• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Calling things that are not as though they are.

Status
Not open for further replies.

probinson

Legend
Aug 16, 2005
24,669
4,637
48
PA
✟214,514.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, the sisters heard something:

John 11:40
Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"

That just makes no sense at all. Why would Jesus be "deeply moved and troubled in His spirit"? I've had family members die. I was emotionally troubled, but my spirit was quite calm, knowing that while I would miss that person, that they were in a much better place.

Jesus KNEW what He was about to do. He KNEW He was about to raise Lazarus from the dead.

The passage does not speak of Jesus being moved by their tears. That simply is not there. Granted, neither is the explanation I've given, but it is far from "clear" that Jesus was moved by their tears.

Consider this. Mary, Martha, the disciples, EVERYONE standing around wailing did not believe Jesus. Not one of them. Martha went so far as to try to stop Jesus from having the stone rolled away. "But surely he stinks by now!" Jesus even prayed aloud, saying that He was doing it for the sake of those standing around so that they would believe.

Uh, no. That's not the WoF doctrine at all. As I've pointed out many other times, you can be like the man at the pool and wait for Jesus to come heal you and that day may or may not come. Or you can be like the woman with the issue of blood who fought and pushed her way through the crowd to touch Jesus in faith. Both are valid and you can receive healing either way. I choose to push through the crowd.

See, that's not AT ALL what Mary and Martha said, they said, our brother is dead and we know he'll rise again in the last day. I'm not calling Mary and Martha "unbelievers" in the sense you're implying. But it's quite clear that in this instance, Mary and Martha did not believe what Jesus had told them.
Tamara224 said:
In any event, nobody's unbelief shackled Lazarus... as I mentioned before, Jesus let him die on purpose so that He could raise him again. The sisters sent word to Jesus as soon as he got sick, believing, undoubtedly that Jesus would come heal him.

The word that the sent to Jesus might as well have been a medical report. The word they sent did not request Jesus to do anything. It simply said, "The one you love is sick". We are left only to assume that they undoubtedly believed that Jesus would come heal him, since the word they sent said no such thing.
And again, please read John 11:40

Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"


What I am trying (and obviously failing) to say when I say "agree with your circumstances" is this. If you get a report that you have an illness and you are going to die, that is a fact. You can concede that fact, or you can counter it with truth.

Your circumstances have an outcome. That's what I'm talking about. Do you affirm the outcome of your circumstances, or do you believe that the outcome will change.

New age philosophy is nothing more thant the devil's counterfit. I've called thing that are not as though they were. I believed that I was healed, even though the doctors said I would never be healed. I thanked God for healing me even before that healing was manifested in my body.
Is your salvation reliant on you? Would you be saved if you did not confess with your mouth what you believed in your heart? Will God "withhold" salvation from you if you don't believe in Him?

God is the author and finisher of our faith. But we have to put our faith into action:

Mark 11:23

I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him.

That's pretty conditional. We must confess, not doubt and believe. It's God's modus operandi. It's how we received our salvation. It's how we receive anything from God.
 
Upvote 0

charityagape

Blue Chicken Gives You Horns
May 6, 2005
7,146
516
51
Texas
Visit site
✟32,430.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Here this might help:


Verse 3 says the sisters sent word to him, and immediately after it says Jesus said, this seems to me to be a reply to them, word sent back to them. Cause in the next verst it says "Then he said to his disciples:

"
 
Upvote 0

BarbB

I stand with my brothers and sisters in Israel!
Aug 6, 2003
14,246
508
78
NJ summers; FL winters
✟40,548.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Republican
charityagape said:
Here this might help:



Verse 3 says the sisters sent word to him, and immediately after it says Jesus said, this seems to me to be a reply to them, word sent back to them. Cause in the next verst it says "Then he said to his disciples:




"

But where the Bible is so clear on other actions and speech, it does not say that here. It simply does not. Clearly Jesus said that to his disciples, but it's simply not in the scriptures in either place that Jesus said this to Martha.

Forgive me if I'm assuming something here, but it sounds as though this was used as a Word of Faith teaching and the link was made and accepted, but to me, there simply is no link.

What is clear to me is that Martha would have believed whatever Jesus said to her. She believed in the resurrection; she believed that Jesus could have healed Lazarus. She would have had no reason to disbelieve him if he had said that Lazarus would not stay dead!
 
Upvote 0

psalms 91

Legend
Dec 27, 2004
71,903
13,538
✟134,786.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
The reason Jesus said this and tarried is because among the Jewish there was a belief that if a person was dead over three days the soul left the body and could not be brought back so when Jesus raised him after four days He showed Himself to be the Son of God.
 
Upvote 0

BarbB

I stand with my brothers and sisters in Israel!
Aug 6, 2003
14,246
508
78
NJ summers; FL winters
✟40,548.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Republican

I agree, Bill - the 4 days was crucial to what Jesus was going to demonstrate.
 
Upvote 0

Tamara224

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2006
13,285
2,396
Wyoming
✟48,234.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
probinson said:
Well, the sisters heard something:

John 11:40
Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"

Yes, they heard *something* ... but they didn't hear Jesus tell the disciples that the sickness wouldn't end in death. Jesus told them if they believed in Him, they would see the glory of God. God's glory can be displayed in many ways. Jesus didn't tell them that they had to believe that Lazarus would be raised from the dead in order for them to see that glory. And, they did see the glory when Lazarus came out of the tomb without having believed, specifically, that Jesus would do that exact thing.


I don't think Jesus was moved to tears by the fact of Lazarus' death, but by the grief of the sisters. It was sympathetic weeping. I have been to a funeral where I didn't even know the person who died, but the grief of the mourners moved me to tears and troubled my spirit. I think that the love Jesus had for these women caused him to weep for their grief... He was 'sharing their pain' so to speak. Also, it is noted that the Jews who were there saw His tears as a sign of His love for Lazarus... I think that since those witnesses saw His facial expressions and body language, etc, their impression of the cause of His tears could be considered pretty accurate... especially since their interpretation of His tears is not contradicted in the passage.


Perhaps, but the statement "Jesus wept" is not preceded or followed by any mention of unbelief... it is preceded and followed by mention of people weeping. It says that "when Jesus saw her weeping...he was deeply moved in Spirit and troubled." When he saw their tears, he was moved. I think it is clear that the tears were what moved him to weep. What is less clear is what it was about the tears, exactly, that caused him to weep. It may be that their tears troubled him, causing him to weep because He saw them as a sign of unbelief... However, that just doesn't seem to me to be supported by the passage.


True. But they believed in Jesus (at least, Mary and Martha did)... they believed He was Son of God and that He was capable of having healed Lazarus before He died. I think they didn't have a full understanding, yet. It may not have occurred to them to think that it wasn't too late for Jesus to do something and He performed the miracle so that they would believe to the fullest extent, I think.



Okay, Pete, I believe that this is what you believe WoF doctrine is.... but I've heard too many other WoFers say otherwise, here on this forum and elsewhere for me to believe that this is an accurate statement of that 'doctrine.'



It is what Martha said: "21"Lord," Martha said to Jesus, "if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22 But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask." Jesus told her he would rise again, and I think perhaps Martha assumed He was comforting her by reminding her of the final resurrection. She didn't doubt that God could raise him, she just didn't understand, I think, that Jesus meant 'right now.'



And again, please read John 11:40
Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"

I'm sorry, Pete, but your interpretation of that verse requires a big assumption...It requires that we assume that when Jesus told them to believe He was referring to and they understood specifically that he meant believe He would raise Lazarus from the dead. In fact, we have no way of knowing when Jesus told them this... it could have been days or months before. In fact, since it's not recounted in this chapter, we must assume that it was said at least 5 days before this event (Jesus wasn't in Bethany). So, if Jesus was sitting and talking to them and He said to them (before Lazarus ever even got sick) "If you believe, you will see the glory of God," there is no way for them to have assumed that He meant by this that they would see Him raise Lazarus from the grave.


What I am trying (and obviously failing) to say when I say "agree with your circumstances" is this. If you get a report that you have an illness and you are going to die, that is a fact. You can concede that fact, or you can counter it with truth.

Sorry, I'm still not getting it... You give the option of either conceding a fact or countering it with truth. However, this is not a logical proposition... facts are countered with facts. Facts can be true or false. You counter a false fact with a true fact, but you don't counter a (neutral) fact with Truth.

True Fact - Jane has cancer
True Fact - God can heal her
True Fact - Jane believes in God's healing power
True Fact - God heals her

There is no need whatsoever for Jane to enter a false fact into the equation by saying that she doesn't have cancer when she clearly does. To believe that God can heal her is for her to believe one of the facts of the circumstances. It is a fact, a true fact, that God can and does heal. Therefore, she believes it, she asks for healing and God heals her thereby changing the outcome.

Your circumstances have an outcome. That's what I'm talking about. Do you affirm the outcome of your circumstances, or do you believe that the outcome will change.

Affirming the present likely outcome does not equal believing it cannot change. Again though, I don't believe that what we believe or acknowledge or agree with changes reality. If I have cancer, I have cancer whether I admit it or not. There is a physical reality beyond my mind, beyond what I think or hear or see. It is objective, it is not dependent on whether I admit it or not. The prognosis is death in 6 months whether I admit it or not. Believing in God means that I know He can change my prognosis. There's no reason for me to start lying about my current condition in order for God to heal me. I can believe that God will heal me and wait upon Him for healing without ever once saying "I am healed" before I actually am healed. Does this mean I'm passively waiting by the pool, hoping he'll come along? No, I can bring my petition before Him constantly, pester Him for it every day. Again, though, I see no reason to say anything even remotely untrue with regard to it.

Is your salvation reliant on you? Would you be saved if you did not confess with your mouth what you believed in your heart? Will God "withhold" salvation from you if you don't believe in Him?

No, my salvation is not reliant on me. No, I would not be saved if I didn't confess and believe. It is not God withholding salvation, but my refusal to believe that would determine damnation.

Salvation is not the same thing as current physical healing. I do not accept what is in my opinion a false doctrine built on one misunderstood proof text (i.e. that current physical healing was provided for in the atonement and is, in essence, already 'done.')


Well, believing that a thing will happen (future tense) is not the same thing as saying it has already happened, even though the facts of the case say otherwise. It is not doubt when a person acknowledges facts, it is, imho, foolishness to do otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

BarbB

I stand with my brothers and sisters in Israel!
Aug 6, 2003
14,246
508
78
NJ summers; FL winters
✟40,548.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Republican
TreeOfLife said:
...
Jesus wept.

imho, Jesus wept at the pain and grief that his much loved friends, Martha and Mary, were feeling at the death of their beloved brother. Jesus - the supreme empathizer - who came to earth wholly man and felt everything that we feel.
 
Upvote 0

TreeOfLife

A son of God!
Aug 12, 2005
7,816
260
68
Alabama, USA
✟9,334.00
Faith
Non-Denom
BarbB said:
imho, Jesus wept at the pain and grief that his much loved friends, Martha and Mary, were feeling at the death of their beloved brother. Jesus - the supreme empathizer - who came to earth wholly man and felt everything that we feel.

Well then I must disagree. Jesus wept at the astounding lack of faith He found. The context, and the presence of pro-wailers, supports my interpretation.
 
Upvote 0

Tamara224

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2006
13,285
2,396
Wyoming
✟48,234.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
TreeOfLife said:
If it doesn't make sense to my mind, then golly gee, it just doesn't make sense and cannot be true!

I don't trust in my own understanding of things, I trust in the Lord. However, as Rush Limbaugh says, I have "talent on loan from God." He gave me a brain and He expects me to use it. If something doesn't make sense to my mind, I don't automatically reject it, but it does raise a red flag indicating the thing needs to be further explored. If, after further exploration, the things still doesn't make sense, then I really question it. Applying logic to the Word of God to reason things out is a requirement of a Christian. This is what I try to do. I don't trust my own understanding, but God is logical so if something is illogical, if it doesn't make sense according to Scripture and clear reasoning as well as the prompting of the Holy Spirit... then it's not true.
 
Upvote 0

TreeOfLife

A son of God!
Aug 12, 2005
7,816
260
68
Alabama, USA
✟9,334.00
Faith
Non-Denom

Really? You do realize that scripture says the exact opposite of that right?
 
Upvote 0

BarbB

I stand with my brothers and sisters in Israel!
Aug 6, 2003
14,246
508
78
NJ summers; FL winters
✟40,548.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Republican
TreeOfLife said:
Well then I must disagree. Jesus wept at the astounding lack of faith He found. The context, and the presence of pro-wailers, supports my interpretation.

And yet there's only words of pain and empathy in those verses - nary a word about unbelief.


Nowhere does the scripture say that He felt their unbelief - just their pain; not anger and disgust on his part, but empathy for the suffering of the sisters. In fact, if there was so much unbelief, by your own testimony AND the verses about Jesus in Nazareth and other towns, he would not have been able to raise Lazarus.

 
Upvote 0

TreeOfLife

A son of God!
Aug 12, 2005
7,816
260
68
Alabama, USA
✟9,334.00
Faith
Non-Denom

Nah, your Jewish tradition starts the narrative to late. Look at the whole story and you will see the anguish in the tears of our Lord. He is utterly surrounded by Jewish tradition at this point, and the unbelief of it is what causes Him to weep.

Racist apologetics wants to cloud the issue, but it is clear why Jesus wept.
 
Upvote 0

OnlyByHisGrace

Junior Member
May 12, 2006
54
3
The Ozarks
✟22,689.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
gett ing in kind of late in this thread...sorry.

Did Jesus himself call things that were as though they were not?

Luke 8:52 talking about the little girl he said she was not dead, but sleeping (paraphrasing). Was she in fact dead, or was she sleeping? Just curious.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.