Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship Community Forums

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Faber

All of the Old Covenant commands are obsolete (Hebrews 8:13)

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, atpollard said:

Isn't "Natural Law" survival of the fittest?  The school bully is natural law.  People making fun of someone who is different is natural law.

No.  That would be the Law of Nature.

 

Natural Law is the law that God put into place and governs all the world...even atheists.

 

For example,,,everyone (NOT really everyone)  knows that murder is wrong.

We know this NATURALLY,,,no need to be taught by any religion.

 

It's those moral beliefs that are commonly accepted by all humans....

 

(The law of nature is Darwinian in nature)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ben Asher said:

You make a good point. While I believe the Torah as described in the Pentateuch was given primarily to Israel alone, the New Testament actually makes mention of and repeats at least 9 of the commandments.  A Christian may not be saved by keeping them, but I believe a saved Christian will naturally keep them.

 

 

Agreed.

 

As I've stated...the Civil and Ceremonial Law is abolished...

I believe it's abolished even for Jews since there is no temple.

 

However, the Moral Law will never be abolished.

It's true and in effect for everyone who believes in God.

 

Your last sentence is also correct...

"A Christian may not be saved by keeping them, but I believe a saved Christian will naturally keep them."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
23 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

I don't believe in total depravity.

I believe we're all born with the sin nature...obtained through Adam's sin.

 

Total depravity means we are incapable, or unable.

If we are incapable or unable to choose between good and evil, it means that ultimately we cannot be held responsible for our sins.

 

And yet Jesus said:

 

John 5:27-29

27and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. 

28“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 

29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deedsto a resurrection of judgment.

 

Why would ANY judgement be necessary if God has already chosen the saved and the lost?

 

Jesus said that those who did GOOD DEEDS will be resurrected to life and those who committed evil deeds to a resurrection of judgement or condemnation.

 

If God decides all,,,,there is no reason for a final judgement since we are already judged, and there would be no differentiation between the good and the evil if everyone were depraved...

 

Jesus' very words mean that persons are capable of doing good.

Once again you're equating works which if possible might earn salvation and the good works which are the fruits of the Holy Spirit that evidences salvation. You have made Jesus Christ unnecessary if man is ABLE to achieve the standard by which the Law demands.

 

Matthew 7:16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Titus 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

 

As far as shifting the blame upon the shoulders of God you should engage that kinda misconception in an other thread to do with the doctrine of "double predestination". God doesn't make us sinners nor is He accountable or responsible for the reprobate. God is not obligated to save everyone without exception. Get over your human understanding of what is fair and quit projecting your standards upon God. The reprobate have rejected Christ therefore they shall be held accountable and responsible for their own sins. Whereas Jesus Christ is held accountable for the sins of the Elect as our federal head.

 

 

On John 5:29:

The inference which the Papists draw from those passages — that eternal life is suspended on the merits of works — may be refuted without any difficulty. For Christ does not now treat of the cause of salvation, but merely distinguishes the elect from the reprobate by their own mark; and he does so in order to invite and exhort his own people to a holy and blameless life. And indeed we do not deny that the faith which justifies us is accompanied by an earnest desire to live well and righteously; but we only maintain that our confidence cannot rest on any thing else than on the mercy of God alone. - John Calvin

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

Jesus' very words mean that persons are capable of doing good.

I will let you have the last word on that to avoid further topic drift. 

 

**********

 

Instead I will offer an observation on the latest topic, the Ten Commandments:

They are inadequate.  Even for the Mosaic Law, they are inadequate.  Allow me to present an example:

 

[Exo 20:13 NASB] 13 "You shall not murder.
[Deu 5:17 NASB] 17 'You shall not murder.

 

So under the OT Law, one can go through life having never even struck another person and think that you have fulfilled the command. 

 

[Mat 5:21-22 NASB] 21 "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.' 22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty [enough to go] into the fiery hell.

 

Jesus says that the commandment is only the beginning.  By God's reckoning, is any man not guilty of "murder"?  That is why Paul says that the function of the Law is to teach men about sin ... [Rom 7:7 NASB] 7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."

 

Instead we have been given two superior Commandments:

 

[Mat 22:37-40 NASB] 37 And He said to him, " 'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' 40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

 

To love God will address all of the Laws on idolatry and personal holiness and worship.  To love our neighbor, well as Paul said ... [Rom 13:9 NASB] 9 For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

 

Best of all ...

 

[Heb 10:11-18 NASB] 11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, 16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," [He then says,] 17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." 18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer [any] offering for sin.

 

... these better Commandments are written directly on our hearts and minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, William said:

Once again you're equating works which earn salvation and the good works which are the fruits of the Holy Spirit which evidences salvation. You have made Jesus Christ unnecessary if man is ABLE to achieve the standard by which the Law demands.

 

Are we not saved persons?

How am I equating works with getting saved?

I'm posting words that Jesus said....not words that I made up.

 

Jesus said we will be judge by our good deeds and some by their evil deeds.

HE said this,,,not me.

 

How is following Jesus making Him unnecessary?

What would you say is the difference between the Old Covenant (Mosaic) and the New Covenant?

 

In which Atonement theory do you believe?

3 minutes ago, William said:

 

Matthew 7:16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Titus 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

 

Titus 2:14 is speaking about the Jesus Victor atonement theory.

Which is the one I believe, BTW.

Jesus died to redeem us from our bondage to satan....

which we have been under since Adam sinned,,,

and from the fear of death...

3 minutes ago, William said:

 

As far as shifting the blame upon the shoulders of God you should engage that kinda misconception in an other thread to do with the doctrine of "double predestination". God doesn't make us sinners nor is He accountable or responsible for the reprobate. God is not obligated to save everyone. Get over your human understanding of what is fair and quit projecting your standards upon God. The reprobate have rejected Christ therefore they shall be held accountable and responsible for their own sins. Whereas Jesus Christ is held accountable for the sins of the Elect as our federal head.

 

I can't know all the threads available.

I make comments as they come to mind and try not to derail too much.

I don't really care to discuss double predestination, but I'll say this:

 

If God predestinates everything, which is what Calvin taught, then yes, God is responsible for sin.  If I'm depraved to the point that I cannot do any good and God predestinated this...then yes, He is responsible for my sin, and He becomes the author of sin.

 

I don't project my standards on God,,, HE PROJECTS HIS STANDARDS ON ME.

He made US in HIS image....not v v.

God is LOVE, MERCY, JUSTICE and HOLINESS....not US.

 

The reprobate have rejected Christ because God did not choose them for salvation. Unconditional Election means that persons are chosen based on nothing at all.  If this is wrong, you could correct me.

 

Also, you might want to link me to that other thread,,,but I probably won't be too interested.

 

 

3 minutes ago, William said:

 

The inference which the Papists draw from those passages — that eternal life is suspended on the merits of works — may be refuted without any difficulty. For Christ does not now treat of the cause of salvation, but merely distinguishes the elect from the reprobate by their own mark; and he does so in order to invite and exhort his own people to a holy and blameless life. And indeed we do not deny that the faith which justifies us is accompanied by an earnest desire to live well and righteously; but we only maintain that our confidence cannot rest on any thing else than on the mercy of God alone. - John Calvin

 

 

Our confidence rests on choosing to be saved by the sacrifice of Jesus and being a disciple of His.

Romans 10:9-10

9that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 

10for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, atpollard said:

I will let you have the last word on that to avoid further topic drift. 

 

**********

 

Instead I will offer an observation on the latest topic, the Ten Commandments:

They are inadequate.  Even for the Mosaic Law, they are inadequate.  Allow me to present an example:

 

[Exo 20:13 NASB] 13 "You shall not murder.
[Deu 5:17 NASB] 17 'You shall not murder.

 

So under the OT Law, one can go through life having never even struck another person and think that you have fulfilled the command. 

 

[Mat 5:21-22 NASB] 21 "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.' 22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty [enough to go] into the fiery hell.

 

Jesus says that the commandment is only the beginning.  By God's reckoning, is any man not guilty of "murder"?  That is why Paul says that the function of the Law is to teach men about sin ... [Rom 7:7 NASB] 7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."

 

Instead we have been given two superior Commandments:

 

[Mat 22:37-40 NASB] 37 And He said to him, " 'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' 40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

 

To love God will address all of the Laws on idolatry and personal holiness and worship.  To love our neighbor, well as Paul said ... [Rom 13:9 NASB] 9 For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

 

Best of all ...

 

[Heb 10:11-18 NASB] 11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, 16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," [He then says,] 17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." 18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer [any] offering for sin.

 

... these better Commandments are written directly on our hearts and minds.

I've said several times that the commandments have been moved from the mind to the heart.

 

I agree with the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
Just now, GodsGrace said:

Are we not saved persons?

How am I equating works with getting saved?

I'm posting words that Jesus said....not words that I made up.

Lemme say this, first you suggest that you agree with Ephesians 2:8-9 and then you do a word search for "works" and seemingly do not even take into account the context before you post a word list for the desired search.

 

Again, you're better off posting your Catholic contentiousness in another thread. I'd be happy to put your papist theology in place in the Calvinist section of the board.

22 hours ago, GodsGrace said:

Anything can be proven from some verses....I  believe what we have to do is take the entire bible as a whole thought and go with that.

When you respond to me with something like this and do not apply it to yourself it makes me not want to engage you.

 

Posting a list of verses with the word "works" doesn't mean you're systematic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, atpollard said:

No argument from me on this.  Christians are WAY too enamored with the OT Law.  My fathers were never in Egypt or Sinai or promised land in the Middle East.  They were fishing the coasts of Norway and Wales and Italy.  THAT covenant was not made with me. 

 

[Acts 15:28-29 NASB] 28 "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: 29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell."

 

Happy to read this, as this was basically the main point I was trying to get across.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ben Asher said:

 

Happy to read this, as this was basically the main point I was trying to get across.

I know. 

I realized I was spending too much effort "straining gnats" and not contributing to "All of the Old Covenant commands are obsolete (Hebrews 8:13)".

 

People also seem over impressed with Hebrew words. 

I mean, being able to actually READ Greek or Hebrew is probably a really useful thing, ... but saying "Hasatan" insead of "Satan" or "Rhema" instead of "Word" in some statement of theological drivel doesn't change the fact that it was theological drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, William said:

Lemme say this, first you suggest that you agree with Ephesians 2:8-9 and then you do a word search for "works" and seemingly do not even take into account the context before you post a word list for the desired search.

 

Again, you're better off posting your Catholic contentiousness in another thread. I'd be happy to put your papist theology in place in the Calvinist section of the board.

When you respond to me with something like this and do not apply it to yourself it makes me not want to engage you.

 

Posting a list of verses with the word "works" doesn't mean you're systematic.

 

Quite frankly William,

I don't know what you're talking about.

 

There are scores of verses that support good works/deeds.

I can't help it if you don't agree with good works.  Are you for bad works??

 

Also,  I'm not catholic and you keep speaking to me as though I am.

Not that there's anything wrong with it...it's just not my accepted doctrine.

I also find it rather strange that Calvin got his ideas from Augustine who was Catholic, and a gnostic one at that, I might add.  He took his gnosticsm and manichaeism with him into the catholic religion.

 

Also, what did I respond to you to which you take exception?

Was it the long list of verses with the word WORKS in it?

I can't remember posting that to you.

However, if I'm trying to support my belief in good works,,,the veses will have the word works in them AND they'll be in context which is why I don't post all of them that I find.  We can go thru them one by one if you wish.

 

You'll find that I do not apply anything personally to myself.

I'm here to discuss doctrine...not me.  I'm sure I don't understand what you mean by this, so I'll just let it go.

 

As to systematic...again I don't know what you mean.

You might be referring to systematic theology.

Did I say I was of that school?

No.

Because I don't consider myself of ANY school, I just follow and believe what I read in the New Testament.

 

It might be different than what you believe...

so be it.  We'll find out soon enough that God will not be put in a box.

2 minutes ago, atpollard said:

I know. 

I realized I was spending too much effort "straining gnats" and not contributing to "All of the Old Covenant commands are obsolete (Hebrews 8:13)".

 

People also seem over impressed with Hebrew words. 

I mean, being able to actually READ Greek or Hebrew is probably a really useful thing, ... but saying "Hasatan" insead of "Satan" or "Rhema" instead of "Word" in some statement of theological drivel doesn't change the fact that it was theological drivel.

What is theological drivel?

The Word of God?

And the Word of God is different from the Rhema of God.

 

There is a difference which doesn't come to mind right now,,,I had done a small study on this about two years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@atpollard

 

I found this quick in wikipedia,

but I remember that when I was learning about it,

I did find it very interesting...

 

In Christianity[edit]

Main article: Rhema (doctrine)

In Christianity, rhema is used in Bible study to signify Jesus Christ's utterances.[citation needed] The Greek word rhema is useful to distinguish between two meanings of word. While both rhema and logos are translated into the English word, in the original Greek there was a substantial distinction.

Some modern usage distinguishes rhema from logos in Christian theology, with rhema at times called "spoken word",[8] referring to the revelation received by disciples when the Holy Spirit"speaks" to them.[8][9] In this usage, "Logos" refers to Christ.[10]

Edited by GodsGrace
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GodsGrace said:

Quite frankly William,

I don't know what you're talking about.

I am not trying to argue, or convince, just trying to explain what William is talking about:

 

View 1:  Good Works are the ROOT of Salvation; natural man is capable of doing what God requires to be saved; Salvation comes from what we do.

View 2:  Good Works are the FRUIT of Salvation; natural man is incapable of doing what God requires to be saved; God saves us and then we do good works.

 

William holds View 2 and is accusing you of holding View 1 (View 1 is also held by the Catholic Church).

I hope that makes it understandable (even if you completely disagree).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, atpollard said:

I am not trying to argue, or convince, just trying to explain what William is talking about:

 

View 1:  Good Works are the ROOT of Salvation; natural man is capable of doing what God requires to be saved; Salvation comes from what we do.

View 2:  Good Works are the FRUIT of Salvation; natural man is incapable of doing what God requires to be saved; God saves us and then we do good works.

 

William holds View 2 and is accusing you of holding View 1 (View 1 is also held by the Catholic Church).

I hope that makes it understandable (even if you completely disagree).

Thanks A,,,

I've said several times that I agree with Ephesians 2:8-9, and so does the catholic church, BTW.  And I'm not catholic....not that there's anything wrong with it.

 

I explained that everyone here is most probably saved...I haven't come across any atheists....

 

SO....if we're all saved....and I agree with Ephesians 2:8-9 doesn't that tell you something about what I think about works?

 

Works come AFTER salvation.

But they do come...

I've spoken to lots of Christians that tell me works are not necessary...

I DO NOT agree with this.  Works are necessary,  WE are the hands and feet of God here in His Kingdom on Earth.

 

Can't make it more clear than that.

But,  anyone CAN disagree with me.

I don't believe that persons on any particular site have to agree about everything...

 

13 minutes ago, atpollard said:

I am not trying to argue, or convince, just trying to explain what William is talking about:

 

View 1:  Good Works are the ROOT of Salvation; natural man is capable of doing what God requires to be saved; Salvation comes from what we do.

View 2:  Good Works are the FRUIT of Salvation; natural man is incapable of doing what God requires to be saved; God saves us and then we do good works.

 

William holds View 2 and is accusing you of holding View 1 (View 1 is also held by the Catholic Church).

I hope that makes it understandable (even if you completely disagree).

Just to make it perfectly clear:

 

I also hold to view 2.

Man cannot do anything of any value to save himself.

Only faith in God can save.

After salvation..we are called to do good works...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

@atpollard

 

I found this quick in wikipedia,

but I remember that when I was learning about it,

I did find it very interesting...

 

In Christianity[edit]

Main article: Rhema (doctrine)

In Christianity, rhema is used in Bible study to signify Jesus Christ's utterances.[citation needed] The Greek word rhema is useful to distinguish between two meanings of word. While both rhema and logos are translated into the English word, in the original Greek there was a substantial distinction.

Some modern usage distinguishes rhema from logos in Christian theology, with rhema at times called "spoken word",[8] referring to the revelation received by disciples when the Holy Spirit"speaks" to them.[8][9] In this usage, "Logos" refers to Christ.[10]

I wish that was what they were talking about.  Where I ran into it was where a "Jewish Prophetess" (her self-proclaimed title) stood up and announced some contra-biblical prosperity prediction and then told us that we had just had a 'Rhema' moment. 

If she said "God just told me", her foolishness would have been apparent, but by throwing in a Greek word like Rhema ... well she MUST be a real prophetess, right? :RpS_blink:

I later suggested that the Church needed to gather a pile of cobbles (fist sized rocks) on the side of the raised platform so we could read Deuteronomy 18:20 NKJV ('But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.') and point to the pile of rocks before any 'prophet' speaks.  Then they can decide if they still have a "Rhema" word from God.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

What is theological drivel?

"By his stripes we WERE healed.  You will notice that the statement is in the past tense.  God has already healed you.  I have never been sick, because I just stand on God's word and believe that Jesus blood already healed me.  Who are you listening to? Are you listening to the doctors?  If you keep saying 'I have diabetes', then you are doubting that God has ALREADY healed you.  Your lack of faith is blocking your healing.  Now say 'I HAD diabetes, but by the stripes of Jesus I WAS healed.  Take charge over that illness and comand it to go away!"

 

- That is theological drivel.  Now imagine how much more impressive it would sound to a new Christian if I sprinkled a few Greek and Hebrew words in there ... like "Yeshua" and "Yahweh".  Maybe throw in the word "aorist tense" for good measure.  I must know what I am talking about then, right?

 

Here is the verse in context:

[1Pe 2:21-24 NKJV] 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: 22 "Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth"; 23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed [Himself] to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness--by whose stripes you were healed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, atpollard said:

I wish that was what they were talking about.  Where I ran into it was where a "Jewish Prophetess" (her self-proclaimed title) stood up and announced some contra-biblical prosperity prediction and then told us that we had just had a 'Rhema' moment. 

If she said "God just told me", her foolishness would have been apparent, but by throwing in a Greek word like Rhema ... well she MUST be a real prophetess, right? :RpS_blink:

I later suggested that the Church needed to gather a pile of cobbles (fist sized rocks) on the side of the raised platform so we could read Deuteronomy 18:20 NKJV ('But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.') and point to the pile of rocks before any 'prophet' speaks.  Then they can decide if they still have a "Rhema" word from God.

Yes, I see what you mean.  I don't read each and every post...I'm sorry about that.

I do agree with your feelings above.

Although Rhema is a real idea/concept it can be used to sound smart.

There are these churches that have prophets...I believe it's the WofFaith movement. I think Jesus was the last revelation and we don't need prophets anymore....Unless by prophet we mean someone that speaks the word of God that is already spoken and biblical....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, atpollard said:

"By his stripes we WERE healed.  You will notice that the statement is in the past tense.  God has already healed you.  I have never been sick, because I just stand on God's word and believe that Jesus blood already healed me.  Who are you listening to? Are you listening to the doctors?  If you keep saying 'I have diabetes', then you are doubting that God has ALREADY healed you.  Your lack of faith is blocking your healing.  Now say 'I HAD diabetes, but by the stripes of Jesus I WAS healed.  Take charge over that illness and comand it to go away!"

 

- That is theological drivel.  Now imagine how much more impressive it would sound to a new Christian if I sprinkled a few Greek and Hebrew words in there ... like "Yeshua" and "Yahweh".  Maybe throw in the word "aorist tense" for good measure.  I must know what I am talking about then, right?

 

Here is the verse in context:

[1Pe 2:21-24 NKJV] 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: 22 "Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth"; 23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed [Himself] to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness--by whose stripes you were healed.

I don't even believe the wounds refers to physical wounds but the wounds caused by previous sin.  It just says that we will suffer like Jesus suffered and vengeance lies in the hands of God if anyone lets us suffer, like Jesus did....(I don't mean Jesus makes us suffer...this came out wrong) and that Jesus carried our sins in His body when He was on the cross.

 

As to physical healing...I believe a miracle can happen...but it IS a miracle.

We can't claim to be healed if we aren't.  This could cause some to lose their faith.

Also, people from these churches are told that they don't receive their healing because they don't have enough faith.  How MUCH faith is necessary for God to heal?  They're told that they have sin in their life....who doesn't?

 

I think it's a terrible doctrine and not supported by scripture.

 

Oh.  And the aorist tense.  Like we really even understand it....

Like the English is not sufficient...Like if we don't know Greek, how will we ever know enough to be saved?  It's all rather silly.  Theologians and biblical scholars could discuss the nuance of a word...but I think it's beyond our scope; no reason to have to know it.

Edited by GodsGrace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, atpollard said:

People also seem over impressed with Hebrew words.  

1

I guess by people you are referring to monolingual anglophones?

 

20 hours ago, atpollard said:

I mean, being able to actually READ Greek or Hebrew is probably a really useful thing, ...

I believe that being able to communicate in a modern foreign language and read (Modern or Biblical) with comprehension can really useful and eye-opening (or perspective changing).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Obsolete" is just a matter of perspective. A covenant doesn't really go away from a legal or lawful point of view.

 

1. "Obsolete" means it no longer saves. One at a point can no longer rely on an older covenant to be saved. The formal cut off point is defined in the Bible. The proclaiming of Law and Prophets (i.e., OT) is until John the Baptist, since then the Gospel is to be preached.

 

2. "Obsolete" means we Christians are no longer judged using the older covenant. Under the older covenant, we are the sinners, but under the New Covenant we can be deemed as the righteous.With the New Covenant in effect, "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more. Heb 8:13).

 

3. By and large, OT is above an older covenant granted to the Jews. It has almost nothing to do with today's humans. God just demonstrated through the Jews that each and every human is subject to a covenant either to be saved or condemned. While a covenant serves the purpose of identifying the righteous from the wicked. As time goes by and with humans walking further away from God, a covenant will finally lose its salvation effect (as the Mosaic covenant did). Then it's time for God to grant a new covenant, such that the righteous can be told apart from the wicked again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hawkins said:

"Obsolete" is just a matter of perspective. A covenant doesn't really go away from a legal or lawful point of view.

 

1. "Obsolete" means it no longer saves.

 The only laws that have to be obeyed from them are the ones repeated in the New Covenant. If I lived in Connecticut in 1730 and continued to do so until 1800 from a legal or lawful point of view I would not have to obey any British law once the USA became a nation.

All of the British laws for me have been made obsolete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • Christ is the same substance/essence (hypostasis) as the Father (Hebrews 1:3)

      Hebrews 1:3  And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. (NASB, the underlined is mine)    a. Concerning "the exact representation" (charaktēr)      1. J. P. Louw and Eugene Nida: a representation as an exact reproduction of a particular form or structure - 'exact representation.' 'who is the reflection of

      in God (Trinitarian doctrines)

    • Ligon Duncan on Covenant Theology vs. Dispensationalism

      I love to talk to Ligon Duncan about pretty much anything, but it was especially enjoyable to talk to him about one of his many areas of expertise—covenant theology. As he mentions in our conversation, he has taught a Covenant Theology course at Reformed Theological Seminary 30-something times. The audio for this course is available via iTunes and is well worth listening through—especially if, like me, you did not grow up understanding how covenant provides a framework for understanding the whol

      in Christian Current Events

    • Best arguments for Covenant/Household Baptism

      Really short version by JTB.SDG:   1) The covenant promises to Abraham were about salvation in the fullest sense (Gen.17:7-8; NT scripture). "...to be God to you and to your descendants after you." This is the essence of God's covenant with Abraham; and if you get this, everything else falls into place (below).   2) The covenant promises were made not only to Abraham but also to his offspring (Gen.17:7-8). "I will be God" --not just to Abraham--But: "to you and to your descendants afte

      in Covenant/Household Baptism

    • What About Hebrews 6?

      Hebrews 6 is one of the most difficult passages of Scripture to understand, mainly because we don’t know who wrote the book or the circumstances surrounding its writing. If we knew, for instance, that the author was writing to people who had fallen in among the Judaizers like those in Galatia, he would be making an argument against salvation by the law. For someone to turn again to the law would be to reject everything he had received under the Gospel. The grace he had received in the Spirit wou

      in Bible Study

    • Need help with an apologetics question re: Old Covenant

      I was talking with a somewhat liberal Catholic who has also attended the Eastern Orthodox for a period of time.  He said that he didn't believe in the Catholic notion that if you commit one mortal sin you go to hell, but that there was certainly greater and lesser sins.  I said that I believed all sins were mortal in a sense, in that we all deserve hell for our sins. He said that if that were the case, then Christians would be worse off then under the Old Covenant where you could sacrifice anima

      in Apologetics and Theology

×
×
  • Create New...