Posted on 12/19/2014 1:30:26 PM PST by SeekAndFind
All I note is that you do not post scripture backing your point.
More study needed.
Assuredly.
But who can be “in his hand” if they depart of their own volition?
If they depart of their own volition then obviously Jesus is of lesser power then they themselves: for they themselves are snatching themselves from his hand.
But obviously that is untrue: if he will lose none of those given him by the father, then none of those who (after having be given him) leave can actually be lost, otherwise he is a liar. (This is not to say that we cannot deceive ourselves, that is another topic altogether and human experience has shown the great capacity for self-deception that humanity has.)
He is clearly speaking of his core disciples:
John 17:
[12] While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
[13] And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
[14] I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
[15] I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
[16] They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
[17] Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
[18] As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
[19] And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
[20] Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
John 18:
[8] Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way:
[9] That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.
It couldn't possibly be clearer that he is speaking of the eleven.
One and Two are just plain wrong, and 4 is situational.
It’s ridiculous to claim that the scriptures are not God’s word. (1) These folks can’t distinguish between the scriptures and the organizing principle of the universe, The Word.
It’s ridiculous to claim that works precedes grace. (2) By grace are you save through faith. All is of grace.
And giving one’s life depends on the circumstance, as Paul ably points out to the Philippians. (4) I’d like to go on to be with God but it’s more needful that I remain here.
Jesus did not come into the world to condemn the world, but to save it. His own words.
Except what I posted was in John 6 and John 10, what you post is in John 17 & 18, in completely different settings:
John 6:35-40 is not directed at the Twelve, but at the crowds after the feeding of the five thousand sought him out the day after, and is his reply to their inquery about the bread of life. (Link)So, obviously the claim that these particular things were directed at the Twelve is absurd, the claim that these were strictly about the Twelve is a lie.
John 10:16 (about the sheep of the other pen) is part of a reply tothe Jews, who were divided about his reply (see v. 19).
John 10:28 is directed at the Jews as part of a bigger speech on who Jesus is and what he is doing, in the temple (v 22) and the response the Jews had was to attempt to stone him (v. 31) and arrest him (v. 39).
You continue to misrepresent the true content of the scriptures!
“I will in no wise cast out” is not a promise that many would not simply depart on their own, and in this chapter (6) it plainly says that many did: “[66] From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.”
And again, “believe on” as used in the NT is not intellectual belief, but the true belief of a disciple that dedicates his life to following the teaching.
Twist as you will, the clear meaning of scripture will not change.
The teaching that you appear to want is not the teaching that Yeshua gave.
.
…really?
You're the one who said that the portions cited from John ch. 6 and 10 were about the Twelve, I showed they were not.
“I will in no wise cast out” is not a promise that many would not simply depart on their own, and in this chapter (6) it plainly says that many did: “[66] From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.”
Were they given to him by the Father?
Were they ever in his hand at all?
>> “Were they given to him by the Father?” <<
>> “Were they ever in his hand at all?” <<
.
These are the excellent questions I was trying to get you to see. They are the ones that blow big holes in your man made theology.
.
How is it that the Holy Spirit can tell some folks it’s OK to marry sodomites and others that it is an abomination?
So, which is right? Yes, the vast majority of us know it is an abomination but using protestant logic, who is the authority that is going to tell someone what the Holy Spirit allegedly ‘revealed’ or said was “ok” to them?
Nobody.
And if you kept up with the thread, I was informed that my Church is “corrupt” which seems to be a rather prevalent protestant dogma. In fact that was the start of my line of questioning to begin with. The article is based on falsehood of catholic teaching, which so far nobody has bothered to answer.
So, every Bible believing Protestant is assured of the Holy Spirit assisting them with their personal interpretation of Scripture yet the Catholic Church is not given the same benefit.
Yeah.
Then why did you claim that he was talking about the Twelve?
They are the ones that blow big holes in your man made theology.
Really?
Where has my man-made theology
been inadequate? The words were spoken by Jesus, and I was quite plain in Post 181 that the self-perceived state of being in his hand
could well be self-deception.
You, on the other hand, said in Post 180 that Jesus didn't say that he would lose none of those given him; in Post 177 that this assurance was only to the Twelve (ironically, in Post 182 wherein you were trying to support this you bolded the underlined Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
which is obviously not the Twelve) — which is easily disproven.
Why then should I hold that your understanding of Theology is better than mine? Or that your condemnation of it (as man made
) is of any merit?
I'm not about to claim that no Catholic has had the Holy Spirit assist them in such a manner, as to do so would be to claim that no Catholic is Christian.
But it seems absurd to me to claim that the Catholic Church, as an organization, has the interaction/revelation of the Holy Spirit while denying that the Holy Spirit can/does speak to individuals — the smallest possible group and, incidentally, requisite for an organization at all.
And if you kept up with the thread, I was informed that my Church is “corrupt” which seems to be a rather prevalent protestant dogma.
Satan goes about like a roaring lion seeking those to devour and he's crafty; it would be stupid to think that any church (in the organizational sense) cannot be subverted, either into accepting lies/untrue-doctrine or having their drive turned to unprofitable endeavors (e.g. intra-congregational feuds, self-righteous attitude, singing a little louder, etc) or both (e.g. works-based theology, etc) by the enemy. (Pride goes before a fall.) — Given the size of the Catholic church it would be particularly foolish to claim purity on the organizational scale, heck, that's true for even the small 4- or 5-member churches. (All our good works are as filthy rags.) — The Catholic church has taught some things that, IMO, are very suspect (e.g. if not outright Mary worship then damn close: co-redemptrix, Queen of Heaven
, etc).
In fact that was the start of my line of questioning to begin with. The article is based on falsehood of catholic teaching, which so far nobody has bothered to answer.
Which in particular?
Yeah, did that plus other passages. In verse 9 it mentions the light. Who is the light? It's Christ. It does NOT go on to talk about the law.
>>The terms Law an Commandments are essentially interchangeable in the NT, as all of the commandments of the NT are demands of obedience to the “first things.”<<
Nonsense and not consistent with the rest of scripture. The commandments are NOT the laws given to Moses. Let's go back to Exodus and Deuteronomy to see the difference.
When the ark was commanded to be built by God specific things were to be put in the ark. One of those things was that tablets with the ten commandments.
Exodus 25:16 And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee.
What was the testimony that He was to give them?
Exodus 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.
Those of course were the 10 commandments. Note in Exodus 26 God said to put them into the ark. The ten commandments were put inside the ark under the mercy seat. Now let's see where the laws of Moses were placed.
Deu 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it beside of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.>/font>
The laws of Moses are NOT the same as the commandments nor are they given the same place. Notice also that the laws were 'a witness against us". But that's another subject.
Now, knowing that the commandments of God are NOT treated the same as the commandments let's look at what Jesus said.
Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
He then goes into describing the attributes of each of the ten commandments. Jesus tells us to keep the commandments NOT the law.
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
1 John 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
1John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
2Jn 1:6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.
We are NOT told to keep the laws of Moses. We are told to keep the ten commandments. >>Your attempt to differentiate Law and Commandments has to be facetious.<<
Not according to what God said. I listen to God, not that fraud Michael Rood. He works for the enemy trying to put man back under the law which separates them from Christ.
Probably not as much as less of the influence of Michael Rood who works for the enemy.
That there exist liars, false teachers, and false spirits should be of no surprise to anyone.
Each of those explain how someone could claim that the Holy Spirit approved.
So, which is right? Yes, the vast majority of us know it is an abomination but using protestant logic, who is the authority that is going to tell someone what the Holy Spirit allegedly ‘revealed’ or said was “ok” to them?
In Mathematics it is common to check your work by means of another method; the same can be applied to Spirituality and, indeed, the Berean Jews were commended for doing just this:
(Acts 17:11)They had the Scriptures, which they knew to be the Word of God, if there was a discrepancy they would have not accepted Paul's message; indeed John says that we're to test the spirits… in fact, the portion of scripture containing the command explains the phenomenon:
Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
(1 John 4:1-6)
4 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world. Little children, you are from God, and have conquered them; for the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. They are from the world; therefore what they say is from the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and whoever is not from God does not listen to us. From this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
Not of those the Father gave Him he didn't.
The disciples were the ones the Father gave him. That is the point!
You’ll face your accusations at the Great White Throne.
.
Peter covered your private interpretations.
The word of God is self interpreting, not dispy interpreted.
I’m already aware of what you wish were true; save your typing finger.
.
Oh good grief.
>> “Then why did you claim that he was talking about the Twelve?” <<
.
He was talking about the eleven.
>> “I was quite plain in Post 181 that the self-perceived state of being in his hand could well be self-deception.” <<
.
More likely in your case it is observer wishful thinking deception.
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.