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 believe Jesus as God can traverse time, which is the fourth dimension, and that every time that God in form of a man appears in the OT, it’s Jesus.
He appeared to Moses face to face and talked to him as a man talks to a friend.
In Genesis 18:1 YHWH appears as one of three men, Abraham washes His feet.
In Genesis 19, YHWH on earth, rains down fire and brimstone from YHWH in heaven.
Etc.
I believe it was later, in Acts 13:
Act 13:45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.
Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying,I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
Never heard of that before but that seems really interesting Chad. I have no problem with your belief.
I disagree with Jesus ever being in OT, because it was GODS WORD, that was in the OT, then the word later became flesh named Jesus, in the NT. ~ ~ ~ That is just my thoughts on that subject Chad.
Me saying Jesus Christ is God, doesn't save me.
I believe that faith through grace saves us.
Here`s the issue John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Question: If no man has seen God then who was the God that was seen in the Old Testament?
Jesus said He was "I Am" and the Jews who knew what He meant wanted to stone Him for saying that.
You know a lot of people like to use the I am statement. When Jesus Christ speaking in that verse was him saying that He was from above.
Though after Jesus Christ has accomplished all the things God need Him, and Jesus Christ gave everything back to Go so that God may be all in all.
We do see later on in the Revelation, about how Jesus Christ is the Lord God Almighty on the throne.
The whole I am statement is used an a lot... those none of these things are salvation issue.
If we just stick to salvation issues there isn`t much to bicker about
You know a lot of people like to use the I am statement. When Jesus Christ speaking in that verse was him saying that He was from above.
Though after Jesus Christ has accomplished all the things God need Him, and Jesus Christ gave everything back to God so that God may be all in all.
We do see later on in the Revelation, about how Jesus Christ is the Lord God Almighty on the throne.
The whole I am statement is used an a lot... those none of these things are salvation issue.
On the contrary, it’s an excellent parable, which was a tool Jesus used to teach truth by using an analogy.
It shows why freewill doesn’t mean the lost saves themselves, which is YOUR carnal claim, that isn’t found in the scriptures- but freewill IS found there.
Shalom.
What verses are they that you think I'm denying? As I said, "ALL" of the passages have to fit what one believes. By saying all, I'm not denying any.
Let's cut to the chase. You save yourself according to Arminius. God saves you according to Calvin.What Jacobus (aka Jacob aka James) Arminius believed and taught is not precisely the same thing as what became Arminianism, but it allowed for it and produced it.
There it is: Arminius himself may not have said it, but he provided for it to be said, as:
"Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man's freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God's Spirit and be regenerated or resist God's grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit's assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man's act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation." --In which, a person's eternal destiny hinges on his choice and not God's. "Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation." --either Arminius agrees with this abomination, or Arminianism contradicts Arminius.
Calvinism and Arminianism comparison
You don't realize how sin makes God unrecognizable. The man dangling is blind. Grace grabs him and saves him. You are saying the man saved himself by grabbing the rope.Imagine a man dangling from a cliff, who's going to fall to his death.
Just before he loses his grip, a man comes along and sees his plight, and reaches out a hand to save him.
The one in danger has to accept the offer of help.
He could turn it down. Maybe the rescuer is black, and the one ready to fall is racist and refuses the offered hand, or maybe he was committing suicide and wants to die - so he could refuse the saving hand.
To claim that the man about to fall to his death decides to accept the offer from the saving hand, grasps that hand, and is saved from death, means that the man in peril saved himself, is ludicrous.
He obviously couldn’t save himself - nor would anyone in that situation claim that he saved himself - nor would any observer of the rescue claim that the act of accepting the saving hand meant that he was his own savior.
That typical Calvinist claim, is pretty ludicrous..
Let's cut to the chase. You save yourself according to Arminius. God saves you according to Calvin.
Prove it wrong if it is as you say.Once again you make a critical, provocative remark without backing it up. You contribute nothing by doing that.
You don't realize how sin makes God unrecognizable. The man dangling is blind. Grace grabs him and saves him. You are saying the man saved himself by grabbing the rope.
You are blind to God before the New Birth. You only see idols you think are God.Why would new birth make choices unlimited? That doesn`t make sense to me.
No one but God has unlimited choices. If that`s what you consider freewill to be then its not a very useful term.
Prove it wrong if it is as you say.
So you have no scripture proving my position is wrong?Depending on who made the claim would decide who’s job it is to prove something. Just an observation while passing through
Whoever made the claim has the proving to do, not the poor fella who disagrees with an unsubstantiated claim.
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?