Really? I just need the word of God. It's truth, wisdom, and spiritual principles provide me with all I need to make good, God-honoring decisions.
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.
I see. Well, I've observed Christians sanctifying disobedience to God this way. "I gotta' pray about it and get some peace," they say, instead of just doing what God has plainly commanded them in Scripture to do. I hope you aren't guilty of this sort of thing. A believer does not have to have peace about loving their neighbor, or abstaining from fornication, or being generous to those in need, or telling the truth. These things are commanded of all believers in God's word, regardless of whether or not they feel at peace about obeying.
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.
Peace is not a wavelength. Our peace is found in a Person: Jesus Christ. He is the "Prince of Peace" (Isa. 9:6); to have the "peace which passes all understanding" is to have him, to be in intimate, unbroken fellowship with him.
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.]
Isaiah 42:8
8 I am the Lord, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.
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:]
Many times the Bible anthropomorphizes God. The Bible says God, who is an invisible Spirit (Jn. 1:18; 4:24) and not a human (Nu. 23:19; 1 Sam. 15:29), sits, and rests, that He stretches out His arm (Ex. 6:6), that He has a face (Deut. 31:17; Ps. 31:16, etc) and fingers (Ex. 31:18; Lu. 11:20). It would be impossible for us to talk about God without doing so through the lens of our own humanity. But if God is the perfect, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent invisible Spirit the Bible says He is, then, when Scripture assigns human feelings, behaviours or characteristics to God, 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.
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'
This is what happens when you take one verse and lift it up above the rest of Scripture. As far as I can tell, you have just arbitrarily established a hierarchy of verses here.
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.
I don't see that the phrase "whole duty of man" is a stronger phrase than "First and Great commandment";
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'
I don't see that Solomon's words exceed those of Christ himself; I don't see that the duties of man described by Solomon cannot be fulfilled from a motive of love.
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.
One avoids sin by obeying God's commands. And what is the First and Great commandment we ought to obey? Loving God with all of our being. There is, then, no legitimate way around the love motive in living the Christian life. Every time you obey God out of fear, you disobey the First and Great Commandment. As the apostle John has said, "he who fears has not been made perfect in love," and "perfect love casts out fear."
That love is the only acceptable basis for our obedience is the clear implication in what Paul wrote to the Corinthian Christians. Nothing we say (vs. 1), nothing we know or believe (vs. 2), and nothing we do (vs. 3) serve any spiritually useful or profitable purpose if not connected to a motive of love.
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)
Christ makes this point as well:
Matthew 7:21-23
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'
This is, at first glance, a strange set of verses. Is it not the will of the Father that demons be cast out of people? Yes, certainly. Is it not His will that wonders be done in Christ's name? Well, sure. Why, then, are those who do such things, who are doing the will of God, cast out from Christ and declared to be lawless? The answer is found in considering what they didn't say. These exorcisers of demons, these performers of miracles, these prophesiers did not claim obedience to the First and Great Commandment, did they? And why wouldn't they if they were trying to demonstrate their fidelity to Christ? It's the First and Great Commandment of God, its the beginning point of fulfilling the will of the Father, after all. They don't mention it, however, and are told to depart from Christ as lawless people. If just any sort of obedience was sufficient to warrant acceptance by Christ, these exorcists and miracle workers should have been let into God's kingdom. Christ makes it clear, though, that even miraculous deeds done in his name are worthless if they are separated from loving him with all of one's being.
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?