Posted on 07/08/2012 2:51:23 PM PDT by NYer
Parables were never intended to reveal truth but to hid it from the reprobate ...Over and over in the OT and the NT we see that only those that are His can her His word..
I recently heard that the reason the unsaved can not understand the scriptures is because the Bible is written for the saved
Luk 8:9 ¶ And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luk 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Luk 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Luk 10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and [he] to whom the Son will reveal [him].
Luk 10:23 And he turned him unto [his] disciples, and said privately, Blessed [are] the eyes which see the things that ye see:
Luk 10:24 For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen [them]; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard [them].
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
Mat 13:16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
Jhn 12:40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with [their] eyes, nor understand with [their] heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
Col 1:26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
Funny it seems Catholics think they are saved by faith in Rome alone.
Sola Ecclesia Romanus Only the Church of Rome is the Rule of Faith
.Given the choice I will place my faith were the Bible tells me..Jesus Christ
Now perhaps, if you can rightly divide the word of God you might want to look at James again
If one believes he is saved or damned by his works , then one comforts oneself with the idea that "I am not as bad as my neighbor"
The Bible tells us "ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." That is the inspired word of God . It does not say that some have fallen short and some are "close"
May I quote James to you?
Jam 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.
So the thief is also a murder in Gods eyes.
No where does Jesus say or imply that one is saved by works.
The book of James was written to a converted church , not heathens seeking salvation . It tells them how their conversion is seen by the unsaved world . It is not about becoming saved or being saved. It is about the fruit of your salvation.
Jam 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jam 2:18 Yea, a man may say,/B> Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
This is an amplification of the teaching of Jesus that we know a tree by the fruit it bears. It is how we know the saved from the unsaved. It does not declare that the man has faith ...but that he SAYS he has faith.
This addresses a hollow profession of faith , not a saving one
.Can a hollow profession save him? NO, any more than works can save.This scripture says to the church that this faith is non existent , it is dead.
The bible is clear that it is God that gives the faith and it is God that ordains the works of the saved
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Hbr 13:21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom [be] glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Phl 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of [his] good pleasure.
Amen
Mar 6:10 And he said unto them, In what place soever ye enter into an house, there abide till ye depart from that place.
Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
because they were not intended to hear
Mar 6:10 And he said unto them, In what place soever ye enter into an house, there abide till ye depart from that place.
Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
because they were not intended to hear
RnMomof7 >>>>Funny, my bible says those that Jesus did not intend for them to hear or understand<<<<<
Gospel of Mark >> He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. <<
Hmmm... what bible are you reading?
Matthew 13: 58 gives the reason
And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.
Did not many mighty works - Miracles. This implies that he performed some miracles. Mark tells us what they were: “He laid his hands upon a few sick folk and healed them,” Mark 6:5.
Because of their unbelief - That is, it would have been useless to the great purposes of his mission to have worked miracles there. We are not to suppose that his power was limited by the belief or unbelief of people; but they were so “prejudiced,” so set against him, that they were not in a condition to “judge of evidence” and to be convinced. They would have charged it to derangement, or sorcery, or the agency of the devil. Compare John 10:20. It would have been of no use, therefore, in proving to them that he was from God, to have worked miracles. He did, therefore, only those things which were the proper work of benevolence, and which could not easily be charged on the devil. He gave “sufficient” proof of his mission, and left them in their chosen unbelief without excuse. It is also true, in spiritual things, that the unbelief of a people prevents the influences of the Holy Spirit from being sent down to bless them. God requires faith. He hears only the prayers of faith. And when there is little true belief, and prayer is cold and formal, there the people sleep in spiritual death and are unblessed.
(barnes note)
All one needs to understand is the philosophy (I will provide sources)... tell me, how valuable is love that is not freely given? I mean I can make my computer print "I Love You." a hundred times, a million, what-ever I want... and how much is that worth compared to a friend saying it?
There is no comparison precisely because there is no obligation or even predisposition for it (as there would be in familial relations) because he is my friend. Freely chosen and freely given.
God, in the form of His son Jesus, has called us friends: John 15:15-17
"I don't call you servants now. A servant does not know what his master is doing. But now I call you friends because I have told you everything I heard from my Father. You did not choose me; I chose you. And I gave you this work: to go and make fruit. I want this fruit to continue {in your life}. Then the Father will give you anything you ask for in my name. This is my command: Love each other." (ERV)
Furthermore, to posit that man has no free will is to posit that God created intentionally flawed people (Adam and Eve) and therefore predestined them to sin. But we know that is against God's character, for if he does not even tempt us (James 1:13-14) then how could he predestine out forefather Adam to sin, and thereby infect us all with sin-nature? That is, if free will does not exist, then God is evil in that he purposely made man to sin; but if free will does exist then it was given fully and perfectly (James 1:17); and if it was given fully then the possibility that we would chose to sin must be included therein.
Deuteronomy 30:19 and Joshua 24:15 both deal with choosing; if free will does not exist then the conditional promises are of a fact utterly meaningless. Would you call God's promises nothing? When you deny free will you do so.
Furthermore, the Psalms declare free will (which Jesus recognized as being scripture needful of fulfillment [Lk 24:44]):
Accept, I beseech thee, the freewill offering of my mouth, O Lord, and teach me thy judgments. -- Psalms 119:108
Ping to 20
I read your entire post, but am very interested in the request for you to provide a passage where man’s choices are free from God’s influence. The passage about the “freewill” offerings (notice one word), and the dozen or so other uses of this in the OT are in regard to the sacrafice called, “The freewill offering”. It was called such because there was no written or verbal (from another authority figure) which mandated the giving. A man could give it, if he chose to. The question you must answer, however, is what would cause him to choose? Is the man’s choices unaffected (or perhaps more biblically, “uneffected”) by God?
Your claim that love “...not freely given,” (the old CS Lewis argument) is not biblically supported. You were compelled to use a computer analogy. Please give us a biblical reference to the “philosophical” perspective you claim derives from Scripture. You may have needs to be loved. God does not have that need. What He desires is to display His glory to all of creation. That is its purpose...not to return love to Him. Love existed adequately within the Triune Godhead long before creation.
Additionally, you must deal with
Job 37 – 41
Job 42:2
Jer. 32:17
Prov. 16:9
Is. 45:1
Prov. 16:4
Eccl. 3:1-14
Prov. 21:1
Dan 4:35
Prov. 20:24
Job 14:5
Phil 3:12
Eph. 2:10
Ex 4:11
Ex. 35:35
James 4:13-15
Lam. 3:37-38
Is. 53:10
Acts 4:27-28
I Kings 22:19-23
I Sam 16:14-23,
I Sam 18:10
I Sam 19:9
II Sam 24:1
(1 Chronicles 21:1)
I Cor. 14:33
Ex 14:24
Ex 23:27
Deut 7:23
Deut 28:20
II Thess 2:11
Rom 11:8
II Chron 34:24
Is 37:26,
Amos 3:5,
John 6:44
John 6:65
Isaiah 43:6-7
Rom 14:4
Jude 24, 25
Ephesians 1:11-12
Jeremiah 31:34ff
Phil 1:6
and lot of others making the same claims. God fashioned creation ex nihilo...out of nothing (John 1:1ff). The origin of evil and everything else is obviously from Him. Why does that bother you? He has determined not to use it unfettered, the way you think He must if He created it. Why is that? Because it comports with your categories? Because the philosophers say so, (Bertrand Russell, Epicurus, et al). God has determined to restrain its effects and use after the counsel of His own will...the only “free will” in existence. This is at least one reason to “fear” God. He can do anything He wishes.
And, of course Adam and Eve were created with the propensity to sin. That is what James 1 describes. The extant lust (appetite) was on board at creation. When the opportunity for it to express itself arose (Satan: Has God really said...), it was carried away, conceived and gave birth to sin. Please tell us where the Scriptures say Adam had “free will”? James is dealing with God not “tempting” by dangling a thing in front of you and watching what you will do? It is planned, orchestrated, executed in every man. At least that is what the text says.
I say again, the “calls” for a man to choose (as Joshua said, “Choose this day whom you will serve...” are conditioned upon God directing the man to choose (or not). That is why the prophets would cry, “Why have you caused us to rebel?” and other such tragic truths. If you notice a man “choosing”, you are seeing the operation of God upon His creation. Check Vincent Cheung’s work on the origin of evil.
You may not like it, you may dislike its philosophical implications, you may not even “feel” the effect of God performing His amazing work...that does not change what the text says about man being managed by God. Again, please tell us where the Scriptures teach that man is free from God’s influence.
Never did I claim, or even hint at, man being free from God's influence.
I fully believe that if God "recalled his spirit" from mankind we would cease to live; that is actually irrelevant to free will though.
God fashioned creation ex nihilo...out of nothing (John 1:1ff). The origin of evil and everything else is obviously from Him. Why does that bother you? He has determined not to use it unfettered, the way you think He must if He created it.
And evil must have the good already present to exist. A lie is meaningless without the Truth; rottenness is meaningless without the fruit; a rust-hole cannot exist independent of the thing rusted.
But to say that God created evil is quite akin to the unforgivable sin: to attribute to God's Holy Spirit the work/evil of Satan.
Your claim that love “...not freely given,” (the old CS Lewis argument) is not biblically supported. You were compelled to use a computer analogy.
Because I happen to be a Computer Scientist; Jesus himself recognized we speak of the things we know.
You may have needs to be loved. God does not have that need.
I never said that God had that need; I said that our love would be utterly worthless if not given freely.
This was not a general declaration..HE WAS ADDRESSING HIS DISCIPLES He did not call YOU His friend..
This was not a general declaration..HE WAS ADDRESSING HIS DISCIPLES He did not call YOU His friend..
Actually God created Satan and ordained the fall of satan.. ..and He is still the God of Satan . Satan can not act outside the will of God.. ..so yes the temptation in the garden was ordained by God..as was the fall...
Ah, so then he didn't intend for them to tell others about his work on Earth? (You know, the thing He said made them his friends.) Wow, so much for the Great Commission.
He's not a personal savior? Guess the group-salvation stuff of liberation theology must be right after all.
Do you even think about the consequence of your theological positions?
And besides that; if things are as you say and I have no free will, then what does it matter that I do or don't? If God is not my friend, then why shouldn't I tremble in terror at the Great Despot? If God is as you paint, giving me no free will and not being my friend; then why should I believe that He intends any good thing for me?
But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe God created me to hate. Maybe God made me simply so he could laugh at my pathetic attempts at life.
After all, your God, being perfectly free creates man in his own image, but without any freedom and with an inherent sin-nature.
No, you must be right and the apostles wrong; surely God did not send his son to die for my sin because He loved me. Surely Jesus never thought of me at all, despite being God himself, and despite him forming me in the womb.
HUH?
You used that scripture to imply that Jesus was speaking about YOU..he was not ..unless you are saved you are an enemy of Gods..not His friend. .
And besides that; if things are as you say and I have no free will, then what does it matter that I do or don't?
If you are not saved it does not matter what you do.. every thing you do is sin.. EVERYTHING even works the world calls good
If God is not my friend, then why shouldn't I tremble in terror at the Great Despot?
Because He is Holy and Righteous and will oe day be your judge.. He can send you to hell..
If God is as you paint, giving me no free will and not being my friend; then why should I believe that He intends any good thing for me?
If you are not saved he has no good intent for you..
But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe God created me to hate. Maybe God made me simply so he could laugh at my pathetic attempts at life.
The purpose of creation is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.. Men will never choose to love God without a movement of His grace on them first..Free will? Man will NEVER choose God.. so his "free will " is no gift .it damns him
After all, your God, being perfectly free creates man in his own image, but without any freedom and with an inherent sin-nature.
Is man still in the image of our Holy and perfect God now? What does the bible tell us?
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat [a son] in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
You need to learn to read scripture..all promises in the scripture do not belong to all men..they were specific to the audience.. and Jesus called the disciples His friends..not you
Wow! How utterly repugnant, and how utterly stupid, and how utterly contrary to the whole of the bible: If God has no good intent for me then he did not send Jesus to die for my sins, BEFORE I WAS SAVED, in order to save me -- such would be good intent and, according to you, require me to already be saved.
(Indeed, the New-covenant [Jesus], the Abrahamic-covenant, the Noah-covenant, the Adamic-covenant ALL require God's good intent.)
1 John 4:19 (KJV) -- We love him, because he first loved us.
Romans 5:8 -- but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
But God does have good intent toward me; He sent Jesus do be the propitiation for my sins. Now let me ask: Who are you to tell me that I am not saved? And who are you to tell me that God has no good intent for me?
No, I think that it is you who has no good intent for me.
Certainly you did. The term "free will" has no meaning if it does not mean that man can make choices completely free from the God. Otherwise you are back to that hybrid, "limited free will" which is not free, at all.
"But to say that God created evil is quite akin to the unforgivable sin: to attribute to God's Holy Spirit the work/evil of Satan."
How is it that God possessed a "knowledge of good and evil" when He ordered Adam to not eat from that tree, if the concept did not exist until creation and someone other than God invented it? Did God "learn" something new? Gen. makes clear, God said that the man had "...become like one of Us, knowing good from evil". If we agree that the Scriptures claim God is immutable, unchanging, thus has always known what He knows, what did He know about evil if it did not exist?
If a man is going to pick red or green sox out of the drawer tomorrow at 10am, free will requires that God not know what choice He would make. Otherwise, God is seeing something which cannot possibly occur differently. If it cannot occur differently, then exactly how "free" is the man? And, if God does not know, are you claiming that God has no foreknowledge? Does He not see what will happen tomorrow? That is a pagan god, not Yahweh, the God of Heaven & Earth.
What is it about the need to be free from God that even those who call themselves believers cling to such a concept? The Scriptures plainly say He turns the hearts of Kings, He causes the dice to roll a certain number, He sics Satan on men, He controls who believes. What is it that makes this an unwelcome truth? Here is my suspicion: They possess a reward system theology, rather than grace.
Saying that free will does not exist if there is any influence is absurd. Is your choice to, say, paint your house red or blue, or green suddenly not your choice if your mom suggests blue or purple? She certainly has influence, but you have the choice.
How is it that God possessed a "knowledge of good and evil" when He ordered Adam to not eat from that tree, if the concept did not exist until creation and someone other than God invented it? Did God "learn" something new?
Knowledge of something does not necessarily mean the implementation thereof; that is to say that the knowledge of something not the same as the doing of it. You're falling into a mode of thinking similar to those who say one cannot condemn something if they haven't tried it.
Gen. makes clear, God said that the man had "...become like one of Us, knowing good from evil". If we agree that the Scriptures claim God is immutable, unchanging, thus has always known what He knows, what did He know about evil if it did not exist?
Again, you are confusing existence with the possibility of existence; the practice with the theory.
If a man is going to pick red or green sox out of the drawer tomorrow at 10am, free will requires that God not know what choice He would make. Otherwise, God is seeing something which cannot possibly occur differently. If it cannot occur differently, then exactly how "free" is the man? And, if God does not know, are you claiming that God has no foreknowledge? Does He not see what will happen tomorrow? That is a pagan god, not Yahweh, the God of Heaven & Earth.
No, that's wrong; that's like saying that you knowing your drug dealing mouthy brother is going to get himself killed [if he doesn't stop] invalidates your brother's choice to stop or continue. Furthermore, it assumes that knowledge of the future invalidates the choices of the present. (This is hard to convey properly precisely because we are temporal beings, bounded by time.)
What I'm saying is that God's foreknowledge does not invalidate free will; they are not mutually exclusive.
What is it about the need to be free from God that even those who call themselves believers cling to such a concept? The Scriptures plainly say He turns the hearts of Kings, He causes the dice to roll a certain number, He sics Satan on men, He controls who believes. What is it that makes this an unwelcome truth? Here is my suspicion: They possess a reward system theology, rather than grace.
Ha! You really seem hung up on the concept that "free will" means "free from God [and all of God's power]" that is not so, God supports and sustains the whole of the Universe.
Why do you claim that the belief that I am responsible for my own actions, having free will, utterly negates a claim that I exist/am-sustained (as all in the universe are) because of God? It's akin, to use the computer metaphor, to saying that I believe that computers don't use electricity because I believe that they can compute; but the truth is that w/o electricity the whole thing is moot because that necessary component is missing.
Just because God keeps me in existence does not mean that I do not have free will. Not any more than not being arrested means that I have committed no crime.
God sends rain to the just and the unjust? (Yes or no).
How can a man be just [or unjust] if he is not responsible for his own actions? and if he is responsible for his own actions, how can it be just for God to punish him if he had no free will? (After all, if he has no free will then he had no choice but to act in that unjust manner and therefore holding him to account for them would be just as absurd as trying to hold a computer to account for following its program.)
Here is my suspicion: those who deny free will make excuses to sin. ("Oh, but Trayvon couldn't help attacking Zimmerman, it was his being raised in a poor neighborhood!")
Isn’t it amazing how men hate the idea of a sovereign God interfering with their free will?
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.