patrick jane forums
Christian Theology with DOUG and TED T. => Christian Threads => Topic started by: guest5 on August 04, 2018, 08:30:40 pm
-
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
-
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
I imagine many people don't have one, Jon. I will share mine shortly.
-
Lol, I didn’t think about that PJ. I forgot it’s a fairly new place lol.
-
I wasn't correcting you just pointing out. Even at Theology Forums, our home forum, I've seen many people put "I dunno" or none or other things. For me, I was in limbo for decades, just all about me me me and what's in it for me. So, as a small kid, I knew and believed in Jesus Christ as my Saviour and I was in Catholic school until the middle of fourth grade.
Transferring to Public School I was far ahead of the new fellow students in many subjects. I never completed my "confirmation" as a young Catholic but for the next 30 years I would tell people I'm Catholic while only have a 4th grade understanding. Although schools in that system were further ahead I tested at a 9th grade vocabulary in 3rd grade.
BTW, this forum is kinda fun when you start getting used to it. You guys are all Mods with lots of permissions.
So then, comes Junior High and High School and all I did was smoke pot. I didn't want girlfriends but had some anyway. All I wanted was weed and my friends to cruise with and hang out with. I never finished my Junior year and got a GED. One full year of college and then stayed in the workforce and necer went back to school. Still could I suppose.
Then I got a NIV Study Bible for my birthday from my cousin Sharon and browsed through it from time to time for 3 years. I never got into the NIV but I really did enjoy reading it and having all of the study notes and commentary. I started to read the commentaries more than the scriptures. Relying on the NIV interpretations. It didn't feel right.
In about 2011 a let a friend stay with me who had just survived the Joplin MO tornado that destroyed everything including his place. He stayed for 3 months and did things for me like stain the whole deck in one day by himself, 2 or 3 coats. Surprised me and I felt guilty but thankful. My best friend. Perhaps he left the small KJV Red letter NT Bible there for me. It was in the open and he took everything else.
I let that sit for 2 years and never really opened it, just looked at it. Out of maybe boredom or frustration with my spiritual state I opened it. It was easy to read because it red letter and small. Leather and comfortable to hold. I felt really good reading it and the words came alive. I understood what I was reading. After Matthew Mark Luke and John a few times I read Acts a few times. Then Romans blew me away until I got to 1 & Corinthians and Ephesians, Philippians Galatians Thessalonians, Timothy !!!
I couldn't believe what I was understanding. I was wrong for so long. Then I decide to get on the internet and I was a novice.
I think I Googled - deep thought - and some theology came up. I saw theologyonline and joined. At this point I was a huge follower of Paul's epistles and the revelations given to him by the risen ascended Lord Jesus Christ.
I studied with the MAD gang and over 3 years there I firmly established my theology and doctrine. I know very little and learn everyday. But the wisdom and spiritual understanding I've been given by God is enough for me to know that I am saved and sealed with that holy spirit of promise, I have an inheritance and I'm a purchased possession, redeemed. Believing and trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ seals us. We are saved by the death, the blood of Christ. By grace, which was revealed to Paul first.
That's where the debate comes with my theology because most want to follow Peter. I don't mind debating but I like reading and talking about it much more.
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterst : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
My small Forum : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
My Website : https://patrickjane3169.wixsite.com/website
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Vimeo : https://vimeo.com/user87745391
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
-
I knew you weren’t trying to correct me PJ lol, I think I got used to everybody being set in their ways over there. This topic would probably get more hits over there too, but it doesn’t really seem to fit the mood over there right now. I never knew that you had any Catholic experience, all i’ve Ever been around is Baptists and agnostics lol. But yeah, I took up sort of a primitive version of Open View because, it felt the closest to studying like I had never heard anyone’s influence but God. Though, I still kept a belief in some basic things because, I guess they just feel right and honest and true, if anyone gets what I mean.
-
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
Is that other forum the great and outstanding Theology Forums? If it's another that's great too. You're still young and my understanding didn't kick in until later on but that was my fault for ignoring God. You have the time and the desire to learn and you have a big brain ("check out the big brain on Brad").
You are a blessing to us at theologyforums.com - Everybody is.
-
Of course I’m talking about Theology Forums!
-
PJ what is MAD? I saw you say that you spent three years there.
-
PJ what is MAD? I saw you say that you spent three years there.
It stand for Mid Acts Dispensation. Theologians are scared of us because we rightly divide the word of truth. Hah !!! Tambora is MAD and Crow and Bladerunner and a couple others - Many at TOL are and that's where I was fore 3.5 years before coming here. It's called Theology Online and they started in 1997. It simply consists of knowing that several things changed in the middle of the book of Acts, a very difficult book to know.
I have the thread here and at TF that teaches Paul's doctrine which the only doctrine by which we are saved. The Bible says that, not me. The thread is called Salvation, Doctrine and Rightly Dividing and I post lessons from my favorite pastor at a grace bible study church in Indiana. MADs rarely lose a debate on scripture. You could read one post a day and learn more than me trying to explain.
Same with FE, start on page one of the 80 page thread on TF or start fresh on the thread here. You don't have to bear down and study like for a test, but it will all start to sink in. If not, that's cool too. You may not be interested or ready or both.
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterst : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
My small Forum : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
My Website : https://patrickjane3169.wixsite.com/website
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Vimeo : https://vimeo.com/user87745391
- Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
-
I love to Study and Paul most certainly is the Apostle for us gentiles :] I agree, I will look into this deeper.
-
(https://redeeminggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/types-of-theology1.jpg)
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
Sorry, Jon I never really replied to your OP. I have always had a bad taste in my mouth for certain churches and I've been to many. Catholic masses are beautiful and organized and show reverence for God. But I disagree strongly with catholic church history and historic leaders and the Jesuits. I thought I was Pentecostal for a while but couldn't get into the charismatic fakery.
Most churches have politics and as the end days are foretold, more will seek smaller groups of fellowship. I do not feel closer to God by going to place with a large group of people dressing up or even not dressing up , but there is no clear message from the proceedings or the pastor. I get much more and feel closer to Jesus Christ when I share scriptures and thought of things above with friends I can trust in the comfort and safety of my home and the computer. I get much more from reading a few chapters of a book in the Bible than I do from most sermons.
Don't get me wrong, I hear great sermons in church but I will not put up with the hypocrisy and the distractions. One can only really grow in Christ by reading and studying bit by bit and forming your own theology, nobody else's formula. Spiritual discernment and understanding will come to all, I believe, if they seek earnestly with an unselfish heart.
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterst : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
My small Forum : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php
My Website : https://patrickjane3169.wixsite.com/website
Bitchute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Vimeo : https://vimeo.com/user87745391
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection, the gospel of our salvation, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -
-
No worries Peej, actually your answer is pretty much dead on to my own thoughts. I loved Jesus, but I started seeing the general picture the way most outsiders did of the churches and other Christians, I kind of saw myself becoming that and I hated it. I came back to God despite judgemental and self righteous Christians and churches. I eventually started to see that I am not really the only one that has noticed how far Christianity has fallen. I hated church and other Christians for a long time, I still get annoyed, but I really find comfort in the fact that the stereotypes don’t represent all of us and i’m Happy to have made the friends and family i’m Making nowadays.
-
Let's ramble a little, I'm 67 so I'm entitled.
I was saved by means of an [American] gospel magazine, in my own home...but it was dramatic. One moment I did not know God, the next I did, one moment I had no concept of the Holy Spirit, the next I was overflowing with His joy and power, one moment I did not understand a jot of the bible, the next it was an open book to me.
I read the KJV through 3 times in the first 18 months...then read the RSV and the Living through. I still read at least a chapter a day, sometimes more....above all else I am a bible lover, I hate to see the twistings that go on, that's my bible, the much loved word of my Lord.
I am finicky as heck about which theologians or teachers I listen to, Corrie ten Boom and T.L.Osborn whose magazine it was through who I was saved settled me in my faith....I moved away from T.L.'s faith based theology [as indeed HE did in his later years] toward the more stable grace teachings of C.H.Spurgeon...though I rejects much of Calvinism. I love Joseph Prince.
I believe the full Pentecostal whack because I got the full Pentecostal whack...my great sadness has been that until quite recently the Pentecostals themselves had fallen far behind and so fellowship was difficult...I sat at the back of large assemblies longing for revival.
I have stood with a few ministers in establishing little evangelical enterprises and have seen souls saved and lives turned around...great miracles. I rarely do the upfront stuff, but I am known in certain circles...have preached in the open air and seen souls saved, preached in London's Hyde Park. :)
There I rambled a little...there is but a scratching on the surface of all that God has done for me...I love Him and trust Him come what may.
-
Let's ramble a little, I'm 67 so I'm entitled.
I was saved by means of an [American] gospel magazine, in my own home...but it was dramatic. One moment I did not know God, the next I did, one moment I had no concept of the Holy Spirit, the next I was overflowing with His joy and power, one moment I did not understand a jot of the bible, the next it was an open book to me.
I read the KJV through 3 times in the first 18 months...then read the RSV and the Living through. I still read at least a chapter a day, sometimes more....above all else I am a bible lover, I hate to see the twistings that go on, that's my bible, the much loved word of my Lord.
I am finicky as heck about which theologians or teachers I listen to, Corrie ten Boom and T.L.Osborn whose magazine it was through who I was saved settled me in my faith....I moved away from T.L.'s faith based theology [as indeed HE did in his later years] toward the more stable grace teachings of C.H.Spurgeon...though I rejects much of Calvinism. I love Joseph Prince.
I believe the full Pentecostal whack because I got the full Pentecostal whack...my great sadness has been that until quite recently the Pentecostals themselves had fallen far behind and so fellowship was difficult...I sat at the back of large assemblies longing for revival.
I have stood with a few ministers in establishing little evangelical enterprises and have seen souls saved and lives turned around...great miracles. I rarely do the upfront stuff, but I am known in certain circles...have preached in the open air and seen souls saved, preached in London's Hyde Park. :)
There I rambled a little...there is but a scratching on the surface of all that God has done for me...I love Him and trust Him come what may.
Thanks for sharing that with us BE, i’d Like to hear a little more about your transition between faith based and grace based theology one day. A good many of the church goers in my family are Pentecostal and I know very little about the denomination. Of course, I don’t have a lot of study invested in any particular belief system in Christianity, so there’s that lol.
-
(https://redeeminggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/types-of-theology1.jpg)
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
I don't think one size fits all concerning spiritual progress, your path may not coincide with others journey nor should it.
-
True, one size fits all, does not fit all well. There are people progressing easily on a path I personally would have found incredibly difficult, if not nearly impossible.
-
Let's ramble a little, I'm 67 so I'm entitled.
I was saved by means of an [American] gospel magazine, in my own home...but it was dramatic. One moment I did not know God, the next I did, one moment I had no concept of the Holy Spirit, the next I was overflowing with His joy and power, one moment I did not understand a jot of the bible, the next it was an open book to me.
I read the KJV through 3 times in the first 18 months...then read the RSV and the Living through. I still read at least a chapter a day, sometimes more....above all else I am a bible lover, I hate to see the twistings that go on, that's my bible, the much loved word of my Lord.
I am finicky as heck about which theologians or teachers I listen to, Corrie ten Boom and T.L.Osborn whose magazine it was through who I was saved settled me in my faith....I moved away from T.L.'s faith based theology [as indeed HE did in his later years] toward the more stable grace teachings of C.H.Spurgeon...though I rejects much of Calvinism. I love Joseph Prince.
I believe the full Pentecostal whack because I got the full Pentecostal whack...my great sadness has been that until quite recently the Pentecostals themselves had fallen far behind and so fellowship was difficult...I sat at the back of large assemblies longing for revival.
I have stood with a few ministers in establishing little evangelical enterprises and have seen souls saved and lives turned around...great miracles. I rarely do the upfront stuff, but I am known in certain circles...have preached in the open air and seen souls saved, preached in London's Hyde Park. :)
There I rambled a little...there is but a scratching on the surface of all that God has done for me...I love Him and trust Him come what may.
Awesome, Billy. I just now saw this, I'm sorry I missed it. Amen that we can't tell all the things God does in us and in our lives. I feel that God has me right where I'm supposed to be. Never really felt this before. I've been saved since childhood when I heard and believed and trusted.
Went to Catholic school and church everyday and became quite familiar with the mass and the teachings. Left in 4th grade. Grew older into 12 and 13 and began smoking and drugs. Fast Forward to about the age of 42 and I got back in the word after never really reading iit to begin with in my life.
My cousin gave me a NIV Study Bible and I loved it, used it and read it The book was so big though I had to read it on a table. I like laying down and reading and a perfectly timed mishap from a childhood friend caused him to leave behind a small NT KJV red letter leather pocket type Bible.
The scriptures came alive like never before in the King James. For once in my life I read something other than M, M, L and John. I read Paul's letters and Acts and the everything made sense. I was a Pentecostal for several years and my mother's side of my family are Pentecostal. Mostly Assembly of God.
I'm glad you came here Billy and like I said, if you don't post much that's ok just don't forget about me over here lol. I have much more to say but I really liked your story.
-
We’re all kind of products of our environment, it’s the way we decide to interact with it that sets us apart. I like understanding what influenced others to become who they are.
-
I was brought up in a Baptist Church with a grandfather as a Baptist preacher in the family. As we lived in another state, we attended a Baptist church in another city. My Grandfather and his church was two states away. Needless to say, I left the Church we attended when I as 14 and have never been back. I did not abandon Jesus but I could not stand to stay in a church where there was so much deception going on by so-called 'saved' Christians. It has only gotten worse in today’s churches. Several years later an event happened with one of my father friends that eventually brought me closer to GOD. This is one reason , why I profess I am a Calvinist at least in partial terms. I do believe that 'once saved, always saved' but I DO NOT believe in "Carnal Christians"
Your either saved or your are not! I say this as I was ?saved? in a little Baptist Church at a very young age (5-6). I have become to realize this was a "knee jerk" reaction to my grandmothers prodding as she was a very godly lady and wanted for me to be saved.
My younger years, while I was not a law breaker, I did push the limits just as far as I could get them.
By all accounts, I should have died many times over those years as I was pushing those limits. Then one day, an event (a calling) for me and one other person (another story) came from God in a dream. Shortly thereafter, sitting on a stump on my farm, I found Jesus for the first time even though I had known Him for years. Since that time, my days and nights are SO different. I awake everyday with my eyes to heaven and my head in the Bible or teachings wherever I can find them. Operating heavy equipment during the daytime, I most of the time can listen to teachings by scholars via ipod that I keep downloaded with new material. Thus, I will spend most days at least 16 hours or more listening to the glory and WORD of GOD.
Let us review a part of the Calvinist view:
Accordingly, each of us TRUE Christians are ‘predestined’ and ‘called’ thus ‘justified’ by GOD Himself(Rom 8:29-30). He tells us He foreknew us and I often asked.myself...did He know that I would walk down to the pulpit at that young age. YES.. DID He know that I would leave the Church not to return YES! Did He know WHY? YES
Since, as Jesus says, I was predestined, then I believe now I was somewhat protected from harm until I was ‘called’ or it sure does seem that way. As I stated earlier, I should have died several times looking back on those years, I could have turned bad and I mean real bad so easy after I left the church, yet I did not. Of, course meeting the love of my life in HS also helped as she has been keeping me on the straight and narrow for some 49 years.
As I said: many years ago, I was called and became saved (for certain) in God's Church, a pasture.
Since that time, I have found out just how little I know about GOD's WORD but have also come to believe that the more I read the Bible, the more literal I get as each reading brings a blessing of something I had not known before. I try my best to pass this along. I hope this helps someone understand there is a plan for everyone one of us TRUE CHRISTIANS.
Blade
-
I was introduced to Jesus by a fellow Marine. He took about a half an hour and showed me that I was a sinner, why I was a sinner, and what happens to sinners. I knew that all of it was true. Then he showed me that Jesus paid for our sins. Three weeks later, after going to church a few times, listening to my friend witness to me, and laying in bed at night scared to death, I asked the Lord to save me. And He did. Just like that!
I only went to the Episcopal church on Easter with my mom and sister prior to that, so I had no theology. The guy who lead me to Christ was a Baptist so that is where I went. I was baptized the next Sunday and that made it official. :) That was over 40 years ago. After a lot of church history and doctrine study I am still a Baptist, but now I know why. Funny old thing.
BTW C. H. Spurgeon is my favorite preacher to read. He was a Calvinist, but he is not a typical Calvinist. That man knew his God.
I have a pretty good idea what a MAD Dispensationalist is, but I cannot understand what Open Theists are. I tried to read their statement on TF. I tried. Somebody help this old man.
-
I was introduced to Jesus by a fellow Marine. He took about a half an hour and showed me that I was a sinner, why I was a sinner, and what happens to sinners. I knew that all of it was true. Then he showed me that Jesus paid for our sins. Three weeks later, after going to church a few times, listening to my friend witness to me, and laying in bed at night scared to death, I asked the Lord to save me. And He did. Just like that!
I only went to the Episcopal church on Easter with my mom and sister prior to that, so I had no theology. The guy who lead me to Christ was a Baptist so that is where I went. I was baptized the next Sunday and that made it official. :) That was over 40 years ago. After a lot of church history and doctrine study I am still a Baptist, but now I know why. Funny old thing.
BTW C. H. Spurgeon is my favorite preacher to read. He was a Calvinist, but he is not a typical Calvinist. That man knew his God.
I have a pretty good idea what a MAD Dispensationalist is, but I cannot understand what Open Theists are. I tried to read their statement on TF. I tried. Somebody help this old man.
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
-
Yes Blade,
I have been called an Arminian more than once. I found an old confession of faith once that was Arminian. I think it was actually a document put out by the Dutch government a few centuries ago. I read it and discovered that I do indeed believe a lot of it. My departure from all that is that I am convinced of the eternal security of the believer. In a nutshell, since God saved us, then we cannot un-save us. We talk a lot about rightly dividing, but some dividing is just dividing. I'm with Jon on this. If the Bible says we have to call upon Him, then do that. If the Bible describes the sovereignty and foreknowledge of God then I believe that too. It's not God's fault I can't figure it all out. :) I can post scripture to support everything I believe. I want to know how to defend my positions, or change them if I am wrong. All the best to y'all.
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
There is a difference in Predestined and Foreknown. Of course, God is in complete control. He predestined people because He knew in advance what they would do. Jon, he knew when and where you were going to give your heart to him. All He did was make the conditions right so that when you exercised your free-will to accept him as your savior, it would happen. You cannot force someone to love you and He is smart enough to know that.
There are those that believe they have the free-will to turn away from GOD after they have been saved. I disagree with this point in that Jesus tells us a number of times that He will lose one who His father has given him. They therefore were not saved in the beginning.
So, the bottom line is, if you are one who knows without a doubt that they are in the Body of Christ, you were one of those that were predestined before the beginning of Heavens and the earth. Gen 1:1.
Blade
-
[quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=22.msg296#msg296 date=
There is a difference in Predestined and Foreknown. Of course, God is in complete control. He predestined people because He knew in advance what they would do. Jon, he knew when and where you were going to give your heart to him. All He did was make the conditions right so that when you exercised your free-will to accept him as your savior, it would happen. You cannot force someone to love you and He is smart enough to know that.
There are those that believe they have the free-will to turn away from GOD after they have been saved. I disagree with this point in that Jesus tells us a number of times that He will lose one who His father has given him. They therefore were not saved in the beginning.
So, the bottom line is, if you are one who knows without a doubt that they are in the Body of Christ, you were one of those that were predestined before the beginning of Heavens and the earth. Gen 1:1.
Blade
[/quote]
I totally understand what you are saying here Blade. I guess, by the time I’ve entered discussions between Calvinists and Open Theists, the topic has already devolved into a bickering match between the extreme representatives of those viewpoints. I have a hard time seeing why anybody who is truly a follower of Christ would want to leave the fold in the first place so I see your points. I’ve come and left before and I can see how maybe I could not have been as sincere as I thought I had been at the time. I’m glad to have had this talk with you and to see that your viewpoint actually works hand in hand with my own. We don’t always get to have productive talks like this when we get so caught up in trying to prove the other guy wrong.
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.
Open. If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.
Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.
Constantly Developing is a better way to word this. I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.
Open. If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.
Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.
Constantly Developing is a better way to word this. I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?
Blade
-
I love to Study and Paul most certainly is the Apostle for us gentiles :] I agree, I will look into this deeper.
I am not a mid Acts guy, but I read a little about it on TF. There is a certain logic to it. I'm checking it out too. For now, it is back burner for me. Let me know what you like/dislike about it. Then we can gang up on PJ and drive him mad. (Oops. Poor choice of words.)
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.
Open. If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.
Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.
Constantly Developing is a better way to word this. I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?
Blade
Blade,
For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that. It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off. It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.
You nailed it!
All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.
-
-Quote from Sasha- “Blade,
For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that. It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off. It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.
You nailed it!
All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.”
-Quote from Joechan82- “In that case, I'm not what anybody would call Open. I do believe that the Holy Spirit helps us to understand scripture, because He wrote it in the first place. The continuing for me is called sanctification. Many things in the Bible are clear. Anybody can see some things. I do not avoid labels for myself either. Words mean things and help us understand things. If you know what I am, you can then relate to me. Talk about rambling! What time is it anyway?”
@Joechan82
Please forgive me. I think you quoted part of my post in your initial response, but it showed up without quotes, so I didn’t check the end of your post to see that you had added your words to explain the response and I was concerned I had messed something up and somehow posted in a way that quoted to show the post as if it was you.
Anyhow, please forgive me. I’ve fixed it and quoted your words to retain your post.
If you highlight, copy and past your words, then repost, your post will be restored as you originally had it.
It was a total error on my part. I won’t let it happen again. So very sorry!
@Patrick Jane ... please forgive me. I know what I did wrong and won’t do it again.
I hit the wrong button.
-
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?
Blade[/color]
At least in my understanding of Open Theism and to the understanding of a few others, yes Blade. That’s a great way to put it! In many ways to me, Open Theism is just the way I study through the Bible and through life.
Right Jon. I let the Bible say what it says and I keep a positive and open mind in life.
-
I thought I ended up double posting, so I deleted what I thought was a double. Pj has my last comment quoted in his response though so i’m Okay with it lol.
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.
Open. If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.
Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.
Constantly Developing is a better way to word this. I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?
Blade
Blade,
For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that. It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off. It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.
You nailed it!
All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.
I don't think you understood my question? my fault for not wording it correctly.
We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.
My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?
To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.
Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)
Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.
If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece
Blade[/color]
-
are you familiar with Arminianism? It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.
The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.
My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior.
He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.
Hope this helps.
Blade
I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.
I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.
Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)
Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.
Open. If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.
Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.
Constantly Developing is a better way to word this. I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?
Blade
Blade,
For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that. It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off. It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.
You nailed it!
All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.
I don't think you understood my question? my fault for not wording it correctly.
We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.
My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?
To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.
Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)
Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.
If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece
Blade[/color]
Blade,
God meant what He said, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, through fellow wretched men, with the exception of “God With Us”, who was the Living God speaking and free of wretchedness.
Man is arrogant and exceedingly set on telling God what God said, but 1 John 2:27 tells us that we are to allow no man to teach us. This parallels with Jesus saying He alone is our teacher.
I am not a biblical relativist. I am, however, aware that theology contained in “Commentary” is just crayola scribbles and attempts to interpret scripture. I see God perpetually making Love the standard and mankind being deceived to disobey this simple standard.
All excuses can be made, but the account in John where the woman caught in the throws of adulterous passion was thrown before the only Man ever to sincerely walk the earth the union of God and Man, and the very God that commanded us to stone her, knew the Law better than us and by the law, didn’t stone her... thus showing us that mercy and love trump human frailty. Many claimed to be the SON of God, but God Flat our married to the flesh of mankind and showed us what He meant, with His teachings.
Satan has got the Body divided as Paul warned us not to allow, and was starting his campaign just decades after Christ’s ascension.
Popular theology isn’t spread through truth, but selfish appeal to mankind’s self exalting heart, or at the tip of the sword and the oppression of political force. No brick and mortar establishment “Has the Truth”, as, and I’m certain you’ll agree, the Truth is at the Right Hand of God and IS GOD, yet to See HIM is to “Have seen the Father”. He is the very glory of God. In other words, the WOMAN (Church) was never supposed to speak for the MAN (Christ).
As for the topic you broached, I am a person of peace. I’ve studied the churches favorite divisional pet at enormous length and I indeed have a personal doctrine that I adhere to, but it is raw scripture that binds to itself so extensively, it typically brings a load of butt hurt, when I biblically exegete it all.
I keep my mouth shut on such matters, because I’m sick of getting drug into discussions that give Satan exactly what he wants.
Jesus is Love and Satan is Hate. I never forget how the Creator is adversarially opposed by the greatest crafter of twistings of the literal Words of the living WORD.
I sincerely keep a low spiritual profile these days, but God didn’t say by our doctrine shall we be known, but by our Love for one another.
I believe no human being has it 100% right and I can truly say, the only time theology was embraced correctly by a “man”, was here (John 5:39).
I will sharpen what I’m saying, but I fear you and I might cross blades, and God help me Blade, please allow peace to reign between us. You may cause me to stumble if you bring me into debate. I don’t say this to be a jerk, but because I enjoy discussion with you and ache to see the Global Body of Christ ache for the lost and reach to Love one another despite even the most difficult of theological skisms. The “my way is the true way” approach has destroyed the body of Christ.
I hope this answer finds you well and answers any questions you may have had about my stance.
All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother in Him.
-
I don't think you understood my question? my fault for not wording it correctly.
We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.
My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?
To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.
Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)
Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.
If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece
Blade
[/quote]
That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.
-
I don't think you understood my question? my fault for not wording it correctly.
We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.
My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?
To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.
Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)
Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.
If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece
Blade
That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.
[/quote]
Yeah, hear you. Even the end times have religion coupled with politics.
Blade
-
I don't think you understood my question? my fault for not wording it correctly.
We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.
My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?
To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.
Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)
Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.
If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece
Blade
That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.
Blade- Yeah, hear you. Even the end times have religion coupled with politics.
Blade
Blade, That’s a major BINGO!
-
My theological stance .... ? Not really sure that I have one. It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty. While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.
The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind. I read and listen.
Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.
-
My theological stance .... ? Not really sure that I have one. It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty. While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.
The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind. I read and listen.
Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.
I’m a fairly young Christian that is not very studied yet. I like being here and TF, I’ve never been to any of the other forums that everybody dislikes and i’m Kinda glad. I like having a bunch of different people around to draw from and talk with.
-
My theological stance .... ? Not really sure that I have one. It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty. While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.
The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind. I read and listen.
Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.
I bet you do have a lot to offer theologically. You know more than you think.For me it was repetition. I kept reading Paul's epistles and reading posts on TOL and then at some point it all made sense and the whole Bible made sense after reading Paul. I was stuck in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
I have believed in God and Jesus Christ since childhood but never really knew I was saved for sure until reading Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Galatians and Colossians. All are easy to read and not too long. Each time I read them I learn and remember something new or that I missed before. It's like reading a new book every time.
I think you could be growing spiritually whether you intend to or not. Thanks for this post Jinkx.
-
My theological stance .... ? Not really sure that I have one. It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty. While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.
The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind. I read and listen.
Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.
I’m a fairly young Christian that is not very studied yet. I like being here and TF, I’ve never been to any of the other forums that everybody dislikes and i’m Kinda glad. I like having a bunch of different people around to draw from and talk with.
Read my post to Jinkx above. Nobody ever guided me as to what to read when I picked up a Bible and started to read. I found out by myself after wasting decades of my life ignoring God's word.
Time goes fast and I am so happy with the knowledge I've gained in the last 5 years. I have never felt so saved and sealed, so secure in my salvation that it gives me confidence and the ability to speak boldly about the gospel of Christ. I also love small talk, being funny and silly and laughing hard everyday. I have never been happier in my life and I'm now 49 and a half almost exactly.
-
I will paste my "un-testimony" here. I use the term because so many 'testimonies' go off center and introduce things that are truly not the once for all faith delivered to the saints.
I would just add one thing. Going out on a hike with my next oldest brother, back from a term at a Bible college, he said 'God can't just forgive sin; there has to be a cost, a punishment.' When most people hear this they think of something they themselves must endure, but my brother was speaking of Christ. I should add that though to this piece:
The Gospel with a Twist. How I was introduced to the Gospel in spite of the Jesus revolution of the 70s
Marcus Sanford, www.interplans.net
I became a Christian at a Bible camp one summer in middle school. I have found that the content of this was fairly unique. The counselor explained that I had a debt of $100 with him. And it needed to be paid back, or else…they might have to send me home. No more water slides or 3:OO ice cream feeds.
You have to realize 2 things at this point. Going to camp was sort of your first experience completely away from your family or friends places where you sort of knew what the rules were. You expected the counselor to be nice, but hey, he could be a rough character who liked to pick on little kids. You didn't know yet, and this debt thing could kind of throw you. The 2nd thing was that this was 1964. How much was $100? All that mattered was that it was huge, and out of my threshold. I supposed I could earn it in a year, but I didn't even have a feel for a year.
Now, either I could come up with that (I calculated it would take about a year but at that age, I couldn’t even get a ‘feel’ for a week), or I could take an offer his friend (another counselor) was making to me to pay it off for me. They even reenacted it. I could hardly refuse. I had little idea how advanced this was. What I did realize later was that by comparison, the idea of Jesus coming inside you was not nearly has helpful as many adults thought. Instead I had been introduced to debt, credit (from a 3rd party) and really to justification. It was not that I was short on joy or wonder from it all. But all the adults who talked about Jesus being inside talked about that like they had found a way to make that happen.
I was humbled by a sense of gratitude that this debt story had been presented. In fact, I didn’t know why, if the debt story was true, it would matter if Jesus “came into my life” (I mean, if the counselor was really right, the sort of ‘magic’ of the experience of Christ coming inside was off-target. It is a metaphor, but not what actually matters). I began to see that many times the debt and gift of credit arrangement was the actual construct of the business of being saved in some of Jesus' "simple" parables (in case someone thinks Paul 'complicated' him). Still later I found out that that is what justification by an imputed righteousness means.
If you have trouble understanding the value of your justification before God through someone else's righteousness (Christ’s), it could very well be the nebulous effect of straining your imagination to grasp what it means to have Christ “inside” you as a child. You shouldn’t have to. That’s the Gospel I nearly missed, and how I nearly missed it.
In the 70s when there was supposedly a revival going on in America, the countercultural Jesus people, etc., I found the subjective emphasis to be hollow. Telling an experience is by nature a bit competitive. There was no equality, there was instead more attention to the person with the most drama. This kept shrinking my concept of truth, until one day I heard a forum of speakers I can only describe as missionaries TO America say that it was all mistaken!
They were from Australia, and one was an ex-communicated-Adventist minister, but with the most coherent sense of truth I had ever heard. Part of this was the trauma of being ex-Adventist, but part of it was his being submerged in Spurgeon and Luther. I had no idea of the type of ground broken by Luther, or that the essential Roman Catholic doctrine all along was that the inner transformation of a person is what justification meant to them. And so I had learned something of why God wanted me to hear the debt/credit story as a kid.
Having grown up as an Missionary Kid, it had dawned on me that people might COME TO America for the same reason as I had gone to Africa. In fact, by being gone between 1969 and 71, the revolutions of the 60s had shown themselves in drastic fashion (and I don't mean miniskirts). What the Australian Forum's genius was, I learned, was that without a strong judicial framework in talking about our affairs with God, the side-effect on our culture, even if we thought we were talking Gospel, was a weakening of the awe and wonder and terror of God. It is one thing wish people would get a sense of those things, and quite another to actually talk about imputed righteousness, which immediately clears up an incredible amount of subjective clutter. As the Forum would say: “The gospel of a ‘changed-life’ has taken the place of the Gospel which changes lives” and become a market-driven enterprise largely susceptible to the sexual revolution in its slack morality.
That explained a lot. A lot about America. In fact, it was not long after this that "addiction" words were used about Jesus (psychedelic verbs, ‘far out,’ ‘trip,’ etc.), all about the most current of experiences, and no one was gaining in what Lewis would call the Asgard effect: recognition of his honor and wonder and might entirely apart from 'what's in it for me' of a god who may not 'come up with goods' by tonight (also language from the drug world) or even for a long while. (Asgard is a 13th century Nordic king-god on whom Aslan is modeled). So this is why I learned the Gospel as I did. I hope I can pass on the legacy of this high view of God to others. You always value imputed righteousness, because where past sin abounds, grace abounds even more, ever new. But that is much different from the type of Jesus we hear about providing cash, motorcycles and new girlfriends.
-
My 'un-testimony' did not deal with D'ism:
While a grew up in a Dispensationalist futurist church, the main reason for leaving that kind of thinking was triteness, soundbytes, and crassness. When you get tired of that and want to see actual thought go into a position, you probably won't be D'ist. I found satisfaction in reading Lewis and Schaeffer on many things, and found that the churchfolk just did not know what they were getting at, so it was too hard to pretend that they had a real handle on what the NT was saying.
-
My 'un-testimony' did not deal with D'ism:
While a grew up in a Dispensationalist futurist church, the main reason for leaving that kind of thinking was triteness, soundbytes, and crassness. When you get tired of that and want to see actual thought go into a position, you probably won't be D'ist. I found satisfaction in reading Lewis and Schaeffer on many things, and found that the churchfolk just did not know what they were getting at, so it was too hard to pretend that they had a real handle on what the NT was saying.
I know you as @Interplanner from TF then. I recall reading your un-testimony there and found myself fond of the $100 debt scenario, I liken it to a tangible parable. I think one of the leading explanations of why people engage in theological study is a dissatisfaction with the way local churches operate and teach. People like myself begin to wonder past what we are told in brick and mortar establishments that we’ve attended and question how much of the teaching therein is just an appeal to a wide audience, coupled with the opinions of the church leaders.
-
(https://comps.canstockphoto.com/theology-drawings_csp11824598.jpg)
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
I want this to be a place for deep thinking, light conversation and discussion, sharing thoughts and feelings, knowledge and wisdom and most of all FUN.
Post anything you want here. Start new topics and be seen by thousands. Promote your links and sites and spread your message. Join Free and post now !!!
It's a long story with me and not easy to explain. I'm 61 and I've been to so many churches in my life, some by force and others by choice. So I've seen and experienced a lot that way. It was a definite learning curve.
As a child I felt extremely close to God and I attended church regularly, a Baptist church. But it wasn't in the church that I learned about God and felt close to him. I would take walks in the woods and sit and watch and listen. One time there were rays of sunlight streaming down through the trees. It was really beautiful. I put my hands into the stream of sunlight and it was like connecting with God and I could actually feel that energy and I smiled thinking, how great you are making such beautiful things. And for me the woods were like a Cathedral where I really felt God's presence and the beauty all around me and the animals, some of which would come up to me and let me touch them. It was my sanctuary. I felt God's love just like a loving Father. If I was sad, he would comfort me. If I was afraid, he made me feel safe. If I asked questions, it was like he had a way of answering them somehow. I don't 'mean he spoke out loud or anything but it was an inward voice. He was always reassuring me.
But as I grew older, I lost that kind of close connection. The expectations of the churches I went to with their guidelines for membership and things I was expected to do and believe and the doctrines just seemed to build a wall between me and God.
Anyway, at this point in my life, I try to draw close to God like I did when I was a child. It's hard to really listen the same way now as I did then because I was changed so much in churches and things got in the way. But there are still times when I can hear him speaking to me inside when I really listen. I know that one day I will once again have and feel that close connection with God. I look forward to that. I still think of God as a loving Father and I cherish those memories I had as a child with childlike faith when there was nothing to interfere with that.
-
I want this to be a place for deep thinking, light conversation and discussion, sharing thoughts and feelings, knowledge and wisdom and most of all FUN.
Post anything you want here. Start new topics and be seen by thousands. Promote your links and sites and spread your message. Join Free and post now !!!
It's a long story with me and not easy to explain. I'm 61 and I've been to so many churches in my life, some by force and others by choice. So I've seen and experienced a lot that way. It was a definite learning curve.
As a child I felt extremely close to God and I attended church regularly, a Baptist church. But it wasn't in the church that I learned about God and felt close to him. I would take walks in the woods and sit and watch and listen. One time there were rays of sunlight streaming down through the trees. It was really beautiful. I put my hands into the stream of sunlight and it was like connecting with God and I could actually feel that energy and I smiled thinking, how great you are making such beautiful things. And for me the woods were like a Cathedral where I really felt God's presence and the beauty all around me and the animals, some of which would come up to me and let me touch them. It was my sanctuary. I felt God's love just like a loving Father. If I was sad, he would comfort me. If I was afraid, he made me feel safe. If I asked questions, it was like he had a way of answering them somehow. I don't 'mean he spoke out loud or anything but it was an inward voice. He was always reassuring me.
But as I grew older, I lost that kind of close connection. The expectations of the churches I went to with their guidelines for membership and things I was expected to do and believe and the doctrines just seemed to build a wall between me and God.
Anyway, at this point in my life, I try to draw close to God like I did when I was a child. It's hard to really listen the same way now as I did then because I was changed so much in churches and things got in the way. But there are still times when I can hear him speaking to me inside when I really listen. I know that one day I will once again have and feel that close connection with God. I look forward to that. I still think of God as a loving Father and I cherish those memories I had as a child with childlike faith when there was nothing to interfere with that.
[/quote][size=12pt[/quote]
I'm blessed to have never lost my childlike faith. I've just always known that God is real and near since as far back as I can remember, so my parents must have told me about God. Yes tj I love being in the woods and all of nature and I have a deep love for all animals. I pray for everybody here and I'm praying that you get that close connection back and more !!!
I can go a month or more of not feeling close to God but usually it's not that long. I can't always pray like I want to or should. But when I really think and focus on God and Jesus Christ I can feel the spirit and I feel extremely close to God. He has been working in my life and making good things happen. I give all praise and glory to God.
As I look back on my life I can see that God was doing different things with me at different periods. I strayed and stopped believing for years. I was watching Ancient Aliens and learing about the Mayans. I was reading a book about Edgar Cayce "The Sleeping Prophet". I was way out there, way off base. I started believing all that crap and never reading the Bible.
It's when I started using a small but long pocket KJV Bible that the holy spirit started speaking to and teaching me. I still get the same spirit whenever I read that or any Bible now. But I really enjoy the King James version. You will get that close relationship back soon so pray for it. Thank you for sharing again. You have shared so much with us on both forums and we all feel like we know you you. I feel like I know all of you and more each day.I like this smaller forum sometimes.
-
NO ONE KNOWS THE DAY OR THE HOUR?
At the Time of the End, the wise shall understand. Dan 12:10
Understanding the expression "No man knows the day or hour" is not possible
by simply taking the English translation literally, because in the book of
Daniel and the Book of Revelation, we are given EXACT descriptions of
timing, relative to KEY events - such as the shutting down of the altar
sacrifices in Jerusalem at the MID-POINT of the 70th week. Dan 9:27
Jesus was asked, "When shall these things be?" Matt 24:3
His answer ties us in to a very specific event (The Abomination of
Desolation) which can be measured on our calendars: "When you therefore
shall see the Abomination Of Desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet,
stand in the holy place, (whoever reads, let him understand:)..." Matt 24:15.
It is now clear that "no man knows the day or hour" does NOT mean "no man
knows the day or hour" as we read it from a modern-day English perspective.
>From his book "Signs In the Heavens" by Avi Ben Mordechai, he devotes a
chapter to explaining what "no man knows the day or hour" truly means from
a rabbinical Hebraic perspective. It is a figure of speech.
The following chapter contains edited excerpts from Avi Ben Mordechai's
commentaries and builds on them aiming to explain that the Holy Bible does
in fact reveal the "day and hour" or "exact timing" of our Lord's Return.
No One Knows the Day or the Hour?
Christians over the centuries have separated themselves from their Hebraic
roots causing the misunderstanding of key Jewish biblical idioms. An idiom
is also a figure of speech. When Y'shua (Jesus) uttered His famous words
concerning the Messianic Era in Mattityahu (Matthew) 24:26,
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in Heaven, nor the Son, but
only the Father", He used a common Jewish figure of speech referring to a
specific Jewish Festival. In essence He was saying, "I am coming for My
Bride on such and such a day! Be watching!" What day could the Jewish idiom
be referring to? Keep reading!
HEBRAIC ROOTS
Y'shua HaMashiach (Jesus the Messiah) was Jewish and lived a
Torah-observant Jewish life. Evidence suggests that He communicated to His
audience in the Hebrew language, in Hebraic ways. What does it mean to
communicate in Hebraic ways?
It means to think and talk like a Jew. In Y'shua's day it meant to speak in the language and idioms of the day.
Those who heard the Lord speak knew what He was saying and usually what He was
alluding to unless He was speaking in parables, which had their own
analogies. Of course, today's generation of believers struggles to
understand His words and concepts.
Speaking, thinking and acting like the
Jewish Rabbi He was helped His mission in bringing the gospel message to
"the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt 15:24).
Y'shua was quoted in Mattityahu (Matthew) 8:11 as saying: "I say to you
that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places
at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of Heaven".
Since we are talking about Jewish idioms, have you ever considered the meaning of
these words? Specifically, our Lord used and confirmed common Jewish ideas
about the Day of the Lord - the millennium - and its relation to the Feast
of Sukkot (Tabernacles) in Z'kharyah 14.
In speaking, Y'shua referred to
the Festival and its traditional guests of honour, Avraham, Yitzchak and
Ya'acov, called the ushpizin (uoosh-piz-zin) or seven shepherds (exalted
guests), invited into every succah (tabernacle) at the Feast of Sukkot in
the fall of the year.
The seven shepherds in descending order are
1. Avraham (Abraham), 2. Yitzchak (Isaac), 3. Ya'acov (Jacob), 4. Mosheh
(Moses), 5. Aaron, 6. Yosef (Joseph) and 7. HaMelech David (King David).
By mentioning the feast and three of the seven shepherds,
His audience
immediately understood the allusion to the Messianic age - "Millennium" or
"Day" of the Lord.
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost" (Luke 19:10).
Again, in this simplistic phrase Y'shua, the Son of Miriyam and Yosef,
spoke of two things: His Deity (by calling Himself the subject of the
prophet Dani'el's vision) and His mission (by calling Himself the One God
Who spoke to Mosheh on Mount Sinai) as it is written in Dani'el and
Yechezk'el (Ezekiel):
In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was One like a Son of
Man, coming with the clouds of Heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days
and was led into His presence (Dani'el 7:13-14).
For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I Myself will search for My sheep
and look after them (Yechezk'el-Ezekiel 34:11ff).
In the Gospel narrative of Luke 23:31, Y'shua said: "For if men do these
things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?" In this
verse Y'shua points His audience, who had portions of the writings of the
Prophets memorized, to the verses in Yechezk'el (Ezekiel) 20:45 to 21:7.
Without question, Y'shua's hearers knew He referred to Chevlei HaMashiach
or Ya'acov's Trouble in the Great Tribulation and warned His audience that
what they do to Him in hardness of heart now, God will do to the nation in
judgement later.
Y'shua's encounter with Natan'el (Nathanael) is recorded in Yochanan (John)
1:47-48: When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, He said of him, "Here is a
true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false". "How do You know me?"
Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, "I saw you while you were still under the
fig tree before Philip called you".
Again, our Lord used a strong figure of speech pointing to a widely taught
Jewish expectation concerning the resurrection and the millennium. In
brief, He told Natan'el that he will be alive on the Last Day to inherit
the land promised to Avraham (Bereshith-Genesis 17:8). From Y'shua's words,
Natan'el understood he would participate in the resurrection since "that
Day" was yet future.
This is understood in the first century Jewish figure
of speech, "I saw you while you were still under the fig tree", which
refers to life and study of Torah in the millennium (Midrash Rabbah
Genesis, Rabbah Song of Songs).
Y'shua also told Natan'el that he is like
righteous Avraham who received his reward for trusting God. This is
understood because of the phrase, "Here is a true Israelite, in whom there
is nothing false". The millennial concept of the fig tree is found
throughout the Tanach including Z'kharyah 3:10:
"In that day each of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and fig tree", declares the
LORD Almighty. For this reason Natan'el responded emphatically to Y'shua
and His words, saying: "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; You are the King of
Israel!"
God through HaMashiach Y'shua spoke to the Jews in many portions and in
many ways (Hebrews 1:1-2) relying upon known figures of speech, common
expectations and direct thoughts from Talmudic and Pharisaic teachings. The
concepts I addressed only scratch the surface, so-to-speak.
Every phrase
and word from the mouth of the Lord meant something to His audience. He
spoke with precision. With that as a basis, let us go on to one of the most
interesting Jewish figures of speech misunderstood by the Church over the
years. It concerns Y'shua's phrase,
"No one knows about that day or hour,
not even the angels in Heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father". In
context, He refers to the home-taking of His bride, the beginning of the
Messianic era and His millennial reign as King of kings over all the earth.
To understand this concept, we begin by examining its foundation.
ROSH HASHANAH
Chapter Five described the annual Jewish Festival of Trumpets or Rosh
HaShanah - the first day of the seventh month. A few themes linked to this
Jewish festival are resurrection, repentance, kingship, corronation and a
marriage feast.
This chapter shows another theme and convincing proof that
Rosh HaShanah is not only the start of "The Day of the Lord" (Millennium),
but is also the day of the resurrection! It has to do with the moon and its
29-day cycle of renewal.
In this period of slightly less than 30 days, the moon goes from darkness
to light and back to darkness again. This is not a haphazard occurrence
attributed to evolution or science.
God planned it for many reasons, one
being as a picture of resurrection and renewal. With each cycle of nearly
30 days the ancient rabbis understood that the moon was being reborn or
"born again" (Sefard siddur, Mussaf for Shabbat and Shabbat Rosh Chodesh,
p. 509 and 646-648).
NEW MOON
In Y'shua's day, the moon was so important that a Jewish festival was
proclaimed at the beginning of every month (Talmud Tractate Chaggigah 17b;
Shavuot 10a; Arachin 10b). This was called the New Moon Festival and in the
B'rit Chadashah, Rabbi Sha'ul (Paul) makes note of it (Colossians 2:16).
Even in the Tanach, King David provoked King Sha'ul (Saul) over it (1
Shmu'el-Samuel 20:5).
In the coming millennium the gate of the inner court
of the Temple facing east shall be opened on the new moon
(Yechezk'el-Ezekiel 46:1).
And finally in the millennium all nations will
celebrate the New Moon festival every month (Yeshayahu-Isaiah 66:23). It is
obvious from the Hebrew Scriptures that in the millennium God has no plans
to do away with His system.
Since it is so important, exactly what is a new moon? It is the opposite of
a full moon. Every month the moon goes through a complete cycle of renewal
called Rosh Chodesh, the head or beginning of the renewed month. Twelve
times a year on Rosh Chodesh, the moon always starts off with its disk
being very dark to the naked eye.
Over the course of 15 days it gets
brighter and brighter until it finally reaches a full white-faced disk or
full moon. Over the next 15 days it becomes darker and darker and finally
becomes invisible to the naked eye again.
The ancient rabbis saw a great lesson in this. Just as the moon has no
light of its own but receives its light from the sun, so we too have no
light of our own and must receive it from God.
As the moon goes through a
near 30-day cycle of dark to light to dark, so we need constant spiritual
renewal and repentance. Like the moon, we too must be reborn or "born
again" into HaMashiach and constantly renewed through repentance. This is
why God called it a faithful witness in the sky (Mizmor-Psalm 89:37).
If the moon is so important to God, why do we pay so little attention to
it? We have lost touch with God's faithful witness in the sky. But Y'shua
and the people of His day never lost touch with it. And as I previously
noted, not only was the new moon necessary for the Jewish calendar, it was
also a monthly festival celebrated with a feast fit for a king!
So, when
Y'shua said His famous words in Mattityahu-Matthew 24:36, it had
far-reaching implications. Here are the words of Y'shua in a few different
translations:
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but
my Father only. (KJV)
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the
Son, but only the Father. (NIV) But of that day and hour knoweth no one,
not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only. (ASV)
About the exact time, however, and the hour, none knows - not even the
messengers of Heaven; but My Father alone. (Fenton Modern English
Translation)
Failing to think like Y'shua and taking phrases out of Jewish context can
lead one to misunderstand His words. For example, in many places of the
B'rit Chadashah Y'shua knew the future and talked about it openly. In one
instance He warned His talmidim (disciples) about their future saying,
"See, I have told you ahead of time" (Mattityahu-Matthew 24:25). His
context concerned the tribulation, the destruction of the Temple, the rise
and fall of false messiahs (antichrists), etc.
If He knew the future in
Mattityahu 24:25, and the context concerns the Day of Trouble, why would He
suddenly speak as though He did not know the future in the same context
just 11 verses later in Mattityahu 24:36? Was He confused? Or was He making
perfect sense in light of the customs of the Jews?
Since the subject of our discussion is the new moon and figures of speech,
realize the phrase, "Of that day and hour no man knows" refers to the
sanctification or setting apart of the new moon. Without this
sanctification, the Jews had no way of determining God's "appointed times"
or moedim.
Twelve times a year a new Jewish month (Rosh Chodesh) was announced to the
people. We have no system like it today. We look at a calendar to determine
the first of the month; the Jews, however, looked at the moon.
This system
of chronology was given to the Jews to know precisely when the Holy
festivals (moedim) would fall (there are still eight of them; seven
appointed times and Shabbat). The moon was the faithful Jewish calendar or
witness in the sky and 12 times a year was sanctified as the basis of the
Jewish stellar calendar.
GOD'S APPOINTED TIMES
Because the moon was so important for Jewish date - setting, the authorities
in charge of announcing the new moon in Y'rushalayim took great care to
ensure the first day of the month was announced on time. To correctly
announce the first day of the month, established by the new moon, was one
of the Sanhedrin's greatest responsibilities. They had to ensure the people
knew when the first of the month began 12 times a year! Therefore God said
to the leaders of Israel:
These are the appointed times of the Lord, holy convocations which you
shall proclaim at the times appointed for them (Vayikrah-Leviticus 23:4).
In other words, God gave the Sanhedrin authority to announce and sanctify
the new moon to the people. Its proclamation on earth was supported by God
in Heaven (c.f. Mattityahu 18:18-20 where the Jewish context supports a
believers' Sanhedrin as seen in Acts 15).
As soon as the new moon was
announced, the first day of the month began. Once the beginning of the new
month was established, the festivals and weekly Shabbats for the upcoming
month were sanctified for observance. In Hebrew, those observances have
always been called "appointed times" or moedim, literally "a sacred and
set time".
From God's perspective, the appointed times belong to Him
(Midrash Rabbah Numbers, Vol 2.21.25, p. 852) and no one has the authority
to change the celebration of an appointed time.
To do so was a serious
matter and great sin. Appointed times had to be kept because of their
Messianic implications.
Further in Vayikrah (Leviticus) 23:4, notice the phrase, "holy
convocation". The phrase in Hebrew is mikraw kodesh, better translated,
"holy convocation and rehearsal". In other words, God's appointed times are
actually "holy rehearsals" set apart to reflect events in the Messianic
era. God said to the people,
"Pay attention! On this day I am going to do
something! Wake-up! The Jews were to know and practice all of God's mikraot
or holy convocations. This is the essence of Rav Sha'ul's words that the
Shabbat, new moons and festivals, "are a shadow of things to come; the body
of Mashiach" (Colossians 2:17).
Twice a year, in the spring and fall, there were several appointed times
and specific days of holy convocation dedicated to the Lord. The new moon
was the key in being able to fulfill those set times, holy convocations and
rehearsals.
For example, when the new moon was announced on the first day
of Nisan, also called Aviv, the people knew when to observe the holy
convocations and set times of the 10th (Shemot-Exodus 12:3), 14th and 15th
(Shemot-Exodus 12:6; Bamidbar-Numbers 33:3), 16th (Vayikrah-Leviticus
23:15), and finally the 21st.
In the same way, when the new moon was
announced on the first day of Tishri also called Ethanim, the people knew
when to observe the Holy convocations of the 1st (Vayikrah-Leviticus
23:23), 10th (Vayikrah-Leviticus 23:26), 15th (Vayikrah-Leviticus 23:39),
and 22nd (Vayikrah-Leviticus 23:36).
Thus from the announcement of the new
moon to the festival dates which followed, it was only a matter of counting
the right number of days. In a moment you will understand how this applies
to the phrase that Y'shua spoke concerning His coming again.
THE SANHEDRIN AND THE TWO WITNESSES
The Mishnah, also referred to as the Oral Law, dealt with the legal
elements of daily Jewish religious life, in Hebrew called halachah. In the
treasure of the first and second century halachah we find many explanations
to help us understand the Torah particularly in Y'shua's day since it was
still oral then.
In volume two called "moed" or festival, tractate Rosh
HaShanah teaches us about the Sanhedrin and its selection process of two
witnesses who would tell us when the new moon arrived. Once a month the
Sanhedrin discussed when to proclaim the new moon. They did this through
the agency of two witnesses, the element of all legal transactions in
Judaism.
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any
sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the
mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. Deut 19:15
The men were important because by their witness, Israel celebrated God's
appointed times. They had to be of good character and were always treated
with great honour.
They had special privileges such as authorization to
ride into Y'rushalayim on horseback on the Shabbat to bring the good news
of the new moon festivities! The men had special status because they were
the confirmation that Y'hudah (Judaea) depended on for the correct timing
of the new month and the festivals.
Rosh HaShanah Chapter 2, Mishnah 5 reads: There was a large court in
Jerusalem called Beth Ya'azek. There all the witnesses used to assemble and
the Beth Din used to examine them. They used to entertain them lavishly
there so that they should have an inducement to come. (The witnesses were
allowed to break the Shabbat travel restrictions for this one purpose lest
they might be reluctant to come and give the essential evidence of the
sighting of the new moon).
Continuing in Chapter 2, Mishnah 6: How do they test the witnesses? The
pair who arrive first are tested first. The senior of them is brought in
and they say to him, tell us how you saw the moon - in front of the sun or
behind the sun? To the north of it or the south? How big was it, and in
which direction was it inclined?
And how broad was it? If he says (he saw
it) in front of the sun, his evidence is rejected. After that they would
bring in the second and test him.
If their accounts tallied, their evidence
was accepted, and the other pairs were only questioned briefly, not because
they were required at all, but so that they should not be disappointed,
(and) so that they should not be dissuaded from coming.
In qualifying the witnesses, the Sanhedrin used the following criteria:
They never arrived at the same time.
They were never questioned at the same time.
There were always two new witnesses each month.
In short, the two qualified witnesses usually stood before the Nassi or
President of the Sanhedrin (Jewish High Court) to give account of the
moon's appearance prior to its becoming total dark (Moed Rosh HaShanah,
Chapter 3, Mishnah 1).
Just before the moon's disk enters total darkness,
there are tiny slivers of white on the edges of the waning disk. These were
called the "horns" of the moon.
Correctly sighting the "horns" (on the
waning crescent) determined the beginning of the new month. Once the two
witnesses were qualified and questioned, if the President (who had
knowledge of astronomy) was convinced their observation was accurate, he
publicly sanctified the start of the new month.
After careful scrutiny to determine the official arrival of the new moon,
the Nassi or President of the Sanhedrin proclaimed Rosh Chodesh with the
words: "Sanctified", and all the people repeat after him, "Sanctified,
sanctified". After the proclamation, the Sanhedrin ordered watchmen on the
nearby hillsides to light fires and thus inform the Jews in all of Y'hudah
(Judaea), Shomron (Samaria), Egypt, Babylon and the galut (diaspora) that
the new month had begun. That started the festival of the New Moon and
counting of the next 29- days to the next new month proclamation.
Again, once the Sanhedrin set Rosh Chodesh, or the beginning of the new
month by sighting the new moon, the rest of the festivals were calculated.
However, the seventh month, Tishri, was particularly important because it
was the only month that had a holy convocation or appointed time on the
first day of the month.
This posed a unique problem. The first day of
Tishri was the appointed time called Rosh HaShanah, the Feast of Trumpets
(Vayikrah-Leviticus 23:24). Yet no one could begin observing the festival
until they heard those famous words from the President of the Sanhedrin,
"Sanctified!"
No one in Israel could plan for the first day of the seventh month Tishri,
called Yom Teruah or the Feast of Trumpets (also called Rosh HaShanah).
When they knew how many days to count to a festival, that would be easy.
But:
HOW COULD THEY PLAN FOR A FESTIVAL THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW AT WHAT DAY OR
HOUR IT WOULD PUBLICALLY BE ANNOUNCED AND THUS BEGIN?
This was unique to Rosh HaShanah and dependent upon the testimony of the
two witnesses. Prophetically, we are informed of two important witnesses
during the Great Tribulation:
And I will give power unto My Two Witnesses, and they will prophesy 1260
days, clothed in sackcloth.
Rev 11:3
Of course, anyone could look up into the twilight or early morning sky and,
if they looked hard enough, see the new moon or at least its "horns". And
certainly an astute observer knew when about 29- days were completed since
the previous Rosh Chodesh.
But recall, ONLY THE SANHEDRIN NASSI had the
authority to proclaim the first of Tishri, which was already established as
a technical procedure.
Once proclaimed, the Feast of Trumpets (Rosh
HaShanah) commenced. Until that public announcement by the Nassi, everyone
had to wait before they could begin the observance of the festival. No one
could begin the festival beforehand!
Thus, we can more clearly see the
analogy Jesus made with His words: "But of that day and hour knoweth no
man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only" was in regards to
this important festival of Rosh HaShanah.
**********************************************************************
To educate, train and equip for study both the Jew and
Non-Jew in the Rich Hebraic Heritage of our Faith.
Please visit the Hebraic Roots Global Network
Web Site located at:
http://www.hebroots.org/
PayPal Donations : https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
Theology Forums : https://theologyforums.com/index.php
Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Google : https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
-
Let's ramble a little, I'm 67 so I'm entitled.
I was saved by means of an [American] gospel magazine, in my own home...but it was dramatic. One moment I did not know God, the next I did, one moment I had no concept of the Holy Spirit, the next I was overflowing with His joy and power, one moment I did not understand a jot of the bible, the next it was an open book to me.
I read the KJV through 3 times in the first 18 months...then read the RSV and the Living through. I still read at least a chapter a day, sometimes more....above all else I am a bible lover, I hate to see the twistings that go on, that's my bible, the much loved word of my Lord.
I am finicky as heck about which theologians or teachers I listen to, Corrie ten Boom and T.L.Osborn whose magazine it was through who I was saved settled me in my faith....I moved away from T.L.'s faith based theology [as indeed HE did in his later years] toward the more stable grace teachings of C.H.Spurgeon...though I rejects much of Calvinism. I love Joseph Prince.
I believe the full Pentecostal whack because I got the full Pentecostal whack...my great sadness has been that until quite recently the Pentecostals themselves had fallen far behind and so fellowship was difficult...I sat at the back of large assemblies longing for revival.
I have stood with a few ministers in establishing little evangelical enterprises and have seen souls saved and lives turned around...great miracles. I rarely do the upfront stuff, but I am known in certain circles...have preached in the open air and seen souls saved, preached in London's Hyde Park. :)
There I rambled a little...there is but a scratching on the surface of all that God has done for me...I love Him and trust Him come what may.
I love it Billy. I'm trying to start replying and interacting in threads more here now after spending 8 months or so building up this forum. I might change the name of the forum in the future and I'd luv your suggestions. For me, my theology was decidedly Catholic until 5th grade but I went no further in the church. I heard a lot of scripture during Mass but they were mostly all the same and boring. I enjoy a good Catholic service now. My mom's side of the family is Pentecostal and my mom and family have spoken in tongues and my uncle Larry Thornton is in with the Assemblies Of God outfit and he interprets tongues speaking.
I got into drugs and spent the next 30 years not touching a Bible and thinking religion was fake and superficial and invented to keep the masses in line. It wasn't until I got on the internet for the very first time in 2014 and created a YT channel just so I could comment. Then I watched only the news and various odd videos. I can look back over these last 5 years and impart so much of God's love and guidance in my life it freaks met out !!! I am amazed at God's doings in my life.
So I started searching for deeper thinking material like theology and stumbled on Grace Ambassadors who teach Mid Acts Pauline Dispensational doctrine which always seemed correct to me. The Holy Spirit opened the KJV to me and I finally understood what is written, Well, much of it but not all. I would love to hear more about your life Billy and also everybody here on this forum and their lives. I really learn from your posts on TF and thank you for being here for us all.
-
Let's ramble a little, I'm 67 so I'm entitled.
I was saved by means of an [American] gospel magazine, in my own home...but it was dramatic. One moment I did not know God, the next I did, one moment I had no concept of the Holy Spirit, the next I was overflowing with His joy and power, one moment I did not understand a jot of the bible, the next it was an open book to me.
I read the KJV through 3 times in the first 18 months...then read the RSV and the Living through. I still read at least a chapter a day, sometimes more....above all else I am a bible lover, I hate to see the twistings that go on, that's my bible, the much loved word of my Lord.
I am finicky as heck about which theologians or teachers I listen to, Corrie ten Boom and T.L.Osborn whose magazine it was through who I was saved settled me in my faith....I moved away from T.L.'s faith based theology [as indeed HE did in his later years] toward the more stable grace teachings of C.H.Spurgeon...though I rejects much of Calvinism. I love Joseph Prince.
I believe the full Pentecostal whack because I got the full Pentecostal whack...my great sadness has been that until quite recently the Pentecostals themselves had fallen far behind and so fellowship was difficult...I sat at the back of large assemblies longing for revival.
I have stood with a few ministers in establishing little evangelical enterprises and have seen souls saved and lives turned around...great miracles. I rarely do the upfront stuff, but I am known in certain circles...have preached in the open air and seen souls saved, preached in London's Hyde Park. :)
There I rambled a little...there is but a scratching on the surface of all that God has done for me...I love Him and trust Him come what may.
I love it Billy. I'm trying to start replying and interacting in threads more here now after spending 8 months or so building up this forum. I might change the name of the forum in the future and I'd luv your suggestions. For me, my theology was decidedly Catholic until 5th grade but I went no further in the church. I heard a lot of scripture during Mass but they were mostly all the same and boring. I enjoy a good Catholic service now. My mom's side of the family is Pentecostal and my mom and family have spoken in tongues and my uncle Larry Thornton is in with the Assemblies Of God outfit and he interprets tongues speaking.
I got into drugs and spent the next 30 years not touching a Bible and thinking religion was fake and superficial and invented to keep the masses in line. It wasn't until I got on the internet for the very first time in 2014 and created a YT channel just so I could comment. Then I watched only the news and various odd videos. I can look back over these last 5 years and impart so much of God's love and guidance in my life it freaks met out !!! I am amazed at God's doings in my life.
So I started searching for deeper thinking material like theology and stumbled on Grace Ambassadors who teach Mid Acts Pauline Dispensational doctrine which always seemed correct to me. The Holy Spirit opened the KJV to me and I finally understood what is written, Well, much of it but not all. I would love to hear more about your life Billy and also everybody here on this forum and their lives. I really learn from your posts on TF and thank you for being here for us all.
a long story......for sure.
Blade
-
That's all you got to say?
-
That's all you got to say?
It would be boredom extreme.
Have a great day my friend.
Blade
-
That's all you got to say?
It would be boredom extreme.
Have a great day my friend.
Blade
Thanks.
-
That's all you got to say?
It would be boredom extreme.
Have a great day my friend.
Blade
Thanks.
I'm welcome.
-
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
I want this to be a place for deep thinking, light conversation and discussion, sharing thoughts and feelings, knowledge and wisdom and most of all FUN.
Post anything you want here. Start new topics and be seen by thousands. Promote your links and sites and spread your message. Join Free and post now !!!
Great post, Jon. Especially the words in yellow. ✝🙏🍺🍕🐟
-
I was wondering this about others today. I’m Closest to an open view because I chose to try and strip as close to bare bones as I could when I came back to God. I wanted to learn as if I knew nothing except basic morality, and the Love of God through Christ and the Spirit. Because everything the local churches had been (while I ran from God) was more biased toward politics and focusing more on condemnation of others, than it was about showing others how to come to Christ. I’m really in the beginning stages of learning and most of my study is on my own while I pray to understand necessary passages in God’s own time. I also study on another forum that I like because there are a variety of different viewpoints presented and I feel that it reminds me to cut my own bias and assumptions from my studies.
I want this to be a place for deep thinking, light conversation and discussion, sharing thoughts and feelings, knowledge and wisdom and most of all FUN.
Post anything you want here. Start new topics and be seen by thousands. Promote your links and sites and spread your message. Join Free and post now !!!
Great post, Jon. Especially the words in yellow. ✝🙏🍺🍕🐟
I concur.
-
me too
-
me too
I have arrived
-
;D
me too
I have arrived
;D
-
;Dme too
I have arrived
;D
Car
-
;Dme too
I have arrived
;D
Car
Plane
-
;Dme too
I have arrived
;D
Car
Plane
Truck