Results 21 - 40 of 40
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: RWC Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | But isn't that a contradiction | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13692 | ||
Hello Justin, I believe that the 66-book canon of the Christian Scriptures were inspired in their original writing. And, since God is perfect in all He is and does, there were no errors or contradictions in those writings. And you are quite correct: context is critical to correct understanding. I am not suggesting that there is a contradiction in Scripture. It seems to me that there is a contradiction within a strongly Calvanistic understanding of the Scriptures. In other words, it seems to me (and it might be my own misunderstanding of their point of view!) that Calvin (and indeed, many before him and after him) have carefully read the Scriptures and yet came to at least 2 conclusions (interpretations? understandings?) that contradict each other. What I do not as yet understand is how those conclusions (ie. that 1. God has predestined everything that comes to pass and 2. God is not the author of sin) can both be true at the same time. They seem, to me at least, to be glaring contradictions (ie. they cannot both be true). If you can help me to understand this point of view, it would be greatly appreciated! Bob |
||||||
22 | But isn't that a contradiction | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13697 | ||
Good day Ray, Your thoughts expressed here have crossed my mind on several occassions as well. We are sinners from conception, and we are treading in some very deep water. I suspect that if God were to directly interject His thinking into our discussion here, that all of us might be rebuked as Job was (Job 38:1-41:34) and that all of us would be forced to conclude as Job did (42:2-3): I know that You can do all things, And that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. 'Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?' "Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know." And yet, I think that, as long as we are honestly seeking to understand each other and the Scriptures (and ultimately God Himself!) better, then there is value in this discussion and that God is both pleased and honored by it. I do not think for even a second that this discussion will end the Calvanist-Arminian debate which has gone on for centuries. But that is not my purpose in asking these questions. I am just trying to understand one point of view better than I do now. You concluded by quoting Galatians 2:20: "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." You are quite correct to be more concerned about this. I can only reply with a hearty "Amen." We must never lose sight of this. And you have my permission (not that you need it!) to remind me of this any time that you think I may be losing that focus. Thank you for a timely reminder. Bob |
||||||
23 | Part 2 of 2: How can both be true? | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13863 | ||
Hi Joe, Just to let you know, I have read this. But I think that I need to get your reply to my post ("But aren't they mutually exclusive? Thu 08/23/01, 10:42am) before I can effectively reply to this. Have a good day. Bob |
||||||
24 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13923 | ||
Hi Norrie, There is a lot to read here. I guess a big part of what I am trying to figure out is whether or not those who hold to a Reformed (strongly Calvinist) interpretation of Scripture believe that there really is such a thing as God truly *permitting* anything, or if absolutely everything has been unchangeably predetermined by God before any of it actually happened. Although I may not be understanding him correctly, it seems to me that Joe is suggesting that *both* of those options are true, while I am contendeing that only one or the other can be true, but not both. Any thoughts? Bob |
||||||
25 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13967 | ||
Hi Norrie, Your description here is more or less how I have come to understand this. The one thing I would want to be made very clear, though, is that God is never surprised by the decisions that we make. He does know the beginning from the end. I just don't think that He can have predetermined (predestined) *all* of those decisions for us. Any decisions that are predestined are not, in fact, *our* decisions; they are God's decisions. What I am trying to understand in all of this is how the Calvinist view can suggest that everything that does happen (including sin) can possibly be *both* "God's predetermined, unchangeable plan" *and* the real exercise of choice on the part of His creatures. As I understand it, any particular decision or choice made by one of God's creatures can be only one or the other, but not both. Suggesting that a decision can be both seems to me to be contradictory, and thus my initial question about this being "a Calvinistic contradiction" (see my post " But aren't they mutually exclusive?" and the follow up post "All of God's decree is not predestined?"). Have a good day. Bob |
||||||
26 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 13968 | ||
Just an addendum to my previous note: you could see my post "Part 2 of 2: How can both be true?" | ||||||
27 | All of God's decree is not predestined? | Gal 2:17 | RWC | 15394 | ||
Hi Joe, I'm sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. Things are VERY busy and will be for a while now, it seems. I have been doing some thinking and a little reading in reference to 2Sa 12:11-12, and I am finding these verses to be most uncomfortable. And I have not found any satisfactory answers, at least as yet. Even your explanation here is quite unsatisfactory to me. This passage is not just God declaring what will happen. It actually says that God Himself will cause this evil to happen. Three times in these two verses God says, "I will...." I have posted a question to this effect attached to 2Sa. 12:11. If you could respond to that question and clarify just exactly how you understand this passage so that God's holiness is not compromised, I would appreciate it. And there are still some questions here in this thread for which I would very much like to hear your answers (ie. "Isn't all of God's decree predestined?" and "Is that fair representation?" and a couple of others where it seemed like you didn't really answer the question directly). The first thing we need to do, though, is nail down some of these definitions ("Isn't all of God's decree predestined?"). Thanks again your time! Bob |
||||||
28 | What does "emptied Himself" really mean | Phil 2:7 | RWC | 4979 | ||
Yes, thank you for making the point about Jesus' humanity being like Adam's (and Eve's!) prior to their initial sin. That is how I have come to understand this as well, but I didn't make that clear (at least in that posting). Jesus did not and does not have a sin nature. And His fellowship with God must have been very similar indeed to that experienced by Adam and Eve prior to sin entering the human race. | ||||||
29 | Have I plagiarized someone? | Phil 2:7 | RWC | 173849 | ||
No problem; thanks for clearing that up. | ||||||
30 | Did Jesus die _only_ for the elect | 1 Tim 3:1 | RWC | 13548 | ||
It was I that asked the question of you. Please forgive me. Being quite unfamiliar with this forum, or even how to find my way around in it, I did not know that this was such a sore point for you and several others. I knew that my question was off the topic of the verse to which this thread is attached, but I did not know that it would raise such an immediate flurry of responses. I think I have found where I can "catch up" on some the discussion that has already gone on and perhaps even ask another question or two. Again, please accept my apologies. I certainly did not intend for all of this. Bob |
||||||
31 | Superiority of Christ to Moses | Heb 3:3 | RWC | 233533 | ||
Hi Doc, Please see my question linked to Heb. 3:2 about why the faithfulness of Moses is being compared instead of contrasted to the faithfulness of Jesus. Your insight would be appreciated. Thanks. Live ready! |
||||||
32 | cf. Heb 3:2 question re. faithfulness | Heb 3:6 | RWC | 233534 | ||
In verse 5, Moses is stated to be "faithful... as a servant...." The distinction (point of contrast) in v. 6 is that "*but* Christ was faithful as a son...." It seems like the author is saying that their faithfulness might be comparable (similar? equal?), but that their difference is in the fact that Jesus is the Son whereas Moses was a servant. Please see and comment on my question to this effect linked to Heb. 3:2. | ||||||
33 | should not enter into his rest | Heb 3:11 | RWC | 233539 | ||
Moses and Aaron would also be included in this primarily because of the Waters of Meribah (Nu. 20:11-12, 23-29; 34:1-5; De. 32:48-52; 34:1-5). | ||||||
34 | Believing but Falling Away? | Heb 3:12 | RWC | 233541 | ||
The second to last sentence, "Sometimes the reality of the lack of an 'eternal life' relationship becomes apparent in this life (He. 3:14)" could also have Ga. 5:4 as a reference. | ||||||
35 | How can Jesus be tempted if He is God? | Heb 4:15 | RWC | 4761 | ||
I think I can buy that. As you (and others in this discussion) have suggested, there seems to be two different kinds of temptation: internal (coming from within us) and external (originating in our circumstances or surroundings). As I understand it, Jesus was never dragged away and enticed by His own evil desires (as it says in James): He had none. His temptations were always external and never internal. I also believe that this was true for Adam and Eve, at least up until they had disobeyed the first time. I suppose that it should also be said that this does not mean that Jesus' temptations were any easier to deal with (humanly speaking), since He bore the full weight of _all_ His temptations by resisting them completely, even to the point of death. |
||||||
36 | Is incomplete temptation real temptation | Heb 4:15 | RWC | 4766 | ||
Hmmm.... When God created humans, He made us significantly different from the rest of the animal world: He gave us the ability to make choices (the ability to exercise will). Whether that will is free or not or to what degree it might be free we will leave for another discussion! That ability to exercise will is the primary ingredient in what God wants most from us: love (agape love!). In order to love with God's kind of love (agape), we need to have BOTH the ability AND the opportunity. If either of those two things are removed, then we cannot love with God's love. And, as you said in part at least, that is precisely what God did in the Garden: He gave Adam and Eve both the ability to choose and the opportunity to choose. This brings me back to this discussion, and to the issue with which I wrestle. There is no doubt that Jesus had the opportunity to sin. He was tempted (externally) in every way that we are. But did He have the ability to do anything other than obey? If not, how does that qualify as an act of obedience or real temptation? The only explanation that I have been able to come up, thus far at least, is that when Jesus became a human being, He set aside all of His divine nature (not character, but power and abilities - see Php. 2.6-8 where we are told that Christ "emptied Himself" in order to prove His obedience) and became totally dependant upon the Holy Spirit, just as we are. In so doing, I wonder if Jesus was just as capable of disobeying as Adam had been. And yet, suggesting that this might be true sounds like it might be blasphemous! Thus my struggle! |
||||||
37 | How can Jesus be tempted if He is God? | Heb 4:15 | RWC | 4767 | ||
I agree with you completely that Jesus had no inward desire or inclination to sin. I am not so sure that the reason He did not sin when He was tempted is because of the fact that He was (and is) God. To avoid repetition, please see the note from Reformer Joe ("I hold that the reason for his temptation...") and my reply ("Hmmm... When God created humans, He made...") Your comments would be appreciated. | ||||||
38 | Is incomplete temptation real temptation | Heb 4:15 | RWC | 4907 | ||
Just brief reply. I have posted a question under the verse that we now seem to be discussing (Phil. 2.7). It might be good if you could copy your note above and make it a response to the question on that verse. I think that this is a pretty good explanation. I do not believe that Jesus' divinity was in any way reduced by His becoming a human being. I am just wondering if (and even of the opinion that) Jesus had set aside the use of the power that is His because of Who He is. (See my question on Phil. 2.7 for a little further expanation.) |
||||||
39 | Must one God mean one Person? | Heb 4:15 | RWC | 5979 | ||
Please forgive me if I wasn't very clear. Or perhaps you didn't read my note thoroughly. Or maybe both are true. First of all, my understanding of the Scripture is very much Trinitarian. I was only trying to clarify exactly what the point of difference is between the Trinitarian view and the "oneness" view. If you have not already done so, please read the message to which I was responding. That might help to clear up some of the misunderstanding. Secondly, even though I agree with you in our view on the Trinity, I am not at all sure that I would consider a creedal statement to be an authoritative proof providing "a simple answer." There is certainly some value in knowing how the people of history have understood the Scriptures. But that is not the same thing as the Scripture itself. A "simple answer," in my estimation, would be a few quotes from Scripture (taken in their context, of course!) |
||||||
40 | journal article | Heb 6:4 | RWC | 233715 | ||
Here is the new link to this article: http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/heb6.pdf |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 ] |