Posted on 02/28/2010 8:30:39 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
Your miracle was a matter of your loving God, believing Him and trusting Him.
Yours is nothing like the atheist taunting God saying she'd believe Him if He poof'ed her a bag of M&M's. It was as if she wanted a "god" she could manipulate - which is not unlike those who made a "god" out of wood so they could see it, touch it, manipulate it. And throw it in a fire when they get tired of it.
Yep. Or else you’d be some place else. 8~)
Belief in Christ does bring a new life, Mr. Rogers. And no one can or will believe unless and until the Holy Spirit regenerates their dead and God-denying heart.
Much appreciate your joining in that prayer.
“And no one can or will believe unless and until the Holy Spirit regenerates their dead and God-denying heart.”
OTOH, I agree - unless God is working, no one turns to God. However, there are multiple passages indicating God IS working in the lives of most men - and that most still refuse to come, that they might have life.
That is my difference with Calvin. He believed life is given in a secret act of regeneration, and then one is irresistibly called and given faith (belief) as a gift.
I believe that when scripture says God desires all men to repent and be saved, that it means all men. That when it says God so loved the world, it means the world. And when it speaks of his own not receiving Him, it means they refused to receive Him.
Repentance is available to all, except those who “knew God, [but] did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened...Therefore God gave them up...”
But we will probably have to agree to disagree. May God bless you as you worship today, and may he bless me & my family as we worship in one of the local SBC congregations.
Yes there is kosta and you know better.
How do we "know" that Paul was in Rome?
How do we know of the caesars? David?, Solomon? Your low standard for historicity is laughable - legitimate historians do not doubt the existence of Jesus
But since I am here, I will answer your question, in proper context.
You write: How do we know of the caesars? David?, Solomon?...Your low standard for historicity is laughable?
My comment to which you are replying was in reference to P-Marlowe's matter-of-fact "the authors of those gospel accounts" who "gave their lives in defense of their testimony."
To which I replied "Do you have extra biblical evidence of that?" And the answer, of course, is no, he doesn't, and neither do you, or anyone else. What we know about the authors of those gospel accounts is legend.
Find one example of alleged martyrdom of the apostles that is not legendary.
Which historical document mentions any of them?
If my historical standards are low, as you say, what do you call standards of unshakable belief based on legends? Ignorance?
RE: Martyrs. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "the Greek word martus signifies a witness who testifies to a fact of which he has knowledge from personal observation." P-Marlowe referenced this type of evidence in a recent post to kosta.
But this is the type of evidence that kosta seems most reluctant to accept, one supposes because it contradicts his "legend" hypothesis. Whatever the case, he's made it clear that he rules out this type of evidence a priori: He simply dismisses it altogether.
RE the above italics: I think what kosta is looking for is some sort of public record of an "alleged martyrdom," something reported by an independent third party or parties. Something that could qualify as "objective history." Then kosta would be satisfied — provided he couldn't find anything wrong with the third party in question. But he probably could; and would.
Actually, I have an independent third-party account lying around here somewhere, not WRT to the martyrdom of any of the apostles per se, but of certain early Christians. The trick is to remember where I put it.
Come to think of it, kosta may not consider such evidence responsive to his question, which was about the Apostles — all of which were ingloriously martyred for their Savior, save only the Blessed Apostle. Kosta says this is only legend.
While I'm looking, here's a little backgrounder on the situation of Christians at the time of the Early Church:
Acceptance of the national religion in antiquity was an obligation incumbent on all citizens; failure to worship the gods of the State was equivalent to treason. This universally accepted principle is responsible for the various persecutions suffered by Christians before the reign of Constantine; Christians denied the existence of and therefore refused to worship the gods of the state pantheon. They were in consequence regarded as atheists. It is true, indeed, that the Jews also rejected the gods of Rome, and yet escaped persecution. But the Jews, from the Roman standpoint, had a national religion and a national God, Jehovah, whom they had a full legal right to worship. Even after the destruction of Jerusalem, when the Jews ceased to exist as a nation, Vespasian made no change in their religious status, save that the tribute formerly sent by Jews to the temple at Jerusalem was henceforth to be paid to the Roman exchequer. For some time after its establishment, the Christian Church enjoyed the religious privileges of the Jewish nation, but from the nature of the case it is apparent that the chiefs of the Jewish religion would not long permit without protest this state of things. For they abhorred Christ's religion as much as they abhorred its Founder. At what date the Roman authorities had their attention directed to the difference between the Jewish and the Christian religion cannot be determined, but it appears to be fairly well established that laws proscribing Christianity were enacted before the end of the first century. Tertullian is authority for the statement that persecution of the Christians was institutum Neronianum — an institution of Nero — (Ad nat., i, 7). The First Epistle of St. Peter also clearly alludes to the proscription of Christians, as Christians, at the time it was written (I, St. Peter, iv, 16). Domitian (81-96) also, is known to have punished with death Christian members of his own family on the charge of atheism (Suetonius, "Domitianus", xv). While it is therefore probable that the formula: "Let there be no Christians" (Christiani non sint) dates from the second half of the first century, yet the earliest clear enactment on the subject of Christianity is that of Trajan (98-117) in his famous letter to the younger Pliny, his legate in Bithynia.From The Catholic Encyclopedia.Pliny had been sent from Rome by the emperor to restore order in the Province of Bithynia-Pontus. Among the difficulties he encountered in the execution of his commission one of the most serious concerned the Christians. The extraordinarily large number of Christians he found within his jurisdiction greatly surprised him: the contagion of their "Superstition", he reported to Trajan, affected not only the cities but even the villages and country districts of the province (Pliny, Ep., x, 96). One consequence of the general defection from the state religion was of an economic order: so many people had become Christians that purchasers were no longer found for the victims that once in great numbers were offered to the gods. Complaints were laid before the legate relative to this state of affairs, with the result that some Christians were arrested and brought before Pliny for examination. The suspects were interrogated as to their tenets and those of them who persisted in declining repeated invitations to recant were executed. Some of the prisoners, however, after first affirming that they were Christians, afterwards, when threatened with punishment, qualified their first admission by saying that at one time they had been adherents of the proscribed body but were so no longer. Others again denied that they were or ever had been Christians. Having never before had to deal with questions concerning Christians Pliny applied to the emperor for instructions on three points regarding which he did not see his way clearly: first, whether the age of the accused should be taken into consideration in meting out punishment; secondly, whether Christians who renounced their belief should be pardoned; and thirdly, whether the mere profession of Christianity should be regarded as a crime, and punishable as such, independent of the fact of the innocence or guilt of the accused of the crimes ordinarily associated with such profession.
To these inquiries Trajan replied in a rescript which was destined to have the force of law throughout the second century in relation to Christianity. After approving what his representative had already done, the emperor directed that in future the rule to be observed in dealing with Christians should be the following: no steps were to be taken by magistrates to ascertain who were or who were not Christians, but at the same time, if any person was denounced, and admitted that he was a Christian, he was to be punished — evidently with death. Anonymous denunciations were not to be acted upon, and on the other hand, those who repented of being Christians and offered sacrifice to the gods, were to be pardoned. Thus, from the year 112, the date of this document, perhaps even from the reign of Nero, a Christian was ipso facto an outlaw. That the followers of Christ were known to the highest authorities of the State to be innocent of the numerous crimes and misdemeanors attributed to them by popular calumny, is evident from Pliny's testimony to this effect, as well as from Trajan's order: conquirendi non sunt. And that the emperor did not regard Christians as a menace to the State is apparent from the general tenor of his instructions. Their only crime was that they were Christians, adherents of an illegal religion. Under this regime of proscription the Church existed from the year 112 to the reign of Septimius Severus (193-211). The position of the faithful was always one of grave danger, being as they were at the mercy of every malicious person who might, without a moment's warning, cite them before the nearest tribunal. It is true indeed, that the delator was an unpopular person in the Roman Empire, and, besides, in accusing a Christian he ran the risk of incurring severe punishment if unable to make good his charge against his intended victim. In spite of the danger, however, instances are known, in the persecution era, of Christian victims of delation.
But that is not what Christ said. He said He came to save His lost sheep. And that all those sheep would hear Him and know Him and that He would return all those sheep to His Father because the Father had tasked Him with that job from before the foundation of the world.
As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep." -- John 10:14-15 "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
Christ does love the world; He created it and that's why He is presently redeeming it through the conversion of dead men into spiritual men who love His appearing.
But are all men among the flock of Christ? No. Only those whom the Father gave to Him; those who are given the free gift of God's grace through faith in their only Shepherd...
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." -- John 10:26-29 "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
And to insure this miracle would take place, Christ told us the Holy Spirit, God Himself, would be given to us so that we would hear the truth of Scripture and know that Jesus Christ has paid for every one of our sins. Our adoption is secure because it rests not on our desire but on God's declaration of His own desire.
"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." -- Isaiah 46:10
So are all men given the Holy Spirit? No. Not according to the word of God.
"He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given." -- Matthew 13:11
Repentance is available to all
Repentance, like all good things, comes as a free gift from God.
"...In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth" -- 2 Timothy 2:25
Yes; evidently we are supposed to submit ourselves, not to God, but to the self-selected "anointed ones." Thomas Sowell has written an excellent book detailing the types of mental operations to which these anointed ones are typically subject — Intellectuals and Society (2009). I believe you would find it of great interest, dear sister in Christ.
One thing the present-day self-selected anointed ones seem to have in common is the absolute denial of spiritual reality. In this way, they not only "get rid of God"; they also get rid of the human soul, whose moral and rational order depends on its relation to God. Thus the sanctity of the individual person can be dissolved into the abstract concept of man in the mass....
Thus the "turning away from God" constitutes the primary source of intellectual and moral disorder, of human persons and of societies alike.
Thank you ever so much, dear spirited irish, for your splendid insights!
Have a good week.
Good grief, why would showing Himself to the scribes and Pharisees be a priority for Jesus Christ — even though it seems to be a priority for kosta? They had already utterly rejected Him. Moreover, they were the proximate cause of His suffering and ignominious death on the Cross.
There seems to be a lesson here for kosta, "if he has the ears to hear it."
Our Lord Jesus Christ didn't come to score points against scribes and Pharisees, but to save the souls of those who love Him.
Thank you so much, dear Godzilla, for your many trenchant essay/posts on this topic, in particular this latest.
THANKS.
Fascinating summary review.
INDEED.
Ears to hear indeed. Have a good evening BB
Thus the "turning away from God" constitutes the primary source of intellectual and moral disorder, of human persons and of societies alike.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.