Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hi Mike,
Your posts are usually too long for me, I will probably skip some, but here are a couple thoughts that stood out while reading the above:
- I don't believe we have "personal faith." To me, it is God's own faith which He imparts to only a few people in this age. But the difference is not insignificant, since God alone gets the glory. The faith of Jesus Christ is just that: His. That's part of why He was successful!
- Justification, imo, is not "available," but a reality for all. Just as Adam's condemnation was a reality for all mankind, it seems quite just and right that God would offer a remedy which was at least as powerful and binding as the sickness.
That's why Jesus is the Last Adam, imo.
Salvation however is not given to all right now. But those who receive it have no merit, since they are mere recipients, they have in no way "asked for" or deserved it.
So all are justified, not all are believers (yet).
I'll be back tomorrow, it's late here!
Blessings!
Brian
Truth does not mold itself to fit your opinion.
It's later than you know!!!
It's obvious that I can't get through to you. Believe what you will.
Last edited by Michael Way; 01-13-2011 at 03:54 PM..
,,,are you serious- the bible definitly has no evidencde of evolution in their,,,id like to see you argue to the atheist's about how literal the bible is and see how you get on,after all isnt that where you got your ET information from,taking verses out of context and looking at them literally,when obviusly their were either inner meanings/missinterpretations/misstranslations/butchered facts or complete lies.I'll go with inner meanings,seperation from God is hell.
how did you give your PHD on the whole world flooding thingy.
I've done it on several occasions...and quite frankly, they are now researching Christianity.....you? I don't ascribe to ET in the universal sense....as you and some others do.
World flooding thingy?
It was local. Research it, and leave Mr. Ken Hamm out of it. I respect him and he is a great man of God, but he is clearly wrong. God is not a deceiver.
The world is roughly 4.5 billion years old...not 6000.
Nimrod did not build the first ziggurat. Noah and his family were not the only ones left to replenish the globe....the land yes, the seed of Adam...yes, but not the globe.
There were roughly 75 million on earth the time Noah stepped off the ark. You can take that to the bank.
Adam was not the first man, which is crystal clear. Christ was not the last man either, which is crystal clear.
Adam was the first in covenant, and those of his seed, are "in him."
Through Judaism, the lost house of Judah, Christianity is revealed.
In Adam - the Jew, in Christ - the Christian.
No UR.
Is that your defense? LOL....lots has changed in the academic world since then...let alone, it is quite clear the flood was not global....and that man...read carefully......evolved....unless you have scientific and Biblical proof that is not the case.....you are reaching for a straw man....I for one, can prove to you scripturally, that Adam....was NOT created ex nihilo....so can many others, that have taken the time to research it, and weigh out the evidence...unlike you it seems.
I never mentioned the flood of Noah, so i don't see where that comes in to this. But it is obvious to me that you don't believe what the bible teaches about many things, and that is why you and those like you who teach the things to which you subscribe must twist the scriptures to make them mean something different than they obviously say.
Nevertheless we digress ...
Quote:
No it wasn't.
Yes, it was ...
Quote:
No...that would be you.,..since you believe that everyone, regardless of faith...has a spirit. The ancients did not think this way, neither did the Hebrews, and this concept spawned from Stoic....and read closely....Gnostic philosophies.
Excuse me, don't try to interpolate your nonsense teachings into Judaism and convince me of its validity. Others who are less educated in world religion might be fooled, but you cant fool me. Judaism teaches today and has always taught that every living human being has a soul and a spirit, as both are necessary. The bible specifically refers to the spirits of people who were neither Hebrew or Christian, such as the pharaoh ...
Do you care to provide evidences that the ancients, including the Hebrews taught and believed that most humans did not have a spirit?
I can show evidence that the Gnostics taught that there would never be a literal resurrection of the dead. That they taught, instead of a resurrection, the enlightened put on an astral/spiritual form and live for ever, while the unenlightened are either doomed to annihilation or eternal torment, as in the case of the Manicheans.
Such as ...
Quote:
The gnostics took an esoteric view of death, and therefore of resurrection. When Paul states in Romans that he that is dead is freed from sin, and that we are buried with him by baptism into death, the gnostics assumed it was a reference to the teaching that the body is the work of the evil demiurge, and that death would release the divine part of a person from the demiurge's power.
Gnostics also took death to be symbolic for the death of the part of a person tied to the demiurge, and the consequential resurrection as a new entirely spiritual being, understanding resurrection as an awakening of spiritual enlightenment. In Philippians, Paul refers to himself as partaking in the same death as Christ, and thence partaking in the resurrection of the dead, which suited gnostic interpretations. Paul's references to reaping and sowing of crops, in 1 Corinthians, was also a common image from the mystery religions symbolising the esoteric death and resurrection of initiates.
In the First Epistle to the Corinthians, however, during chapter 15, Paul appears to give credence to a more literal idea of the physical resurrection of the dead. However, as noted by many gnostics, Paul also states flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Irenaeus complained that all heretics always introduce this passage. It is widely thought by scholars that the presence of the issue proved such a problem that someone felt the need to forge a third letter to the Corinthians, which explicitly states the dead are resurrected physically. Despite this, 3 Corinthians was rejected from biblical canon, and thus became part of the New Testament apocrypha.
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul also refers to baptism for the dead (15:29), a concept according to Elaine Pagels, was easily explained by gnostics. Since the gnostics argued that the text was allegory, their stance was that baptism for the dead refers to pneumatics (i.e. gnostics) taking the place of psychics (i.e. literalists), who were dead to gnosis.
I never mentioned the flood of Noah, so i don't see where that comes in to this.
Quote:
Right, that is why no one in the early church taught anything even remotely similar to what you teach ... ?
Your concept of what the early church, as in the first and second century apostles and church leaders viewed the flood, in lieu of say....3rd and 4th century philosopher such as Origen and such...viewed globally in many different ways. And global flood theology roots itself into the 3rd and 4th centuries, thus giving the universal application of salvation regardless of faith, a devil's playground. Because of this....Christianity took a turn down the wrong road. All of your misconceptions stem from this whether you realize it or not....as well as your belief that the second coming is still future. Your theology will be but deleted from the church's memory in say....two hundred years. Mine, will flourish.
Quote:
But it is obvious to me that you don't believe what the bible teaches about many things, and that is why you and those like you who teach the things to which you subscribe must twist the scriptures to make them mean something different than they obviously say.
It is just that you, don;t understand them, because of what your theology is rooted in...Adam the father of mankind, and that the flood was global.
Quote:
Yes, it was ...
No it wasn't.
Quote:
Excuse me, don't try to interpolate your nonsense teachings into Judaism and convince me of its validity.
Let Christ rephrase....I have come not to destroy the law, or the prophets, but to fulfill.
Quote:
Others who are less educated in world religion might be fooled,
You are one of those people...less educated in world religion, and world history let alone.
Quote:
Judaism teaches today and has always taught that every living human being has a soul and a spirit, as both are necessary. The bible specifically refers to the spirits of people who were neither Hebrew or Christian, such as the pharaoh ...
{Prove to us that the Bible teaches that pharoah had a spirit....not a soul...a spirit. They are two very different words in Hebrew, meaning two very different things.
Quote:
Do you care to provide evidences that the ancients, including the Hebrews taught and believed that most humans did not have a spirit?
See the study I pointed out above. Research it yourself. It's out there.
Quote:
I can show evidence that the Gnostics taught that there would never be a literal resurrection of the dead. That they taught, instead of a resurrection, the enlightened put on an astral/spiritual form and live for ever, while the unenlightened are either doomed to annihilation or eternal torment, as in the case of the Manicheans.
Such as .....etc.
I wasn't talking about 1st century gnostics. Try 300 years before Christ.
Last edited by sciotamicks; 01-13-2011 at 04:23 PM..
that im glad of and not some doctrine that has been passed through roman emporers,english kings and so on's hands over the years,because if the truth is what you say it is then reality is very very sad,and theirs no way you can change that,if the ET doctrine is true then life is a terrible thing,have you ever watched someone or even an animal in agonizing pain,wouldnt you do what you could to help them,even if they were your worst enemy,im sure God would like you too,.............................................b ut why dont you think that God wouldnt help someone in pain,well in the physical world pain is karma,but is only temporary,but eternal pain handed down bye God's judgment dosent fit someone that is higher than justice itself,after all no-one can even hurt God,our seperation from Him,although we dont know it, is pain in-itself,we should be feeling the highest bliss but because we are sinners we are stuck on the temporary platform of existence....mercy is higher than justice and if your saying that god is lim ited to showing mercy to not only his enemys but those who just dont understand,all the good people in the world that might not even beleive in god,if you are putting so much limitations on god then i think that you are not understanding the nature of god.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike555
God has clearly revealed in the Bible whether you accept that fact or not, that all who do not believe in Christ for salvation before they depart from this earth, are going to be eternally separated from God in hell.
again very very sadask yourself,without thinking about the doctrine,which has no philosophy nor religion in it,what would be the best plan for life to exist and evolve through consioussness(spiritual progress).so that all can benefit,or is God just a miser who dosent want to share His love with everyone.?
the word religion has the same meaning as yoga---to combine with/link up with or to merge with the supreme,they both have the same end in mind.
I've done it on several occasions...and quite frankly, they are now researching Christianity.....you? I don't ascribe to ET in the universal sense....as you and some others do.
well are you here defending the ET doctrine or not,ima little confused,maybe ill have to go back and read your posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
World flooding thingy?
It was local. Research it, and leave Mr. Ken Hamm out of it. I respect him and he is a great man of God, but he is clearly wrong. God is not a deceiver.
The world is roughly 4.5 billion years old...not 6000.
Nimrod did not build the first ziggurat. Noah and his family were not the only ones left to replenish the globe....the land yes, the seed of Adam...yes, but not the globe.
There were roughly 75 million on earth the time Noah stepped off the ark. You can take that to the bank.
Adam was not the first man, which is crystal clear. Christ was not the last man either, which is crystal clear.
Adam was the first in covenant, and those of his seed, are "in him."
Through Judaism, the lost house of Judah, Christianity is revealed.
In Adam - the Jew, in Christ - the Christian.
No UR.
Your concept of what the early church, as in the first and second century apostles and church leaders viewed the flood, in lieu of say....3rd and 4th century philosopher such as Origen and such...viewed globally in many different ways. And global flood theology roots itself into the 3rd and 4th centuries, thus giving the universal application of salvation regardless of faith, a devil's playground. Because of this....Christianity took a turn down the wrong road. All of your misconceptions stem from this whether you realize it or not....as well as your belief that the second coming is still future. Your theology will be but deleted from the church's memory in say....two hundred years. Mine, will flourish.
I don't perceive the doctrinal controversy concerning the meaning of the judgments of God and his plan for creation as a competition. I perceive it to be evidence of the fruits of the spirit and its effect, or lack thereof, in the lives of those that profess to believe on Christ.
Nevertheless, the true Gospel of the restitution of all things has survived since the times of Christ and his apostles to now, and not even torture and death, or threat of everlasting torment, at the hands of the state of Rome and the Roman Catholic Church or even the intentional mistranslation of the Greek and Hebrew scriptures has been able "delete" the gospel truth of Christs complete victory over sin and death in the lives of all people and throughout all creation, and neither will your modern day spin on that old bad religion be able to do it either.
Quote:
It is just that you, don;t understand them, because of what your theology is rooted in...Adam the father of mankind, and that the flood was global.
You are a funny guy ... I'm not going to get into what i believe about the flood or whether or not Adam was the first humanoid being created by God(as a matter of fact i speculate that he was not).
However, the scriptures are very clear about how all the nations, not only the nation of Israel, came from Adam, through Noah, and his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And to this day the various ethnicities can be divided into three categories, Semetic nations, Hametic nations, and Japhetic nations, based on the scriptural records. So according to the scriptures, all men of every nation on earth today came from Adam, and not only those who were born of Shem or even much later born of Abraham.
So for you to say that all nations are not effected by the sin of Adam and its ramifications(i.e death), according to the scriptures you are wrong. You must interpret that somehow Adam is only the progenitor of the nation of Israel(that was Abraham) and not all the nations. That is absurd, as is the doctrine you are teaching.
So when Paul uses Adam and the effects of his disobedience on all people as a contrast to Christ and the effects of his faithfulness on the very same group of people, it is obvious what he is actually saying, as he believed the historical accounts of the Torah concerning the origins of men and not what modern day science and archeology or what you and those who "know what you know" now days believe.
And it is more than disingenuous for you to try to take what Paul says out of the obvious context in which it is meant by him and try to say that he did NOT believe that Adam was the progenitor of all people and that his sin did not effect all of humanity but only those under some supposed special covenant, and then say that he thus must not have meant that the effects of Christs work on the cross effects all people, either.
Quote:
No it wasn't.
Quote:
Let Christ rephrase....I have come not to destroy the law, or the prophets, but to fulfill.
LOL, and what are you trying to say by quoting that? Is that supposed to prove that ancient Israel believed that only Israelites had spirits?
Quote:
You are one of those people...less educated in world religion, and world history let alone.
Really? I believe that i have proven otherwise during my time here at C-D, I will let the readers be the judge.
And i am supposed to believe that you mean to imply that you have studied much more about ancient world religion than I have by your saying as much?
I am confident in my my studies and comprehension to say the least.
Quote:
{Prove to us that the Bible teaches that pharoah had a spirit....not a soul...a spirit. They are two very different words in Hebrew, meaning two very different things.
Genesis 41:8
Now in the morning his spirit (Heb: "ruwach") was troubled, so he sent and called for all the magicians of Egypt, and all its wise men And Pharaoh told them his dreams, but there was no one who could interpret them to Pharaoh.
Quote:
See the study I pointed out above. Research it yourself. It's out there.
In other words, no you cant prove it ...
Quote:
I wasn't talking about 1st century gnostics. Try 300 years before Christ.
So then you acquiesce to the fact that what you teach and believe concerning the resurrection of the dead is in agreement with Gnosticism then, at least that of the early Christian era?
Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 01-13-2011 at 06:00 PM..
That other fella on this thread said with a straight face that in that passage there is nothing about believing.
He said the following:
''There is nothing being said about the impious believing or doing anything other than, well, being impious and ungodly...LOL However, this text does tell us what God is doing for them. Namely, declaring righteous the impious.''
He just blocked out the part about it being those who believe who are declared righteous. Just as you block it out.
I knew you'd be back...in short order too... See, God is working on you...lol
Those who believe are imputed with righteousness. This much you've gotten right.
However, what you still have not come to terms with is that the impious ones spoken of in Rom 4:5, the ones not believing, are being declared righteous by Jesus. These impious ones are not yet imputed with righteousness, but are none-the-less, declared righteous.
LOL...this is tougher than I thought. Let me re-phrase Rom 4:5 to make my point:
and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous Adolf Hitler, his faith is reckoned--to righteousness:
Did that help?
IOW, those who believe that Jesus is (present tense) declaring righteous Adolf Hitler, those people who believe this are imputed with the righteousness of Christ. It is hard for the natural mind to grasp this truth. Trust me, I know...
However, that is what Rom 4:5 tells us. This is why I've always maintained that ETer's do not actually believe the Gospel. They do not really believe in Him who is declaring righteous the impious. ETer's do not believe in Jesus. And consequently, ETer's are just like the impious ones that they say will burn in hell for eternity. They themselves too testify that they have not been imputed with the righteousness of Christ. They judge themselves in this regard.
It is that simple my friend. Believe the Gospel. Believe in Him who is declaring righteous the impious.
It is amazing that a person, out of 21 centuries of people, thinks they have come up with a nice way tell God that He is being contradictory. One should realize that niether his thoughts nor any thoughts like his has had any effect on God. God did not create eternal punishment for man. He created it for Satan and his angels. If you go there, you go as an univited guest. God through Christ, His son, made a way of escape from eternal punishment. So with a grateful heart you should live in God's shadow, NOT as far away from Him as you can get and test to see if He will still love you. Most of us are parents and know what kind of child that tries this foolishness. We are not fooled as parents and God is not fooled either. The Bible says to choose who you are going to serve. He says the wages of sin is death. Without Christ that is the penalty of sin.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ask yourself,without thinking about the doctrine,which has no philosophy nor religion in it,what would be the best plan for life to exist and evolve through consioussness(spiritual progress).so that all can benefit,or is God just a miser who dosent want to share His love with everyone.?
See, God is working on you...lol