Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: userdoe220 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Ninevah did. | Rom 1:18 | userdoe220 | 20484 | ||
Ninevah did. | ||||||
2 | response | Rom 1:18 | userdoe220 | 20483 | ||
I am just answering your question, "How can I say to a person that God has a wonderful plan for their life?" It is simple...If they bow their knee to the Lordship of Christ, God will unfold a wonderful plan for their life--Salvation! I agree with every passage you qouted, but yet none of the above passages prove the micr-management of God's creation. Lets look at each of them in context. Matt 10:29...Sure God knows when 2 sparrows are sold for a cent, but that doesn't mean God decreed the selling of those sparrows from the beginning of eternity or controlled/bartered the price of them. This whole passage, in context, is Jesus instructing us that God knows what we are going through--he is not ambivous to our troubles. Luke 12:6,7 Same point as above different book. God cares for his children and is worried about their welfare--John Calvin would say that this passage is "Anthropormorphic". This is a passage of how God cares for his children! This does not mean that God has pre-determined the catastrophes that have fallen upon man from the beginning of time! That we are acting out the great cosmic script created from the beginning of eternity. As far as your O.T. reference goes, Sure, if a nation willingly chooses to reject God's plan, in the O.T. judgement will follow! Look at the prophetic passages Jeremiah, Hosea, Jonah etc., the sole responsibility of judgemnt and judgement sustained is placed on the offenders not some eternal script the nationis acting out hiding under the mis-understood doctrine of Soveriegnty (God did not pre determine that Israel would sin and be dispersed in 7xx bc. They of their own free will chose to reject God, therefore God acted upon what he told them would happent in Dt. 28 and 29). The passages you used above have nothing to do with soverignty as you understand it. It has everything to do with God's knowledge--and I will dare to say affection--for his children. It does not mean he will magically remove us from the situation and get us out of the probelm--although he has done that--but it does mean that he will be there with us emphathizing with us through the problems we face in life. Finally, I would agree with you that God can have a specific plan for a particular individual--Judas Iscariot comes to mind. But that does not mean that God dictated every event of Judas' life and neither does he dictate every event of our life. I know poeple who have felt that God had called them to the mission field. I believe that is a divine plan from God. However, God has not dictated how they perform ministry in that Country. I don't think in God's cosmic script in the sky created before time that he said "on Dec 24, 1999 they are going to do this skit and...Yeah! lets only have 2 families show up. That should teach them a valuable lesson on humilty." End scene 54 act 2. |
||||||
3 | number of apostles | Rev 4:4 | userdoe220 | 16413 | ||
Acts 1:15-26. I know the scripture prophesies that Judas will be replaced after his death (acts 1:20). I am not questioning this as a reason for the choosing of Matthias as a replacement for Judas. If God says it do it. My question: Is there any significance assoiciated with the number of the apostles--12? Can parallels be drawn between the 12 tribes that established the nation of Israel and the 12 apostle that established the N.T church? |
||||||
4 | how so? | Matt 6:14 | userdoe220 | 16326 | ||
Could you please explain how the concept of forgivness contradicts the teachings of scripture? I do think this series of posts is showing the discussion group the logical conclusion of calvanism--nothing really matters as long as you are "the elect/chosen" of God. |
||||||
5 | followup | Jer 18:8 | userdoe220 | 13865 | ||
Is it anthropopathic because our theology dictates it to be? Another words, our we letting our presuppositions dictate our interpretation, or are we letting the Bible speak without our presuppositions. I listed just a couple of examples, but there is a number of instances in scripture which seem to really say just that...God changed his mind. I guess the big question would be, "who defines what verse is Anthropopathic?" There are many verses where everyone in Orthodox Christianity would agree on; However, Dr. Harden feels that the account in Genesis addressing God's sorrow is Anthropapathic. Why? Because feelings like sorrow imply lack and since God is totally complete he can never lack anything. I would disagree and believe that passages that write about God's emotions are not anthropapathic at all. However, where is the line drawn? Have we allowed Platonic reason to form our understanding of the Biblical God? Is the label, Anthropapathic, used to do away with verses that don't fit our understanding of who God is? |
||||||
6 | Can God change His mind? | Jer 18:8 | userdoe220 | 13858 | ||
Does this imply that God can change His mind? It seems in Jer 18 the emphasis is on God's power/authority to make the vessel how he desires, but that desire can be changed by the heart of a nation! There are a number of verses in the Bible that at least imply if not directly state that God can change His mind. ...it repented the Lord that he had made man..." Gen 6:6; " Vines "And the Lord repented (The NASB "changed his mind") of the evil which he thought to do unto his people" Ex 32:14, KJV. "If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them" Jer 18:8 Even this verse implies that the potter will set out to make a vessel (kingdom) a certain way, but if they Repent God will change his mind about the vessel. How do you, on the forum, reconcile these numerous passages with the view that God cannot change? |
||||||
7 | Are you sure? :-) | 1 Cor 14:19 | userdoe220 | 13225 | ||
Are you sure? :-) | ||||||
8 | Is this promise for believers today? | Deut 8:18 | userdoe220 | 11694 | ||
Is this promise for believers today? | ||||||
9 | water into wine | John 2:1 | userdoe220 | 11591 | ||
I wonder how many conservative Evangelicals would turn water into wine today? Assuming they could. | ||||||
10 | curious about your response | Acts | userdoe220 | 9770 | ||
I consider myself part of the Pentecostal-charimatic movement and was wondering how you deal with their reasoning behind the "initial Physical evidence" belief? 1st argument: In the Book of Acts the accounts of people being "baptized (filled) in (with) the Holy Spirit" usually occur after a persons salvation. An example would be the day of Pentecost. So, the Baptism or infilling of the Holy Spirit must be a subsequent act follwing a believers Salvation. (Non-Pentecostals came up with a doctrine called the second-work of Grace after observing this pattern in the book of Acts. Salvation was the first work of Grace and Complete sanctification was the second work of Grace.) 2nd Argument: Every account recorded in the book of Acts except 2 follows with the Baptizee speaking in Tongeus. The 1st exception was the Apostle Paul who we know spoke in tongues because of his testimony in 1 Cor. and what better time to receive the gift of tongues than at his Baptism. The 2nd instance, Simon the Sorcerer saw something dramtic happen to the individuals who were baptized in the Holy Spirit and scripture records that he wanted to purchase the ability to administer the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Something spectacular must have happened to solicit this response--I read one commentary that stated that Simon saw the "changed lifes of the believers" and wanted to have this ability. That is kind of weak in my opinion. Something more dramatic had to have happened than that to solicit that kind of response. 3rd argument: The gift of tongues covered in 1 cor. refer to a special gift used in church and is different from the tongues that accompany the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (surprisingly RC Sproul believes this as well!) I talked to my Pastor about this and he said that a person can speak in tongues one time at his baptism and never again and be considered "baptized in the Holy Spirit." I am very curios to your, or anybody else who is part of the Pentecostal-charismatic movement, response to these two arguments. I personally agree with you on this issue, but I guess 10 plus years believing a certain teaching will take time to work through. |
||||||