I did not say Roman Catholicism is bad. I learned to love the son of God in 1st grade as a newbie. I was taught that Jesus was also in 1st grade, and I should consider how HE would handle the same problems that overworked me. So, I did not say it was bad. I said it was the source of a doctrine.
Most denominations break away over differences in doctrines or creeds.
I did not say denominations are bad.
I said they need to focus on Him who died for our salvation.
Jesus is called the seed of Abraham; seed of David; made of a woman. THAT makes Jesus a created being.
Was the statement confused? Or were you confused as to what the statement asserted?
Everyone hath a doctrine, hath a prayer, hath…
I did not say doctrines are bad. I said Doctrines of MEN should not override scripture.
I did not say teachers are bad.
Some teachers are terrible.
NOT THE SAME STATEMENTS.
When we are given scriptures addressing righteous men who “will save only themselves by their righteousness,” and when we are told “Gentiles who by nature, do the things of the law, are a law…” how can we conclude the doctrine of Original sin which declares everyone to be totally depraved and unable to have a righteous thought?
That is an important point that helps people see where you are coming from.
Yes.
All doctrines are the product of fallible humans. Doctrines are the product of fallible human interpretation of Scripture so no doctrine can actually override scripture. When doctrines clash the problem is in the interpretation that lead to the doctrine.
You appear to be conflating Original Sin with Total Depravity. The first does not automatically lead to the second. BTW, I don’t hold to either of those.
David, our apparent disagreement may well be due to the fact that you and I had different people in mind when you used the term "unbelievers". I agree with you that missionaries who undertake the task of converting heathens (who have never heard of Jesus), it makes good sense NOT to approach them with “advance discourse on doctrines”. The examples I had in mind were: (1) my mother, who learned of Jesus,and that God is Love, at her mother’s knee, but when attending parochial school was MISinformed by her pastor that only Catholics were going to enter heaven; and (2) the missionaries in Taiwan who, in trying to convert my friend, Eric Lien, began with the doctrine that one must proclaim Jesus as one’s Savior to escape the eternal suffering of Hell.
My point in continuing this discussion is to point out that, with the best of intentions to “do God’s work”, these ministers were endangering their own souls, at least IMHO. There are few sayings that convey more truth than this: “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”
So long and God bless,
Al Leo
I agree, it the doctrine of men come from their understanding of scripture, which no one can claim complete understanding of.
That is a false dichotomy to make youself always right. You claim your interpretation of scripture as scripture, and every else’s as doctrine of man. YECs do that frequently when EC tries to say Genesis might not be literally taken.
So let’s start there, and admit that we don’t have all the answers, just our best understanding, backed up by some logic. And then also remember that it’s neat to learn more about God, it might be part of our worship to Him, but it isn’t so important as to break fellowship with a brother in Christ over.
[quote=“Bill_II, post:17, topic:38429”]
Sorry @Theo_Book I have sat through sermons that were shorter than that post.
[/quote] much of his post is scripture quotes. It wasn’t that long…says the guy who seems to write some ridiculously long walls of texts. Lol
Ezekiel 14. Your reference typo got my lost there a bit at first.
It Daniel 9:18 “We do not make requests of you because we are righteous, but because of your great mercy.”. And that entire prayer to vs 19 is admitting Daniel is not righteous.
But who is right about Daniel? God, or Daniel?
How about both? Just as we are sinners made righteous through Jesus, God sees us as righteous (through the work of the cross), but we are not righteous.
Abraham’s faith was credited as righteousness.
Noah, Job, and Daniel were all made righteous through God. I don’t ever think any of them would ever hint that their righteousness cane from their own strength or efforts, but from the grace of God.
There are no scripture references that hint that anyone is saved by their own works. Though there are many that say we are saved by our righteousness (through God).
Probably the biggest thing God emphasizes is humility, not pride. A prideful man tries to save himself, and will fail. A humble man realizes our Creator loves us and is merciful and will save us.
God created us to depend on Him. When we depend on us and put our own needs before His, we are becoming gods and violating the first commandment.
If anything is found good in me, if I am seen as righteous, it is from Him, and He deserves all the glory.
It I don’t subscribe to OS either. For what it’s worth. I just do t agree with some of your logic for not agreeing with it. I used to subscribe to original blessing like @aleo spoke of, but I have lately been modifying that slightly.
When Jesus became flesh incarnate, this was spoken about. There are many other verses that say Jesus has always been, and is not a created being.
First, the trinity, where Jesus is God. Or John 1:1-3
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”
Vs 14
“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.”
That flesh part was the seed of David. Jesus has always been.
Or Col 1:15 or Rom 8:19 or Heb 1:3
“whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.“
“
The Son is the image of the invisible God,”
Think of Jesus like a “prism” that reveals the spectrum of colors of the light of God that we can’t see.
Jesus was not created being…other than His earthly representation/incarnation.
I agree with that to an extent. I am a huge fan of teaching to question the status quo or doctrine, live the life God made you to live and honor Him in it. Show others who God is through how you live, not what you or I say, or study.
Is that true? Or were we always incapable of doing anything not sinful?
None are righteous of their own strength. But Abraham’s faith in God was righteous. So the most righteous deed done, not for the glory of God is like filthy rags. In that we were created to glorify Him, through Him, so anytime He isn’t glorified, it is like a filthy rag, as in we are not living to our full potential. Just like a filthy rag cannot clean very well.
Ideally, there is no need to recruit for those things. But through the love of God in us, we want to do these things. Glorify Him through the gifts He blessed us with.
This is a fruit of the spirit. Something that comes from God, it can’t come from man.
If it is from man to help out a fellow human, why are they doing it? Like C.S Lewis said “I have never had a selfless thought since I was born.” Is it to make yourself feel better? To be praised among men? If it isn’t for the glory of God, it isn’t our full potential, this abundant life that Jesus came to give us.
I think like the one poster said, we are confusing OS with total depravity. There doesn’t need to be an OS to still subscribe to total depravity.
I think we do glorify God by smothering human ego. Humility is spoken of highly in scripture and pride is greatly earned against.
How do you do something unselfishly, but for doing it for God’s glory?
[quote=“Randy, post:4, topic:38429, full:true”]
Thanks. I do think that this is the case. To be a devils’ advocate, what do you think of the Psalm 51:5 “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me;” [/QUOTE]
The Greek is mistranslated to conform to the mistaken idea promoted by the doctrine of Original Sin. The same Greek word that is translated “in” in the King James version, “I was born in sin” is more frequently translated “into.” We are born INTO a world of sin, because it is a world of MEN who make bad choices.
But there is nothing sinful in Conception, nor in simply being born, which is never a matter of “Choice.”
He couches that as a lesson to the Jews and Gentiles of Rome that the Gentiles no longer have to get circumcised,[/quote]
Circumcision was not required of Gentiles, It was the result of a covenant between God and Abraham, almost 300 years prior to the covenant of law given through Moses.
This statement is quite surprising, since, if God has needs, it implies that He can be changed by His continued creation; e.g. He cares whether we love him or not. In my view, he is not threatened by humans trying to “become gods”. On the contrary, he has invited us to become co-creators with him, and he asks us to be willing to make sacrifices to overcome the selfish aspects of the evolutionary process that produced Homo sapiens. This means that we should NOT mis interpret the Genesis account: assuming that, since he saw his creation as good, it means that it was perfect and only needed ‘correcting’ after the Fall.
I certainly agree that everything that is ‘good’ in the Universe is directly attributable to God, but I have misgivings about describing it as “deserves all the glory”. Science has disclosed to us that God’s creative power and wisdom is beyond human comprehension. So what need does He have for glory? The one thing we humans can freely give him is love. And that, I believe, is the one thing he desires of us. Luke 10:27. In continually seeking glory, our president has made that a rather undesirable objective.
Al Leo
IF we assume a Triune Deity, eternal in the Heaven, We can also assume BECAUSE God made MAN, it is because He NEEDS US. Because if triune God existed with ONLY triune God, that would b\have been perfect Love, and in need of NOTHING.
But if we listen to God’s OWN words, we see a theme presented that is amazing in scope and in depth and in meaning.
Psalm 8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the (ELOHIYM) angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. 6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are (ELOHIYM) Gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are Gods?
Phlppns 2:6 Who, being in a form of God,
Not only Jesus, but ALL MEN are Elohiym Psalm 82:6
But Jehovah Elohiym is SPIRIT.
Men are flesh and bones.
Therefore Men are a FORM OF God, clothed in flesh and bone, until they attain immortality at death; at which time, they will either be raised in salvation or depart in damnation; the raised to be clothed in immortality with a cloak of oikeeteerion which is the “habitation” abandoned by the Angels who left heaven to co-habit with daughters of Men.[Gen 6]
And it was God who established that in fact, yes, He has needs that are filled by MAN.
God is love. But love that is not sacrificing is unfulfilled Love. And perfect love who only has perfect love to reciprocate, cannot be fulfilled when it needs to be doing something for lesser beings.
Look at how God puts it -
Who is the HEAD of the woman? The MAN
Who is the HEAD of MAN? CHRIST!
Who is the HEAD of CHRIST? GOD!
Let’s agree, the ultimate HEAD is God;
1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Then let’s establish a need that the perfect head has for the imperfect feet -
1 Cor 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ 13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.14 For the body is not one member, but many.15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again [color=darkred]the head to the feet[/color],
[color=crimson] I have no need of you.[/color]
I am an Elohym serving as the very FOOT of the body of Christ, of whom GOD IS THE HEAD, and who says “I have need of thee.”
And the love He pours out upon me is a Humbling, Caring, Gracious, and Encouraging love, available to all who would reciprocate and need Him, and need to fulfill that need by responding to HIS Love and Need.
What say you?
Right. The Christian understanding is that God has no needs.[/quote]
Agreed! God has no need of anything Man can supply. But it was GOD who supplied Man and his function. So God supplied the response to His own needs, then told us about it.
Remember,
"Christ = the HEAD of Man.
“God the head of Christ”
“Can the Head say to the foot, I have no need of thee?”
I was trying to say that we need to put others needs before ours, that is what God wants. When we put our needs before others, it puts us as gods.
God doesn’t have needs, but He is a jealous God. He doesn’t like when we try to take His glory.
Example, the writing on the wall. Belshazzar who was prideful and didn’t give God the glory, it was all taken from Him, and other kings before and after him.
If you give to the poor or love others not for God’s glory, that is all the reward you get, a warm feeling or approval of men. Which is fleeting, and leaves you always wanting/needing more.
But when you love others of give to the poor, acknowledging that God has blessed you with all you have and allows you to give to them, and He gets the glory, you will receive a peace and joy, that only He can give. You won’t need to chase more, you are filled. Yet you still give more, our of the love of God pouring out of you.
I don’t think He needs the glory, but I do think that it all belongs to Him. I think that is why everything was created. The stars declare His glory, the mountains too. Anything that does what it was designed by Him to do, proclaims His glory. God being able to show His love for us through His Son dying to save us, was for His glory.
I agree, He desires our love, the 2 greatest commandments are to love. But to love Him first, then others. In loving others, we are loving and glorifying Him. Others can see His glory in us, it isn’t us that love comes from, therefor we do not deserve the glory.
I also agree, man should not seek glory, he deserves none of it. Blessings and grace is what we get, though what we deserve is fear misery, we deserve to be our own gods and have no love in us and we deserve hell. Thanks to the loving mercy of God, we don’t get what we do deserve, and He deserves all the glory for that.
I didn’t have much time to write last time, I but I wanted to get something out quick, since that what I did say was not at all what I was intending to get out. But I wanted to add this.
James 4:6 “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble”
Prov 3:34 “He mocks proud mockers but shows favor to the humble and oppressed”
When you are prideful and take care of your needs first, or don’t thank God for what He gave you, you are actually going against God Himself. When you are humble, realize that we are nothing without Him, and we have nothing without Him, realize that others are more important than you.
Phil 2:3 “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves,”
That is why Jesus washed His disciples feet. I don’t think Jesus wasn’t thinking “Oh man, I hate washing feet, this is below me, but I will do it out of ‘love’”.
I do think Jesus was thinking “I value their needs above my own, for humility glorifies my Father, therefore, I will wash there feet.”
Col 3:7
“And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”
1 Cor 10:31
“So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.”
Though I do believe that God can be changed, His mind is changed quite a few times in the scriptures after pleading. It reminds me of my kinds, and I change my mind sometimes. I don’t think God is caught off guard or responding in fear, but I do think He is a personal God who does change His mind. I don’t think His ultimate will, will be changed, but the minutia could be. My kid is still going to school in the morning, but if they want to change their outfit, and there is time, and they are persistent and polite about it, I might let them change outfits.
I never meant to imply that. But if we are to become our own gods, then that is to say that He does not exist. This is why it was the 1st commandment, to have no other gods before Him…including us.
We know He is jealous for us, and our love. Rightly jealous, like a husband should be for his wife. This isn’t the Hollywood jealousy of distrust and paranoia. Rather when we speak our vows, we are saying that our intimate love belongs to each other, and no one else.
"Exodus 6:6-7 I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. I will take you as my own people, and I will be your God.
I will bring you out
I will redeem you
I will rescue you
I will take you as my own
When a Israelite audience heard those phrases, they weren’t just thinking rescue. But those were the four phrases used in an Israelite marriage vow.
God is calling out His bride. That is why the 1st commandment is have no other God but me, I’m a jealous God. He wants our affection, your mine and only mine."
He doesn’t need our love, He doesn’t need our glory or praise, but He deserved our love, and He deserves all glory and praise.
He is using two different analogies here. One, is to show humans, that we should not think of one as more deserving or better than the other, we are all God’s children, all having different jobs/lives, all equally important.
The other analogy is speaking of roles in a way we can comprehend.
God needs us like the Mona Lisa or Lamborghini (insert any beautiful peace of art/design greatly admired) needs it’s admirers. It would be a shame for those things to be created, and have no one know about them or be able to appreciate them. BUT, if no one knew about them, they are still the most beautiful and impressive feats, the car still produces 1000hp.
God is so amazing and deserves so much praise and glory, humans and the universe had to be made, for people to realize and appreciate who He is. BUT, God would still be everything He is if humans had not been made, it just wouldn’t have been as known of proclaimed. Though I am sure every angel who did know God would still be praising Him for all long as they existed, His face would still have been impossibly glorious to look upon.
God is invisible/unknowable. Like a child playing hide-and-go-seek. They want to be found, they want you to struggle slightly (which kind of shows them how bad you want to find them), but they ultimately want to be found. God is the same way, He wants to be found, He gives us hints and glimpse of Him. Ultimately revealing Himself to us in flesh at one point. But we can’t know of see Him because He is too much for us to handle, but He still wants us to find Him and seek Him.
But He does not need us. He is immortal, immortal beings don’t need feet, or hands, or any bodily form, they just are, they exist. “I AM, who I AM”.
You had me…until you said “available to those who reciprocate”. Just like God had Hosea marry a harlot, who didn’t reciprocate his love, but Hosea was to still love her. This is to demonstrate that God loves us, no matter how unfaithful we are. He can’t not love us, He is love.
I was just trying to lighten the environment a bit.
Let me try to re-word that. God created our purpose to give Him glory, we can only do this when we allow Him to live through us. We have two sides pulling at war. Needs of the flesh, and needs of the spirit. the flesh is temporary, a vessel on earth evolved. And the spirit is eternal, it is from God (this original blessing). We have a yearning inside us to allow Him to live through us (the eternal spiritual side), and when we don’t, we feel empty and unsatisfied (living for the temporary flesh side). We, like the Tower of Babel, try to “make a name for ourselves” as opposed to giving God the glory and trying to make His name known.
We are putting our fleshly needs before what our spiritual needs are. Maybe that is better than saying putting our needs before His. And in that, we are making flesh more important than our spirit. The flesh loves success, power, pride, the spirit loves God, and is manifested as joy, love, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, self control, humility, submission, praise of God. These attributes are fruits of the spirit, they come from us putting God first. We can’t try to be loving, we will fail, the law shows us this, the flesh is weak. We can’t try to be humble, we will fail. The only way to achieve these fruits, is through God, God brings about the fruits in us. That is what I mean by all good things come from God.
Theo, this is my honest problem I have with your post: It appears that you rely exclusively on the inspiration given to the ancient peoples who wrote Scripture–and our correct interpretation of it. I would rather believe that God intends us to use science as an additional source and, since it is self-correcting, any ‘mistakes’ tend to be temporary. (e.g. the ‘phlogiston’ theory of combustion.)
Can you deny that this interpretation of Genesis 1 has led to centuries of misogyny?
As a scientist using “Occam’s razor”, there is NO evidence-- other than Scripture–that supports pure spirits (Angels) having intercourse with human females. Is that belief an essential component of finding out God’s purpose in creating humankind? IMHO it is not important, except for the fact that it misleads us as to God’s true nature and his purpose for us.
I totally agree. Except I have found that in spending a lifetime in science studies, I have had access to another source of God’s OWN words.
Al Leo
Theo, this is my honest problem I have with your post: It appears that you rely exclusively on the inspiration given to the ancient peoples who wrote Scripture–and our correct interpretation of it. I would rather believe that God intends us to use science as an additional source and, since it is self-correcting, any ‘mistakes’ tend to be temporary. (e.g. the ‘phlogiston’ theory of combustion.)[/quote]
“Self-correcting?” Suppose I give you an example from Inspiration that Science did NOT “self-correct?”
“Science” tells us “Man” is related (descended from) Apes, because of close similarity through DNA similarity.
Inspiration tells us in early Genesis, that God separated dry land from the Sea.
Dry land, while still in the sea, constituted a common DNA pool, implying a common creator, not a common DNA line.
Upon a time, the earth was flat. Inspiration told us very early on, about the “Circle of the Earth.”
The problem I am having, is the fact that many Scientists are brilliant to a fault. They begin to believe in their own understanding.
Can you deny that this interpretation of Genesis 1 has led to centuries of misogyny?[/quote]
Absolutely! It is not the interpretation that has cause the problem, it is the egoes of Men who consider themselves God’s assistants.
[quote=“Theo_Book, post:38, topic:38429”]
the “habitation” abandoned by the Angels who left heaven to co-habit with daughters of Men.[Gen 6] [/quote]
As a scientist using “Occam’s razor”, there is NO evidence-- other than Scripture–that supports pure spirits (Angels) having intercourse with human females. Is that belief an essential component of finding out God’s purpose in creating humankind? IMHO it is not important, except for the fact that it misleads us as to God’s true nature and his purpose for us.
That assumes conclusions not even recognized let alone considered. We have no evidence against it, but more than enough for it.
Consider: God prophesied that Israel would be in exile in captivity, and would be sent back to Israel to repair the temple and the city walls; and further, that the foreign king would pay the expenses.
Israel was not even in conflict when the prophecy was made.
Over two hundred years passed, and Israel was indeed in exile in captivity, and the king did send them back to repair the temple, and the walls of the city, and paid the expenses.
But the most impressive point was, God named the king two hundred years before the king existed; and it was not a dynasty name. It was Cyrus, King of Persia. THAT serves as evidence worthy of consideration and contemplation.
[quote=“Theo_Book, post:38, topic:38429”]
But if we listen to God’s OWN words, we see a theme presented that is amazing in scope and in depth and in meaning.[/quote]
I totally agree. Except I have found that in spending a lifetime in science studies, I have had access to another source of God’s OWN words.
Al Leo [/quote]
As have I. I accept results from scientific research, analysis, and invention. I do not accept results from musings, opinions, and failed experiments. Like DNA 5 shared with apes.
Yes, Theo, through this Forum many scriptural scholars have found that interacting with scientists have enriched their understanding of both the Old and New Testaments, just as many scientists (yours truly amongst them) have reached a better understanding of how our Universe works by learning more about how Scripture informs thoughtful readers. Biologos was founded upon the conviction that it was a mistake to choose one or the other–in combination they can lead to a better understanding of what God wills for us humans and for the world we live in.
I respect the fact that you do not have a correct view of how science operates (as evidenced from the quotation above), and so I fear you are missing out on the wider appreciation of the Glory of our Creator that can be had from Scripture alone. But regardless of that, you seem to have constructed a Worldview that satisfies you and gives your life a purpose. So why “fix what ain’t broken?”
It is possible you have mistaken my ramblings for knowledge. Not so. I not only am NOT a scientist, I am not even a student thereunto. I just listen to some few illogical offerings from some who mistake science for God. There is even one website where there is an invitation, offering a prize for a solution to Man’s capability to originate Human life.
My response was simply to begin with what was already there, (like previous experiments with test-tube babies), but they wan an original recipe for developing Human life. I point out it will not be “Human” life, but will rather be Human’s life. (Product of Human, not result Human)