Results 1 - 20 of 31
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: brother paul Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | why am I banned? | Rom 13:7 | brother paul | 179912 | ||
Dear Doc, I really do not understand, what do I do where do I go? I love my fellow Christians who seek Him, we ask questions, debate avd then someone pulls the plug. Yours Paul |
||||||
2 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179813 | ||
Dear Jeff, I must thank you for your reply, your time and patience with me. I can appreciate how wearisome this discussion has become to you and the other people frequenting this forum. It is difficult to explain a total scriptural concept in short postings. I ask you to consider the predestined sacrifice of Christ, our saviour, and the whole journey of mankind through sin to salvation. Project earth, to 'form' man in His image. Here I stand corrected, you are right, Christ is not 'created' in us, I should have used 'formed'. Thank you for pointing out my error, wont do that again. Although man is created on the sixth day (Gen 1:27) he is formed on the seventh. (2:7) These are different processes and the seventh day is still running in Heb 4:1-4 several millenia later. It is this 'forming' that I refer too, the completion of His purpose. The forming (yatsar in Hb.) the work of the potter. I now come to your comments of my remarks concerning the letters to Timothy and the Romans, you said I did not 'read on'. Well lets read on, Romans 2:1-4 says it is wrong to judge such actions. This is the main point of Paul's debate, that these people should not be judged by the believers. Dear brother, I am not playing with words, it is not a game, I seek of Him. I have to harmonize all the mess of this world's mess with a God who is ultimate control. The world is where He wants it to be in His divine plan, otherwise He is not God. The mess that we witness has to have a purpose, He permits that, that He could prevent. It is not an unforeseen accident, it is not crisis management, it is the outworking of His purpose. I will pray and meditate on the thoughts you have given me, I thank you and love you in Him, thank you my brother, Yours and His, Paul |
||||||
3 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179776 | ||
Thanks Steve, Yes, yes, yes, everywhere I go in scripture seems to echo this principle, death before resurrection, alienation before reconciliation. On a larger scale did Israel have to be alienated before reconciliation? (Rom 11:15,25, 26) Please look at the scriptures. If it applies to the individual and Isreal, why should it not apply to the world? Going one step further, if Isreal had to fall and be rejected so that 'all Isreal might be saved', did Adam? Did all of us have to go through this procedure? Does 'sin' have a purpose? Then everything starts to make sense, does God work through sin and rejection to create Christ in us? These thoughts gravitate to a God who is 'all in all'. Our meaning and perception of 'sin' alters. There is purpose, design and creation in the fall of mankind. 'To the pure all things are pure', it is subtle, but catalysmic, in a way there is nothing 'wrong'. I find it difficult to explain in words, it is more a spiritual experience, but 'sin' becomes less condemnatory. The first century church seems to have a very relaxed view of sin. 1 Timothy 1:10 where murder, matricide, patricide and all the rest of fallen mankind is merely agaisnt 'doctrine'? Not 'law'? Romans 1:28, where all the slush and degeneration of mankind is 'inconvenient'.It doesnt seem to have the impact of 'sin' as in totally rejected. It is all a bit deeper, not simplistic, not legalistic, and phariasic, we need the Holy Spirit to bring us into all truth and understandind. Truth is His person, not ideas or doctrines, His love and compassion, His infinite grace. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
4 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179754 | ||
Dear brother, I deeply thank you for your reply. It is the best post I have received. My thoughts have been concentrated recently on the fact that truth is a person, not an idea. He is truth. The betraying of Christ by Judas is not an obsession, it is only an example. The reason why I return to this example, is because no-one seems to address the principle. Adam has to reject God, Peter deny Christ, Israel condemn Jesus, Paul persecute the church, David commits murder and adultery, Moses kills, to bring Christ to a place where we can accept Him. It is all somehow part and plan of His design. I pray and consider what you have written, I do not reject anything, but merely seek of Him. There is something that the 'sin must become sunful' turn him 'over to Satan that the spirit might be saved'. I have personally experienced this rejection before I feel I know Him. Does anyone else sense this? If we begin to understand that there is a process of alienation before reconciliation, we begin to understand His ways, not merely His acts. I no longer seek to 'prove' certain doctrinual points to win debates. I try to empty myself, so that I can be taught of Him. Your final statement did acknowledge that the betraying of Christ did somehow contribute to His identification and belief that He is Messiah. This is my point, the process of rejection in His divine plan has advanced His purpose. God is all in all, through our sin He has triumphed. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
5 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179712 | ||
Dear all, I returned one post where I did not 'appreciate' the reply. My posts have now been termed as 'amusing', 'silly', 'devisive', 'specious' and 'acerbic'. I did not appreciate one post and now you threaten me with being banned from this site. I do not understand why simple disagreement should recieve such a response. If others can be direct and say what they feel, cannot I not 'appreciate' a comment? Where is the balance? Where is the offence? I did not 'appreciate' dictionary definition, 'To know, understand, to value', I did not appreciate the post. It was not to challenge what was said. Is this where we have two English speaking nations divided by a common language? My truth is your heresy, your truth is my heresy. 1 Cor 11:19, 'There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be manifest among you.' Can we not debate our differences, can we seek truth? I am sorry if I have offended anyone, I try to come to Him as an empty vessel, I am not sure and know I need Him to bring me into all truth. Everything that is said I take to higher authority, to Him. I do not instantly jump to an already reached conclusion, His truth is deeper. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
6 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179682 | ||
... | ||||||
7 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179681 | ||
Dear Kalos, Ok, you answer Anglies question, was Judas in the plan or not? By the way I did not appreciate your 'answer', if it indeed it was an answer about the holocaust. I lost family. Be kind, there is whole lot more in the Old Testament because it speaks of Christ. It is an adambration of the new. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
8 | Paul, the Answers Are? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179560 | ||
Hi CDBJ Many thanks, I really felt the Lord in your reply, I have expressed what I felt the Lord has shown me and there is a time when it is best left alone. It can become contentious and unprofitable..... A word in season. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
9 | Paul, the Answers Are? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179534 | ||
Dear Brad, By your answer you agree that Christ had to be betrayed. The meaning of 'betrayed' involves a close associate who turns against you. Therefore someone close to Christ, intimately involved with Him had to turn against Him, to identify Him as the Messiah. Alright, OK, it didnt have to be Judas, but someone had to do it, otherwise we would not have the confirmation of His special place in the plan of God. Maybe I should say without a traitor would I be a Christian. This does not alter the original precept of the debate. Without a traitor would I be a Christian? This is the centre of my point, that somehow in the plan of God had to betray Christ for me to be Christian, we have to go through rejecton before acceptance. This is how God brings us to Him, 'sin' and 'rebellion' are all part of the process. The question is where legalism seperates itself from Christ, is this process 'wrong'? Yours, and His, in Him, Paul |
||||||
10 | The meaning of your statments | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179527 | ||
Hello Brian, 1 John 1:9 and 7b are explicit, I totally agree, everything must come back through Christ, yes yes yes, that is exactly where I come from. But how does He get us to that place? It is through our experience of sin sepereration and denial, where we stagger from one bad decision to another. That's how He does it, using our experience in sin and spiritual blindness to bring us to a place where we accept Him. My question is, do we judge this procedure as 'wrong'? Therefore is wordly 'sin' wrong and out of God's plan, if ultimately it might bring people to Him? This is the readjustment of our thinking. What we call 'sin' might be His plan. Romans 1:26 explains how God gives evildoers over to sin, and 1 Cor 5:5 repeats the same principle. God uses 'sin' to bring people to repentance. Therefore is it 'wrong'? I do not advocate a life of sin, that is not the point, but I can see how people are concluded in sin to come to God. In Matthew 13:24-30 we have the parable of the wheat and tares. It starts with Jesus saying that the kingdom of heaven is likened unto, and to be in the kingdom of heaven we must be born of the spirit. (John 3:5) In this spirit message Jesus exp;ains how the would be gardeners do not know the difference between the wheat and the tares until they have matured. Do we have to wait until sin has worked it's process? Until sin has become exceedingly sinful? (Rom 7:13) Yes I do think we have to revisit these questions and redifine what me mean by sin in the divine plan of salvation. Yours, and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
11 | The meaning of your statments | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179491 | ||
Dear Brian, Sorry for the delay, I've been away, If I understand your reply correctly, you ask how is it that 'sin' and 'evil' are in repemtive plan of God. Thank you for your question. 1 Cor 5:5 speaks p;ainly how an evildoer should be turned over to Satan that the Spirit might be saved. Somehow what we might consider as 'wrong' and 'sinful' has an ultimate goal of bringing people to repentance. Is this how we learn? Did mankind have to fall into 'sin' to begin to understand His ways? Did Judas have to betray Christ? Without Judas would I be a Christian? Is there a 'Judas' in us all? Is it part of the process of coming to know Him? Is 'sin' and realisation of 'sin' a part of reconciliation to Him? Romans 3:7, even Paul's lie is unto His glory. Romans 7:13 where the sin must become exceedingly sinful. When Paul said he had been accused of saying that, 'let us do evil that goog may abound' (Rom 3:8) he was accused of exactly the the point I a, trying to make. I, like Paul, do not advocate a life of sin. I, like Paul, say that God is all in all, (1 Cor 15:28) and averything permitted in God's wisdom could have been prevented by His power. Therefore anything that happens is OK by me. If he has permitted it, why should I object? Once we enter this spiritual understanding, it changes everything, all of a sudden everything is fine, it's in Him, no problems, do not be anxious, we are at peace, in Him. Got it? Love you brother, Yours and His, Paul |
||||||
12 | Did the Apostles have a choice? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179486 | ||
Dear KumKum, The rib cage, lungs, breath, the breath of life, He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. The spirit 'phnema', the air, the holy spirit. Eleven, the number of disciples left after the death of Christ. Twelve. the tribes of Israel, spiritual rule under man's authority. There are spiritual steps beyond eleven and twelve when we relate directly to Him. Although essential parts of the process, we must go further. The authority of Isreal was cast off, the Levitical preisthood superceded, our manmade authoritarian hierarchy must be surpassed. False ribs? The number thirteen is far better, but all of this is very subjective, it is not written in stone. These are the extreme edges of my understanding and conversation with Him. Your and His, Paul |
||||||
13 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178637 | ||
Dear Mark, Are we not all sinners? I am the greatest, like the apostle Paul, and sin brings death. But to die is gain. (Phill 1:21) In death is the resurrection, indeed we have to be dead to ourselves before we can be resurrested. Jesus came to teach us how to die, death to self. We die daily. The process of God. Yes, 'sin no more', but that 'sin' can be offending the 'least of these. my brothers'. and that 'sin' can be anything that would offend the most delicate of misguided conscience. This enters an area outside of law, we are now talking about their individual 'rights and wrongs'. the concept goes higher. It no longer rests on rules but love and understanding. This is the love of Christ, it goes deeper than orthodox legalism, it is now talking about love. This is empathy. coming to where a person is, like the good samaritan who met the man where he was. Not like the preists who passed by, because they walked in judgment and legalism. it is not that simple, I would love the body of Christ to start searching, raise the questions that the Holy Spirit might bring in us into all truth. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
14 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178628 | ||
Dear Mark, Yes, Hebrew interpretation is subjective. This opens yet another subject of how God honours our choice. He first honours our choice and sets an example of how we should honour His choice. Is there a difference between obedience to the law and the fulfillment of it? If not the Christians would still be sacrificing animals. What is that difference? I did not preclude the penality of missing His principles, 'there is a penality to be paid.' That is not in question, but how does it all work. What is the understanding? Yes 'sin' is missing the mark. When we miss with the first shot it helps to correct the next. Exactly my point, the sinner has gained vital imformation to help him hit the target. He has progressed, it was part of his spiritual development. Was it 'wrong'? Where you seem to be is where I was, probably more so, to my determiment, it leaves so many unanswered scriptural questions. We have now drifted far from the precept of the original thought. In respect for this forum, having prayed and sought of Him, I feel that it is best to reopen the subject with new threads that bring the debate to a more directed conclusion. We have a mixture of answers, notes and questions which have lost their centre. Do you agree? Your and His Paul |
||||||
15 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178578 | ||
Dear Mark, Thank you for your reply, may I suggest that your study includes Ezekiel 23:47 where the word 'dispatch' is translated from 'Bara', to create or cut with a sword, to separate? Another aspect of these three Hebrew verbs, 'Bara, Asah and Yatszar' is that they all refer to the modification of something that already exsits, none refer to origination. I struggle to understand, nothing is written in stone. If I come across as opinionated or dogmatic, I apologize. I feel there is something in what the Lord is trying to show me so I bring it before my brothers for their comments. This I know is on the edge, but I am only seeking Him. What is 'sin'? The transgression of His laws, but Jesus has removed the curse of the law. He died not for our sins but THE SIN of man, the catagory of sin. You can no longer be fined for speeding if the speed limit is removed. A Christian would of course drive carefully because he has the law written in his heart and becomes the fulfillment of the law. God's purpose is to form us in His image, therefore He has His laws, God's laws, which are His before He gave them to us. No one forces Him to keep His own law, He does it because they are right. If we are to be formed in His image then no one else should force us to keep the law, and when our law agrees with His laws we become the fulfillment of them. Until Christ removed the penality of breaking God's law we could not become like Him. This does not free us to be irresponsible, it is the reverse. While I think I am saving my life by keeping certain rules I cannot show the selfless agape love of God, it becomes corrupted. When I said He uses what legalistic orthodoxy calls 'sin', it is a part of our spiritual education. If I contravene the principles there is a price to be paid, but that in itself has contributed to my development, therefore was it 'wrong'? 'For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.' (Hebrews 12:6) We have to fast from the tree of knowledge of good and evil if we want to be in His presence. Matt 13:28-30, He does not want us to go weeding out the tares from amond the good seed, because we do not know how His crop matures. A lesson in the nonjudgmentalism of Christ. The only people Jesus judged were the judgers. There were some other verses I wanted to share but I will have to come back, it is now 1:50 a.m. in the UK, speak again. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
16 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178475 | ||
Dear Jeff, I am coming back to your post on 10.15. 06 The first verse is Isaiah 45;7, 'I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I the LORD do all these things.' The fascinating thing about this verse is that all the verbs are used in Genesis to describe the birth of man. 'Let us make man' (1:27), 'ASAH' to assemble, the work of the builder. 'God created man' (1:26) 'BARA' to cut, separate, the work of the carpenter. 'God formed man' (2:7), 'YATSAR' to mould, the work of the potter. Lets put these understandings into Isaiah 45:7, 'I mould the light, and separate the darkness; I build peace, and separate the evil; I the LORD do all these things.' Makes sense? When we come back to Genesis 1:1 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth', we now read how God had to separate the physical from the spiritual. There is a separation, in His ceative p;an thet preceeds reconciliation. Even the first word translated as 'In the beginning. involves a separation. An agricultral term that means a separation of the firstfruit. To do the same with 1:1 we now read, 'to get His fruitage, God has to separate the physical from the spiritual.' That brings me back to the original hypothesis, the plan of God requires alienation before reconciliation. Love you brother, yours and His, Paul. |
||||||
17 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178394 | ||
Dear Jeff, Thank you - I do appreciate your considered responses and it helps to crystalize my thoughts. You personalized your argument illustrated my point. If God's plan is to form us in His image, then when you felt you had missed Him and were convicted in your heart, had He progressed the formation of Him you? Although you felt failure, He had progressed His purpose, Therefore was it 'wrong'? The way God convicts us of sin (John 16:8) is the way He deals with the world, His ways do not change. Therefore sin becomes a tool of God and if we see it in ourselves we must allow others the same grace. It is the Holy Spirit who convicts us of sin, and here is the important question. We must individually be convicted of sin. He writes the law in our hearts, it is a personal revelation, like God. We understand the bible as an explanation of God's law, they where His before He gave them to us. To be formed in His image we must, like Him, we must agree with His laws because we want to, not because we have to. Until Christ removes the penalty of the law it was not possible to be formed in His image. No one makes God keep His own laws, it is a personal decision. We must come to that place where it is our decision to agree with His law. To bring us to this understanding we go through a process of sin which is His plan. Therefore the fall and redemption of mankind is the process, not the frustration of God's plan. Yours and His in Him Paul |
||||||
18 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178340 | ||
Dearest Hank, Brad and Doc, Do you or do you not believe that the betrayal of Christ was the fulfillment of prophecy. If it was then Judas was an essential part of God's plan. Yours and His, Paul. |
||||||
19 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178334 | ||
Kalos, Doc and Brad, Matthew 17:22, 'The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men.' These are the words of Christ. If he had not been betrayed he would have been proven a false prophet. Someone had to fulfill the prophecy. Without Judas this would not have happened. I needed Judas to complete the total plan of God. Still love you, Paul |
||||||
20 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178331 | ||
Dear CDBJ Many thanks, you encourage me to go further, Just to clear a point, it was the tutor, not me who went to Oxford. My qualifications are more modest. As you know the smaller words, the conjunctions and prepositions are almost impossible to translate with any degree of certainty. For the moment lets accept your translation, 'but'. This does not remove the imperative of the subject of the sentence, 'God is not willing that any should perish,'. This is the sworn will of God, 'that none should perish' therefore, but, neverless, not withstanding, nay moreover, all should come to repentabce.' Repentance and the acceptance of Christ are essential, that is not the debate, it is the initial statement upon which the object of the sentence is based. 'It is God's will, His promise, His edist, His law (not wish) that none should perish.' As you and I both know 'metanooia' means a change of knowledge, and that is exactly my position, we must leave tradition to be informed of the Holy Spirit. (Mark 7:14 the 2x666th verse of the new testament) Traditions kill the word of God. Your truth is my heresy and my heresy is your truth, praise God but let us still be brothers in Him because that way the truth is verified. (1 Cor 11:19) God bless you brother, you are a man of the word, I thank Him for you, Yours Paul |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |