yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
ahhh..... maybe getting somewhere now.....
Did you read John 17 this week, or ever ?
Jesus' prayer for His disciples, AND for the disciples that would be later....
Upvote
0
Obedience for Obedience' Sake
- Thread starter Tree of Life
- Start date
Did you read John 17 this week, or ever ?
Jesus' prayer for His disciples, AND for the disciples that would be later....
Almost there
Well-Known Member
- Oct 24, 2017
- 3,571
- 1,152
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good question. I'm still researching. I keep a pretty open mind about anything like this that I'm seeing "as through a mirror darkly".
Upvote
0
Almost there
Well-Known Member
- Oct 24, 2017
- 3,571
- 1,152
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I've been a christian since 1980, actively seeking his message for me during that time. For the last four years I've had a 160 mile daily commute. I have a thumb drive in my dashboard with a spoken bible on it. My commute is a little over three hours (total). I focus mainly on the new testament but run through the old from time to time. I tend to immerse in one book over and over again each week.
I've had a lot of new revelations over this last four years. It's amazing how the bible is different when you listen to it than when you read it. Both are valuable. But having sites like Biblehub, rethinkinghell, rethinkingheaven and all the rest out there, not to mention Google and Bing, makes us without excuse more than ever.
Regarding John 17. Yes, I've learned that ANYTHING in red letters is especially worth studying.
Upvote
0
Oldmantook
Well-Known Member
Yes we all see as such. Only hindsight is perfect; haha. I see two resurrections and one judgment. However, if you come up with anything let me know.
Upvote
0
I said to make 'wise decision'. Not about 'right and wrong' decisions.
The Scripture tells us what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to God. The Word of God is our daily bread. As one feed on the written Word, one is more sensitive to the leading to the Holy Spirit. Whenever someone is faced with a difficult situation and suddenly a Scriptural verse that has not been read for a long time pops-out in the mind as a solution to the situation, that is being led by the Spirit. The point is that without the Holy Spirit, the written Word alone cannot tell you what job to choose, where to live, what business partner is suitable. There are many cases in which one will be in a situation where the options are not contrary to the written word of God, that is where I need the counsel of God.
The things in bold actually reveals the problem of liberal churches. It shows a point of view that it is possible for believers to walk contrary to God's word and still feet at peace; it JUST SHOWS HOW COMFORTABLE SOME CHRISTIANS ARE WITH SIN.
Your environment precisely proves my point that churches that do not teach the Fear of the Lord will produce fruits of believers that can still feel at peace when they are at sin.
Actually, in that paragraph. I mentioned:
'Righteousness comes from Christ' 1 time (at the beginning of the paragraph)
'Peace of God' 4 times.
Why do you still feel the need to tell me as if I do not know that the peace comes from God. Just in case you are not clear.
There is no contradiction in
1. Jesus is our peace
2. Christian is guided by the peace of God through our active response in receiving mode(wavelength of peace).
They are complementary to each other.
No 1 is the foundation, but we can have the privilege to advance and have no 2 as well.
The only sensible explanation why you are responding this way is because your understanding of 'Peace of God' is limited only to knowing that a believer is made judicially righteous by Christ. As mentioned in Romans 5:1 [Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:], Jesus is our peace is the foundation. The understanding that we have been made judicially righteous does give us peace. The Peace of God that comes from justification(being made righteous judicially) is static as believers have that foundational peace irregardless of what they do. However, God expects us to grow and not stay still at the foundational stuffs (Hebrews 6:1). A believer can receive greater quantity of the peace of God beyond the peace that comes from justification.
There is a deeper Peace of God for believers that can be received with an active response. When I stated 'This wavelength of peace is maintained as long as I am walking in ways that are acceptable to God', what it means is doing an active response in my part to receive that perfect Peace of God. 'Wavelength of peace is maintained' means I am in receiving mode. 'Wavelength of peace not maintained' means I am not in receiving mode.
Here are the verses that prove the perfect Peace of God needs our active response -
Isaiah 26:3 [Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee.]
John 14:27 [ Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.] There is a deeper Peace of God given by Jesus that needs our active response.
Whatever is not of faith(believe God's Word or give glory to God) is sin. Whenever I am troubled or afraid, then I am sinning. If our mind is stayed on God (worshipping God in every instance, remembering His Word, staying out of sin by remembering God) then we will have perfect peace. If our mind is not stayed on God, then we will not have perfect peace.
You are trying to correct me, but it is you whom is shallower in the revelation of God. You remind of me of the basic stuff when I am talking about the deeper stuff.
Furthermore when you said [to have the "peace which passes all understanding" is to have him, to be in intimate, unbroken fellowship with him.] what does it mean practically? By the way, stop quoting Bible verse partially. Let me give you the full verse.
Ph 4:7 [And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.] Yes we have the peace of God through Jesus Christ. But do you dare to tell me that after you have committed a sin knowingly and have not confessed your sin and ask for forgiveness - that your total peace in heart and mind is unaffected at all? If you quote Phillipians 4:7 and actually fully understand what this verse means, my understanding of 'Peace of God' and the analogy of 'wavelength of peace(of God)' is totally in line with the Scripture. The part of human that tells us whether we sin or not is OUR HEART AND MIND. Not our flesh. A believer that can claim the perfect peace is maintained even after he/she sin knowingly without needing to confess and asking for forgiveness - IS OBVIOUSLY HAS BECOME TOO COMFORTABLE WITH SIN. Let me give you a warning that false peace can exist too
Jeremiah 6:14-15 [14 They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace. 15 Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD.]
You are trying to correct me when there is no contradiction. But I will be patient, I cannot really blame you because this verse is not so easily understood by many.
You cannot just take interpret a verse by ignoring the first half of the sentence. The entire verse must be taken into account to construct the meaning
If you take 'my glory will I not give to another' in isolation. Then your intepretation would seem correct, God does not give His glory to another. But then the closing part of the verse is 'neither my praise to graven images.' is still problematic for your interpretation.
If (hypothetically speaking) we delete the 'I am the LORD: that is my name: and'. And just pretend the verse of Isaiah 42:8 to be [my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images]. If we want to use your interpretation to be consistent. Then it must be
1. My glory will I not give to another = I will not give my glory to another
2. neither my praise to graven images = I will not give my praise to graven images
Do you see something wrong here? Why would God out of the blue says 'I will not give praise to graven images'. But even baby Christian would know what no 2 is really saying is that God will not permit Himself to be praised through graven images. He is not saying 'I will not give praise to graven images'.
Isaiah 42:8 starts with 'I am the LORD, that is My name: and'.
You completely ignore the word 'AND' as if the beginning of the verse does not play a role in completing the meaning of Isaiah 42:8.
What the entire Isaiah 42:8 is saying that
'I am the LORD: that is my name: and the glory(of my name) will I not give to another' and 'I will not permit My name to be praised through carved images'.
The glory of God's name is that it is an object of worship.
Psalm 29:2, Psalm 66:2, Psalm 96:8, Psalm 115:1
The real interpretation of 'and my glory(of my name) will I not give to another' is that God will not permit other being to become an object of worship in which humans give glory to. A few verses after that in Isaiah 42:12 [Let them give glory unto the LORD, and declare his praise in the islands]. Isaiah 42:8-12 talks about LORD as exclusive object to give glory and praise to. That is the message of Isaiah 42:8-12.
The interpretation of 'I will not give my glory to another' in which the believers cannot partake of God's glory is wrong because it would contradict verses throughout the Old Testament and New Testament.
Psalm 3:3, Psalm 4:2, Psalm 62:7, Isaiah 58:8 [Then shall thy light break forth as the morning, and thine health shall spring forth speedily: and thy righteousness shall go before thee; the glory of the LORD shall be thy reward.]
John 7:18 [He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh HIS glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.]
John 17:22 [And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:]
Through your own tradition, you have just made the word of God of none effect. God is perfect but He can be ashamed too. You are the one whom insist that there is contradiction in the Scripture when I do not see it that way. God is perfect but He created the creation for His pleasure. If God cannot feel ashamed, those verses in the Scripture is just a waste of space and time to be recorded. I wanted to pull more verse in the Scripture to prove that God can be ashamed, but choose not to because you are going to ignore it anyway.
[we ought to recognize that this is only an approximation, a speaking of God from our own frame of reference, and not a literal description of Him.] You have just used a tactic of the serpent in the garden of Eden by using the following reasoning 'Did God really say?' , 'God did not really meant what He says'. It is extremely difficult to give another possible explanation than to believe that the premise of your message is that 'God is perfect, therefore even if we sin, it does not affect Him in any way. Therefore He is not ashamed even when we sin'. But does this belief stands-up to the entire message of the Scripture? God the Father has to see His Son got punished and suffer wrath for God's plan to redeem mankind from sin to be complete.
I will believe the premise of your message ONLY if there is an alternate creation. An alternate creation in which the creator choose to judicially forgive the created beings even if they sin without costing the creator anything.
In our 'real' creation that we live-in, it costs the suffering of Jesus for the redemption from sin to be complete. God the Father is Almighty and is the Most High. He does not answer to anybody and surely can create the rules of creation whatsoever He choose. Nobody can question Him if He were to choose to create an alternative creation like the way you want it to be. Even though He can choose to create a creation like the way you want it, fact is He didn't. The message of the Scripture on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is that God is telling us that if we sin, He doesn't like it. He is willing to suffer together with the creation (even though He is Almighty and doesn't have to) by the life of Jesus and give us a theme to let us know sin is SERIOUS. Apparently, that is the rules of the game that God the Father has set. We ought to accept the creation (and its rules) that God has created AS IT IS, not the creation what we LIKE IT TO BE with the false assumption of 'God is Almighty surely He does not bother with my sin'
You are the one whom is being arbitrary all along not me. You have wrong expressed my position. My point is not that there is a 'hierarchy of verses'. My point is that there is a 'chronology of order'. I have expressed that quite clearly when I give the analogy of 'Fear of the LORD' as elementary school and 'love for the LORD' as secondary school. My position of 'chronology of order' is proven by the Scripture.
1. Ecc 12:13
2. The fact that the requirement to love God comes in the second book of the- Bible Exodus. The requirement to Fear the Lord appears in the first book of the Bible- Genesis.
You are deliberately trying to present a false option to cover-up the requirement of 'Fear of the LORD'. It is not a contest of which phrase is stronger. The 2 phrases have different coverage even if there is overlap.
In a simpler analogy (I REPEAT ANALOGY), in Ecc 12 Solomon was saying 'To graduate from High School, you need to complete Science and Maths'. And in Matthew 22, Jesus was asked ' What is the most important topic in Maths?' and then Jesus responded 'Learn Algebra, that is the most important topic in Maths, because if you master Algebra then you would perfectly complete the requirement to get 100% in Maths'
This kind of reasoning is trying to deny the divine authorship of the Scripture. God does use human writer to record Scripture and permit that human experience to be revealed to the reader of the Scripture. However, the Scripture cannot err and is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16, Matthew 22:29) and cannot be broken (John 10:35). David wrote Psalm 95 as described in Hebrews 4:7, but in Hebrews 3:7 states that the message in Psalm 95 is spoken by the Holy Spirit. However, even then the Holy Spirit does not speak on His own authority. John 16:13 [Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.]
A message will not become a verse in Scripture without the approval of God the Father.
You are totally wrong. Do not quote 1 John 4:18 partially, here is the entire verse [There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.]
What Paul is saying that 'He that feareth (torment) is not made perfect in love', you cannot chop the verse into pieces as if the words before that are not directly connected. Little wonder that many people including yourself cannot harmonize Scripture.
Paul was not asking people not to Fear the Lord or else it will contradict many many portion of Scripture. What Paul is conveying from that message is that if one has been made perfect in love, the attitude of serving with 'Fear of the Lord' will not have the fear of punishment elements in it.
When the New Testament is originally written, there is no chapters and verses. It is better to understand what the context of 1 Corinthians 13 if we read how 1 Corinthians 12 ended with.
1 Corinthians 12:31- 1 Corinthians 13:3
[But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.]
The context of the message is that.
[Covet earnestly gifts from God but let me show you more excellent way. Even if you obtain all of God's gift and have earthshaking faith, but if you do not have love. YOU WILL PERSONALLY BENEFIT NOTHING.]
Here is the keyword 'it profiteth me nothing'. Paul was saying he would not have the benefit of life if the actions that he does- have no love in it. The message is that for believers to benefit in the Christian life, there needs to be love.
The theme of 1 Cor 13:1-13 did not say 'it profiteth God nothing'. Faith does please God (Heb 11:6, Psalm 147:11).
1 Corinthians 13 talks the need to have love in the actions that you do in regards to horizontal relationship with other people so that the doer can benefit from it. It has nothing to do whether the actions are acceptable to God.
Romans 13:8-10
[8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.]
He specifically says 'love one another' has fulfilled the law.
If we combined 1 Corinthians 13 and Romans 13:10, Paul was conveying that 'whomever you are interacting with, you need to have motive of love.'
I accept the message of 1 Cor 13 and Romans 13 wholeheartedly. Here is that part where we disagree, that. You said that 'Love is the only acceptable basis' and 'only sole motive' which is un-Scriptural.
By the way, since you want to get so technical about acceptable motive.
Romans 14:23
[And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.]
What actions are of faith? Whenever that action is accompanied by the motive of giving glory to God according to Romans 4:20.
Romans 4:20
[He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;]
1 Corinthians 10:31
[Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.]
Romans 14:23 said that whatever actions that do not have the motive of giving glory to God is sin. Romans 13:10 says love is the fulfillment of the law. But the fulfillment of the law if the law is not established has not achieved the purposes of justification (Romans 3:31).
If we put together Romans 14:23 and Romans 13:10, an action accompanied by the motive of love which fulfills the law but absent the motive of wanting to give glory to God. That action is still not acceptable to God. How is that so? Let me give you an Old Testament analogy, God expects believers to have burnt offering under the Mosaic law. But that burnt offering must have the PRIMARY motivation to to be done as a service to GOD to be counted as an act of worship (an act of giving glory to God). If somebody performs burnt-offering without remembering God and just do it for the pleasure of BBQ smell, then that act of burnt-offering is not counted as a service to God. Giving glory to God = service to God. Whatever is not of service to God is sin.
Romans 3:27-31[27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.]
Romans 3:31 made it very clear, it is only through faith that the law is established - that law achieve the goal of justification(get right with God). According to Romans 14:23 an action is a sin without faith.
Without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6).
Therefore, ONLY ACTIONS that PLEASE GOD are acts of faith.
What are some of the actions that please God?
Psalm 147:11 [The Lord taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.]
Romans 3:28 state one can be justified without keeping the law at all as long as there is faith. Love functions as the fulfillment of the law. Jesus response in Matthew 22:37 [Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind] is a response to the question Matthew 22:36 [Master, which is the great commandment in the law?]. Therefore according to Romans 3:28, your belief of [I don't see that the duties of man described by Solomon cannot be fulfilled from a motive of love.] is wrong. Without faith, an action is not counted as act of worship therefore is sin; without faith, a person is not justified.
Fear of the LORD is faith according to Heb 11:6, Psalm 147:11. Therefore with these 2 verses and Romans 3:28, a person can be justified by Fear of the Lord alone without the deeds of the law.
Actually the theme of Romans 4:20, Romans 14:23, Romans 3:28, Hebrews 11:6, Psalm 147:11 ARE IN PERFECT HARMONY WITH Ecclesiastes 12:13 [Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.]
In chronological order
1. Fear God
2. Keep His Commandment (fulfill His law)
Love only fulfills no 2.
Fear God is 'being sensitive to God'. Being sensitive to God can be in the forms of
1. Fear of punishment that comes from the Almighty
2. So awed by God's majesty that one wants to worship God all the time.
Christians whom have not reached 'perfect love' as described by John will still elements of fear of punishment/wrath when it comes to the 'Fear of the Lord'. Nonetheless, obedience that comes with elements of fear of punishment is still acceptable to God. Numbers 25:10-13
[10 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 11 Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy. 12 Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace: 13 and he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel.]
Covenant of peace = Achieve justification. Only people whom are justified achieve peace with God (Romans 5:1)
You have a habit of chopping verses into half, and reading an entire theme of message partially. That's why you have many wrong interpretation. Jesus gave Matthew 7:15-20 before He gave Matthew 7:21-23. The point of matthew 7:15-23 is that gift of miracles does not prove obedience and tell us not to be easily deceived by miracles. We discern somebody whom is following God or not by look at his/her fruits.
[Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."]
Jesus was teaching the disciples to judge somebody by the fruits.
It is possible for some people not to follow Jesus and not believe Him as Savior but still use His name as a magic word to perform miracles according to Mark 9:38, Luke 9:49. Furthermore, the New Testament teaches the difference between fruits and gifts.
We are justified if we bear fruits [Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.] not because if we bear gifts.
Jesus actually stated because of what reason they are rejected is actually stated in the verse itself. The reason is : [ye that work iniquity]
You do not have to bring ideas outside the passage to interpret this.
If you have not figured-out by now that there is more commandments in the Scripture to Fear God than love God. You have not really read the Scripture.
BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible word or phrase in 65 languages and 205 versions.
Do a search on 'Fear God', 'Fear Lord', 'Love God', 'Love Lord' with MATCH ALL WORDS option.
Number of results display from KJV bible.
'Fear God' - 134 results
'Fear Lord' - 188 results
'Love God' - 92 results
'Love Lord' - 96 results
For purposes of accuracy, let me give a disclaimer.
Around 5-10% of the search results display 'Fear' and 'God' in the same verse without the message of Fearing God.
Leviticus 19:3 [Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the Lord your God]
Around 5-10% of the search results display 'love' and 'God' in the same verses without the message of loving God
Amos 5:15 [Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the Lord God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph.]
By deducting 5-10% of all of the search results, we get to the true number. My point still stands. Fear of God outnumbers Love of God by about 50%. 'Fear Lord' message outnumbers 'Love Lord' by almost double.
If you have read the entire Scripture without the lense of your own tradition, the 'Fear God' message outnumbering 'love God' message is easily detectable. Or maybe you have not read the entire Scripture and wants to go around correcting people?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
In Acts 8, an Ethiopian eunuch was leaving from Jerusalem and holding a portion of Scripture. Thus the details have shown that the Ethiopian eunuch worshipped Jehovah as a non-Jew. By having access to Scripture, he would have at least basic knowledge of God's commandment.
The Ethiopian eunuch was given the privillege to obtain salvation when the Holy Spirit told Philip to find the eunuch in his chariot and Philip later expounded the Scripture on Christ and the need to believe on Him. In Acts 8, there is no positive description of what the Ethiopian eunuch had done that is pleasing to God in his pre-belief in Christ.
In Acts 10, then Cornellius is mentioned. In Acts 10:1-3 [There was a certain man in Cæsarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, 2 a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. 3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.] Do you realize, God could have made the Scripture skip Acts 10:2? God is not going to record a message and make it into a verse in Scripture without any reason.
Unlike the Ethiopian eunuch, it is not stated whether Cornellius has access to Scripture. However Acts 10 does describe that Cornellius is praying to the right God. He is not guilty of praying to a false god. 69 Bible verses about False Gods
By praying to the right God and his prayer accepted, Cornellius knows the name of the LORD and is worshipping Him. Acts 10:2 is a description of how a person does works that is pleasing to the Lord.
Scripture interpet Scripture. Not using your own human tradition to interpret Scripture to make the word of God of none effect. The definition of commend is 'praise formally or officially'. The Scripture tells how some action is praised by God and be remembered.
Matthew 26:6-13
[6 Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, 7 there came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. 8 But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? 9 For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. 10 When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. 11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always. 12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial. 13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.]
That woman bought ointment for Jesus and this good work is remembered. How? By having this good work recorded in the gospel. In Acts 8, the Ethiopian eunuch obtain salvation without the gospel mentioning any of his good works pre-faith in Christ. In Acts 10, the gospel recorded Cornellius's good works pre-faith in Christ.
Acts 10:2 [a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.] IS A POSITIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE WORKS Cornellius has done. He has the honor of having works recorded in Gospel. Thus by the standard of Matthew 26:13, God does commend the work of Cornellius. If the obedience of Acts 10:2 is not accepted, it will not be recorded in the gospel.
I do not have poor reasoning. You are the one whom fail to see the truth.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
aiki
Regular Member
I don't believe that the Scriptures are insufficient to guide us through all decisions in life. It's commands, wisdom and spiritual principles equip every believer to live holy lives and make wise, God-honoring life-choices (spouse, career, ministry, etc.) This isn't to say that the Holy Spirit doesn't have a vital role to play in enabling us to live "godly in Christ Jesus"; He does. His work is in convicting us, illuminating our minds to God's truth (found in the Bible), comforting us in times of pain and fear, mortifying our flesh, and conforming us to the Person of Christ. I don't read anywhere in Scripture, though, that I should expect Him to tell me what career I should take up, or who to marry. If I apply the wisdom, principles and commands of God found in His word to such decisions, I have all I need to choose well.
What my comments pointed out was that peace is not necessary to obeying God's commands. We ought to do as He commands whether or not we feel at peace about doing so. How this becomes the "problem of liberal churches" is a mystery to me. It looks to me like you've misunderstood what I wrote.
If we ought to obey God regardless of what sense of peace we have about doing so, how important is a sense of peace to Christian living? I see too many Christians making their feeling of peace superior to the command of God and in doing so end up in disobedience to Him.
"My environment"? You have no idea what my environment is; it cannot, then, prove any point of yours (except, of course, that I have an environment). In any case, I said nothing about Christians having peace when they sin, only that peace was not essential to obeying God. Again, we ought to obey God with or without a sense of peace.
The peace of God is a Person, not a wavelength. And I read no where in Scripture about an "active response in receiving mode" that you call a "wavelength of peace." We have more peace as the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit, has more of us. He is our peace, not a wavelength. He guides us, not a feeling, and He does so through the eternal and unchanging word of God, the Bible. It disturbs me greatly when a professing Christian makes peace the essential ingredient in obeying God. This kind of thinking produces believers who are pursuing a sensation, a feeling, of peace rather than the Person of Christ. The consequences of doing this can be devastating spiritually and morally. Our primary guide, the plumbline of Christian living, is the word of God, not a feeling.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
You're tilting at windmills, here. See above.
As I said, the perfect peace of God is not a feeling, but a Person: Jesus Christ. He does not dole out sensations of peace to us as some sort of spiritual currency separate from himself. He is, in the Person of the Spirit, our peace; and as we give him greater ground in our lives, we are more and more filled with him who is our peace. This is exactly what Philippians 4:7 explains:
Philippians 4:7
7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
And this demonstrates perfectly why this line of thinking that makes feelings the paramount factor in Christian living so dangerous. Do you think Jesus sinned? His behaviour in the Garden of Gethsemane just prior to his being taken would, under the standard you set here, be sinful. He was so distressed by what he was about to face that he "sweat as it were great drops of blood"! He was in a terrible torment of soul. What, then, of your "whenever I am troubled or afraid, then I am sinning"? Are you saying Jesus sinned? This seems to me to be the obvious implication of your feelings-centered doctrine. Do you see how this unbiblical idea you have about feelings is leading you into blasphemy?
This is a remarkable set of convolutions you've gone through here to try to escape the plain meaning of the verse. It hasn't worked. God's glory is His own. No one else may possess what is His by virtue of being God. Are you God? Do you share in God's divinity? No, you don't. You are a finite, corrupt, and comparatively ignorant creature. By your very nature you cannot possess God's glory.
Psalms 3:3
3 But You, O Lord, are a shield for me, My glory and the One who lifts up my head.
Does this verse say that the Psalmist shares in God's glory? No. It says that the Lord, not the Psalmist, is the Psalmist's glory. In other words, the Psalmist glories in the Lord, He is the thing in which the Psalmist glories, not himself.
Psalms 4:2
2 How long, O you sons of men, Will you turn my glory to shame? How long will you love worthlessness And seek falsehood? Selah
Don't see anything in this verse about the Psalmist possessing or sharing in God's glory. King David is speaking of his own royal "glory," not God's.
Psalms 62:7
7 In God is my salvation and my glory; The rock of my strength, And my refuge, is in God.
Again, the Psalmist points to God as the thing in which he glories, not himself.
Isaiah 58:8
8 Then your light shall break forth like the morning, Your healing shall spring forth speedily, And your righteousness shall go before you; The glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard.
Don't see anything in this verse that says God gives His divine glory to His creatures. Isaiah says God's glory shall serve as a "rearguard"; he says nothing at all about God sharing His divine glory with a human being.
And so it goes. All of your offered verses end up not supporting your contention at all.
John 7:18
18 He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who seeks the glory of the One who sent Him is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him.
Don't see anything in this verse about a man sharing in God's divine glory.
John 17:22-23
22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:
23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.
What is the "glory" spoken of here? Is it God's divine glory that is the product of His divine nature? No. It seems Christ is speaking here of the Holy Spirit. Every born-again person is a temple of the Holy Spirit who binds together all believers into one holy, spiritual community. Does a person who is indwelt by the Spirit become as God? Obviously not. God's power, perfection - and glory - remain His own just as we remain finite, weak, and comparatively ignorant creatures though we have God's Spirit within us.
Right back at you!
Well, your merely saying so doesn't make it so. I have not questioned what God has said in His word but your misinterpretation of it!
God is perfect. And this entails necessarily that nothing can diminish or add to His perfection. So, no, our behavior does not alter God's perfect state at all. Does this mean God has no feeling whatever about our sin? No. But when Scripture talks of God being ashamed it cannot communicate to us the actual thing God feels - or if He feels in the way we do at all. Certainly, God does not feel ashamed in the way we do. He's not human. So pressing too hard on what Scripture says about God's "shame" is certain to lead one awry about the nature and behaviour of God.
??? I don't desire an "alternative creation." This is entirely your notion, not mine.
You don't seem to be thinking very well here. If you want to say that fearing God is an earlier command of Scripture than loving Him, that's fine. But if you want to further assert that because fearing God comes before loving Him in Scripture it is more important, or more fundamental, to human interaction with God, then you are establishing a hierarchy of verses based on order of appearance in Scripture. And as I've already said, I don't accept this hierarchy of importance - especially for born-again believers.
Exactly. Glad you actually recognize this.
Not at all. Many people speak in Scripture. Even Satan (Ge. 3; Job. 1; Matt. 4). Should we, then, place the devil's words on par with Christ's? Of course not.
Baloney. Sorry, but that's what you've written here. Total baloney. No where does Paul qualify his words in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 the way you have here. He does not speak at all of the benefit to others his good deeds may have when properly connected to a love motive but to his loss of spiritual benefit when he does good deeds in a loveless way. And when we add Christ's words in Matthew 22:36-38 to Paul's, your statement above is shown to be doubly mistaken.
Romans 4:20 shows no such thing. It draws no defining correlation between faith and giving glory to God. They are related in that the former may produce the latter, but the latter does not define the former. For a definition of faith see Hebrews 11:1, not Romans 4:20. Faith, then, is not held up in Scripture as a motive for obedience to God, though it is integral to walking with Him.
One who loves God cannot help but give glory to Him. I love my wife. Very much. And so I speak often of her to others, giving glory to her in what I say. This is the natural, inevitable consequence of loving her. A good friend of mine loves golf. He speaks in glowing terms of all things golf, enthusing about the game constantly. He loves golf, so he can't help but glorify the game. So, too, with God. The more I love Him, the more I naturally and inevitably glorify Him. Loving God, then, encompasses giving Him glory, it is the natural by-product of loving Him. To neglect to glorify God is to fail to love Him.
Come on, now, this is getting a bit silly. Every person who lives and is conscious exercises faith in a whole host of things that are completely removed from God. I have faith in my wife, in my doctor, in the postal service, in my barber, in the other drivers on the roadways of my city, in my digestive tract. None of these exercises of my faith necessarily please God but they are, nonetheless, exertions of faith.
In any case, Hebrews 11:6 does not say - or imply - that only acts pleasing to God are acts of faith. It simply states how integral to pleasing God faith is. A battery is vital to starting a car. If you don't have a battery to power the electrical systems of your car, it won't start. But other things are just as important to starting your car: an ignition and ignition key, wiring, gas, a motor, etc. It would be utterly silly to say, then, that only the battery is necessary to starting a car. This is true of what Hebrews 11:6 is saying, too. In telling us how important faith is to pleasing God the verse doesn't offer restrictions like you are trying to do.
The "fear of the Lord" prescribed in Scripture to Christians is a reverential awe of God, not a fear of divine punishment.
Absolutely not. About this, as I've explained, the Bible is very clear. As the apostle John wrote, there is no fear in love. The two things, fear and love, are contradictory to each other. One cannot fulfill the First and Great Commandment and be in fear of God as a Punisher or wrathful Judge.
Very amusing! I would take this criticism with some seriousness if it was coming from someone who hadn't demonstrated such serious exegetical ineptness.
And so? Are you suggesting that the Ethiopian eunuch had pleased God prior to being converted?
None of this refutes the observation I made about the verse saying nothing about on what basis God accepted Cornelius' obedience. You might take your own advice here and not read into the verse what isn't there.
That is because he had no good works that God did not regard as "filthy rags." Without coming into relationship with God through Christ and without a love for God motivating his moral deeds, the eunuch's good works prior to his salvation had no spiritual value whatever.
The description itself isn't positive; it's just a description. Cornelius' behaviour was morally positive, though.
But unlike what Christ said of the deeds of the woman at his feet, Cornelius' character of living is not pointed to as a memorial of anything. The deeds of people good and bad fill the Bible. Are we to think that the evil, violent, and perverse deeds that are recorded in Scripture are meant to serve as a memorial too? Obviously not.
Your convolutions of Scripture do not constitute good reasoning, however many convolutions you may make.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Almost there
Well-Known Member
- Oct 24, 2017
- 3,571
- 1,152
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Do you mean as first you seek His Kingdom, also as part of that, not instead of that,
you seek His message to you ?
Even so, at times frequently or not, this has led to problems and serious issues in many churches that separate Him from His Gifts to men , as if they could, but seeking the Gifts while they ignored the Giver of Gifts, the Creator Himself, and ended up using "gifts" from someone contrary to God's Will and opposed to God's Purpose in Jesus' Salvation. (most often for show, wittingly or unwittingly deceived themselves, or wittingly , for profit) .... i.e. test everything.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Almost there
Well-Known Member
- Oct 24, 2017
- 3,571
- 1,152
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes. An analogy: If I seek to get a degree in a particular science, I want to know what assignments the professor would like me to complete. i.e. Degree = Kingdom and professors assignments to me = message to me.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
