- Jul 22, 2014
- 41,685
- 7,904
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
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.
I'm at work. Doing the best I can here. You've made 1 post and demanding a response. Yet I've been waiting 350 posts for you to show me when I should depart from the maxim. Still waiting.
No, you haven't provided 20 verses that show God's voice is 'metaphorical' (whatever that gibberish means I have no idea, nor do you) nor that His voice is Scripture.
Now, let's look at 1 of your 20 verses:
Judges 2:20 "So the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers and has not listened to my voice""
How does that prove your point? The term 'qowl' is 500 times sonic in the Bible. The term 'obey' in Hebrew means 'hearken unto a voice'. How in heaven's name do you see this verse as proof it is written text? You'll say it, 'it mentions the covenant, which is written text'. No it's not. Look at Ex 20 - the 10 commandments were VOICED to Israel before they were written down on stone tablets. And the rest was vocalized to Moses.
I can think of two possible assessments of this statement. The more complex of the two postulates a driving force of evil behind such actions, but does so without contradicting the maxim. That theory is a bit thorny, though, so I'll go with the simpler theory.Yet, that is not the standard. Some think they are doing good while they do evil.
"They shall put you out of the synagogues: yes, the time comes, that whoever kills you will think that he does God service." (John 16:2).
That's patently false. Hebrews 11, for example, documents the saving faith of several OT saints. Romans 4 and Galatians 3 depict Abrahamic faith as the common denominator of saints existing both before, during, and after the issuance of the Mosaic Law.@JALWe cannot even have saving faith without the Bible.
I can think of two possible assessments of this statement. The more complex of the two postulates a driving force of evil behind such actions, but does so without contradicting the maxim. That theory is a bit thorny, though, so I'll go with the simpler theory.
There need not be any 'evil' at work here. Imagine a judge who slaps a death sentence on an innocent person. Does this prove the judge was evil? Not necessarily. He might honestly believe that the evidence rightly incriminated him.
Does this mean that it's possible for an unbeliever to kill Christians with a perfectly clear conscience? No unbeliever's conscience is PERFECTLY clear, since he's still rejecting General Revelation, but once he has bought into false assumptions and false religion, he could conceivably jump to the conclusion that persecuting Christians is a service to God. Prior to conversion, Paul probably was in that category.
That's patently false. Hebrews 11, for example, documents the saving faith of several OT saints. Romans 4 and Galatians 3 depict Abrahamic faith as the common denominator of saints existing both before, during, and after the issuance of the Mosaic Law.
Saving faith cometh by hearing the divine Word.
You've already proven your acceptance of the maxim. At every moment you LIVE by it. Otherwise you'd have cited me at least one example from your life where you saw clear warrant for departing from it.So your maxim is above John 12:48?
I will stick with John 12:48.
God is not the name 'Jesus'. God is a Person, not an English word. The person who doesn't know the name Jesus, but submits to the God of General Revelation, or the God revealed to Abraham (for example) via the Inward Witness DOES know Jesus (albeit not by that name).You cannot be saved without believing in Jesus (John 3:16), or in believing the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).
We know of these truths by Scripture and not by some new vision a guy had last week.
You've already proven your acceptance of the maxim. At every moment you LIVE by it. Otherwise you'd have cited me at least one example from your life where you saw clear warrant for departing from it.
God is not the name 'Jesus'. God is a Person, not an English word.
You said:The person who doesn't know the name Jesus, but submits to the God of General Revelation, or the God revealed to Abraham (for example) via the Inward Witness DOES know Jesus (albeit not by that name).
You said:It's the same Person (it's Yahweh), regardless of the name used.
Otherwise, the OT saints would be unsaved, at least those who did not know the name Jesus.
Things were not different in the OT - except that prophets like Abraham and Moses knew Jesus a whole lot better than you do.God preserves His Word in the English today (with the King James Bible). So I beg to differ.
Jesus is the second person of the Trinity or Godhead.
So Jesus is very much God. If you do not believe that truth, then you cannot post in this section of the forums.
The name of Jesus is above all names (Which would logically include even God the Father's name) (See: Philippians 2:9).
No. That is a lie.
We are saved by believing in Jesus, and not a general revelation of God.
"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts of the Apostles 4:12).
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13).
How was Paul saved?
Was it just some general revelation of God?
No.
"And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest"
(Acts of the Apostles 9:5).
The jailer asked Paul, and Silas,
"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
And they said,
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." (See: Acts of the Apostles 16:30-31).
If you were there, you would say believe in the general revelation of God. So you would not be speaking the same thing Paul and Silas spoke.
Things were different in the Old Testament. Not all OT saints had the full revelation of who their Messiah was.
Yet the maxim is what you LIVE by. Obviously your rebuttals are just blowing hot air, therefore. We hold to a popular saying in my family: Actions speak louder than words. Yours are screaming the maxim so loud that it's drowning out your posts on this thread.A conscience is not new words like the Bible, though; It is also possible to defile a conscience, as well (Titus 1:15). So it is not an entirely reliable source.
Things were not different in the OT - except that prophets like Abraham and Moses knew Jesus a whole lot better than you do.
Yet the maxim is what you LIVE by. Obviously your rebuttals are just blowing hot air, therefore. We hold to a popular saying in my family: Actions speak louder than words. Yours are screaming the maxim so loud that it's drowning out your posts on this thread.
Um...General Revelation refers to Jesus-as-God revealing Himself to all men. To believe in Yahweh - however He chooses to reveal Himself - is precisely what it means to believe in Jesus.We are saved by believing in Jesus, and not a general revelation of God.
Christ's atonement was retroactive. Hence even the OT saints who knew Jesus by other names (such as Yahweh) cannot be saved by any OTHER name. That's how such verses extrapolate."Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts of the Apostles 4:12).
Not in my view was the NT a new covenant. I hold to Covenant Theology, but I'm not going to derail this thread onto THAT topic.Insults are not become of the saints. Anyways, I am aware that even the Israelites had drank of that rock and that rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4). I am aware of the many preincarnate appearances of Christ, as well. I believed they did abide with the same God today but they did not all have the same level of understanding that a New Testament saint had. The New Testament was a new covenant, and a new set of teachings and a further reveal of who God is.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?