how salvation occurs is in the analogy of Lazarus. Before Lazarus can hear the command of Christ, he must be made alive. But he must also be healed from what killed him, or he'll just instantly die again. Only after this can he even hear Christ's command. With restored life, he obeys and comes out of the tomb. Sorry... I may not have clarified things any... and probably I'll have irritated someone! |
||||||
3 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126414 | ||
Hey Doc ... I know I'm sometimes controversial in what I say. I believe in a great number of doctrines that defy the standard beliefs, and though many often can't see what I'm saying for one reason or another, I have sound reasons for believing them and love to express challenging points of view to others. If [I] am the one that is causing you distress, I sincerely apologize. Please don't restrain yourself on my account. All opinions are worthwhile, even if they are disputed. How can we ever discover truth if we don't consider possibilities? Again, I'm sorry if I'm the one causing you to be reticent because I'm controversial. Sound doctrine should be able to stand up to scrutiny and stand unshaken when challenged. If a doctrine begins developing enough holes as to appear to be a wheel of swiss cheese, such should be discarded in favor of the more sound position. All my love to you, Theo-Minor |
||||||
4 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 126423 | ||
Thank you brother Theo! :-) Today's sermon was on the Holy Temple that God is building (all of us being living stones) from Ephesians 2. So how could I possibly ignore such gracious words, without repudiating everything the Spirit was teaching through the Word today? :-) Actually, none of it was causing me distress. The doctrines I espouse stand on scripture alone, and will be validated or not by our Father, Who is the source of all truth. They are also doctrines that have stood the test of time, having been assailed, and built by far better students of scripture than any of us, especially me. (Frankly, if they were original ideas, I'd be really worried about them!) So I don't take offense, Theo. If I feet any angst at all, it is with angry, sarcastic, or pugnacious responses. I really don't want to be responsible for such reactions, even if they are predictable or "natural." But that is probably rooted in my own deficiencies as well. Now, my Grandfather used to say, "You can't reason someone into something that they haven't reasoned themselves into." In other words, when we start getting emotional, we've stopped thinking. So I watch for this in my own reaction. Its a sure sign I haven't thought something through as well as I ought to have done. I believe God calls us to deliberate carefully over the Word. I trade out as many false notions as I can since I was first saved. Things that fall out of the orthodoxy norm ought to be carefully and suspiciously critiqued. Nor should we change our postions too hastily, for that is typical of another kind of problem. So, the long and short of it is this: What unites us -- you and I, Theo -- in our love of Scripture is far greater than the things that divide us in particulars. So we might not see eye-to-eye right now, but the day is coming when we will see even as we are seen. In the mean time, we can benefit by the careful scrutiny you mentioned to the edification of us all. Besides... its fun. :-) |
||||||
5 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126432 | ||
Doc ... Doc ... Doc ... My dearest brother ... I agree with you. Your Grandfather's quote is genius. If someone has agreed within themselves to disagree with you no matter what, there will be no convincing them. We have a friend that comes to Bible study on Thursdays. He is a great guy, but loaded with strange doctrines. The first several conversations, he went home, saying, "I just disagree." Such a statement is, in my opinion, just a cop out. We are to be of one mind and one accord. If you both disagree with each other because neither person has solidly presented his case, then so be it. You have no right to expect someone to bend unless you prove what you are saying irrefutably. But if you have presented the truth, shown credible examples, shown credible plain statements in scripture, and made a solid case for its continuity with the teachings of Christ, they need to concede if they are functioning according to the wisdom of God. Over time, he has changed some of his perceptions, but this only came about (through God) because of time, consideration, patience, and repetition. Barring that, the only way to finally bend him on some of the issues was to pin him down with some yes or no questions and put him on the spot. *laugh* We won those, of course. The words may be thick with pride on their tongues when you do that, but you still cut through the pride. In any case, I just wanted to make sure I hadn't caused you offense, and to make sure it wasn't me that had you wary of speaking freely. I state my points as soundly as I can, but love does not seek its own and is not puffed up. The last thing I would want is to deliberately or knowingly offend someone that has been polite to me without just cause. Theo-Minor |
||||||
6 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 126437 | ||
Well, I hope I'm one of the people "that has been polite to me without just cause." I'd never want to be polite WITH just cause. Perhaps unjust cause now and then, but never just cause. :-) Sorry! Just teasing! Thanks again, Theo. |
||||||