KeralaBrethren.net
New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics :: :: Post new topic


Keralabrethren.net: General Forum: Acts 13:40 & 46 topples Calvinism devoid

Post Reply
Go to bottom of the page

# 02397 :  Acts 13:40 & 46 topples Calvinism devoid

Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you” - Acts 13:40

The above is a verse which speaks of Paul’s proclaiming gospel to the people gathered in a synagogue and most of them were Israelites. Paul was narrating how Jesus had been given as a way of salvation for Jews at first. At the end of his message, finally Paul brings this warning to the listener that they must beware that they should not invite perdition (V 41) like the Old Testament Israelites, because of rejecting Christ.

The crucial point I am emphasizing is that if Calvinistic predestination is true, such a warning is not at all necessary, simple sharing of gospel is enough. Those who are predestined for salvation will automatically get saved without their freewill and according to Calvinism; the proclamation of gospel is only for the selected ones.  Then, I do not understand why the warning should appear here irrelevantly.

 Let us look at another verse – “Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life” – V 46.

Here, we can see that the unbelieving Jews rejected on their own freewill in spite of Holy Spirit’s intention of speaking necessarily God’s word to them first. It was them who judged themselves unworthy of everlasting life, not God.  God  was  all along willing to accept all of them.

If any one openly accepts the truth from the two verses given above can easily understand what the exact meaning of the verse “...And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed” (V48)

Post by : kristine  View Profile    since : 20 Sep 2012


Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 20 Sep 2012 12:44:55 PM Close

Dear 'kristine,'

Could you write what do you mean by "Calvinistic predestination?"  You are writing against it for a few months, but has not told what it is.  You accused a group of Christians being Calvinistic, but admitted that you do not have a corporate statement from them to make your accusation true.  As you have started this thread, 'Acts 13:40 & 46 topples Calvinism devoid,' and wrote, "The crucial point I am emphasizing is that if Calvinistic predestination is true, such a warning is not at all necessary, simple sharing of gospel is enough," I ask you to provide what is this 'Calvinistic predestination?'

For the last few months I asked similar questions on what you wrote, but I have not received any answers.

Shalom Malekim!!!   

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 20 Sep 2012 2:51:56 PM Close

 

Dear ‘kristine,’
This title ‘Acts 13:40 & 46 topples Calvinism devoid’ reminds me of a story. Apparently you think you found some surefire verses to topple Calvinism [= scriptural sovereignty attributed to God in matters of each individual's salvation.]
The story goes like this. A father sent his son to learn martial arts [Kaleri.] He came home for vacation after a month. The father asked the son how he is progressing. The son enthusiastically answered; Father, I can defeat 100 opponents if they attack me all at once.
The son came back after 3 months. Same question from the Father. The Son answered; I can handle 50 people, all at once. He came back after 6 months, and the number reduced to 25. After several return trips and at the end of 3 years of training, he was confronted with the same question from the father. This time he answered with a serious and determined voice; father if one person attacked me I will succeed in defending myself.  
The father in an enthusiastic voice said to the son; son, you have now mastered the martial arts. You have learned enough.
Deep waters seldom make noise while flowing, while shallow stream roar through the nights. Many who stood against Calvinism [=please see my definition above; I am referencing it in that context] after much learning, embraced the scriptural doctrine of predestination. I hope you would too. Perhaps, it may take another 2 ½ years more! But it worth pursuing because it is one of the most comforting and reassuring doctrines in the Bible.  
Those who oppose the doctrine of predestination have not studied the scriptures as they should; whether it is you or Brethren teachers in Kerala or elsewhere, or some of my dear friends whose names are well-known among us or my own flesh and blood [my brother] who wrote a book against it. Once we understand the greatness of God, we would start appreciating the doctrine of predestination. But these opponents want to put God in a box and try to figure out the mind of God & speculate what took place in the eternal counsel of God. Instead, they need to trust the revealed word of God.
But writing something like ‘topples Calvinism devoid,’ is like the boy’s claim at his initial return from the martial-arts training.    
Tom Johns
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 21 Sep 2012 10:17:09 AM Close

It’s Ok, dear Tom, then, why should not you explain what Acts 13:40 & 46 tells you. Please point out the mistakes in my view.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 21 Sep 2012 12:31:35 PM Close

Dear 'kristianjude' a.k.a. 'kristine,'

Your explanation is wanting.  It calls for another explanation of what you termed as 'Calvinistic predestination.'  Could you explain it?  This is the second time, I am asking for an explanation.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 22 Sep 2012 3:28:47 PM Close

 

Dear kristainjude.
 
To answer these questions properly and in detail, it will take chapters. But I will give a quick answer and I would encourage you to start learning these seeking the help of the Holy Spirit. There are no ‘Calvinists’ that I know, who readily accepted this scriptural teachings on the absolute sovereignty of God in matters of a person’s salvation, [or, commonly known as Calvinism] but only after much struggle and debate they started seeing the light.
 
Let me share with you an important lesson. If you see two truths that seem to be in antinomy [=a contradiction between conclusions which seem equally logical, reasonable or necessary,] in the Bible, accept that they both are the absolute truths. I’d qualify that definition by adding ‘an apparent contradiction’ because there is no real contradiction. One such truth will not make the other a lesser important truth. Biblical antinomy is an involved subject. It may take me a while to go into details with the pertinent biblical references. Let me skip that for now.
 
Let me point out an example from the book of Acts. These are good examples to study initially.
 
Acts 2:23 “Him [Christ], being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, YOU have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death.’ [Underlining & caps added]
 
This verse clearly teaches that the crucifixion of our Lord was planned, predicted, and determined before it happened and all the devils in hell or all men on earth could not keep Jesus from the cross – it was determined by a sovereign God. Yet, at the same time, wicked men- acting freely- were charged with this wicked act.
 
In Acts 4:24-30 God puts these two truths side by side without apology or explanation. Here this apparent contradiction and seeming conflict in expressed in this prayer.
 
"So when they heard that, they raised their voice to God with one accord and said: Lord You are God, who made heaven and earth and the sea, and all that is in them, who by the mouth of Your servant David have said: 'Why did the nations rage, and the people plot vain things? The kings of rhe earth shook their stand, and the rulers were together against the Lord and against His Christ."
 
Fpr truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done. Now, Lord, look on their threats ........... Your holy Servant, Jesus." [Acts 4:24-30]
 
In the 1st truth we see that God is 100% sovereign in planning and determining. At the same time these verses teach that wicked men are 100% responsible for their wicked deeds. If we look at the whole Bible we see that God is sovereign in creation, sovereign in redemption and sovereign in providence – and also, the Bible teaches that man is 100% responsible for his sin. Therefore we have no alternative but to believe both are true, even though our finite minds cannot comprehend in its entirety or reconcile or harmonize them. They are both in the Bible and they both are true.
 
Men & women end up in hell because of their rejection of the Savior Lord Jesus Christ and that would be the sole/ only reason. People need to accept Jesus Christ as their substitution for their sins and its penalty. Jesus Christ already died the death of each sinner [on the sinner’s behalf] and removed the sins of all those would place their trust in Him. Those who do not trust Jesus Christ as their full substitution [for their sins] will suffer eternal punishment. Based on the verses I quoted and many others in the Bible, no one can blame God that they are in hell because they were not predestinated. This is the beauty and harmony of predestination and human response. Only God can work this out so beautifully; that is what had taken place ‘by the counsel of God’s will’ before God laid the foundations to the earth.
I just scratched the surface of this subject. I did not directly address the verses you mentioned. Please see if the study of the passages above would shed lights into it. The fact remains that the verses you quoted are true and they do show human responsibility. But that truth does not negate the other.
 
Tom Johns
 
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 5:55:51 AM Close

Dear Tom Johns 

Your scratching the surface of the subject does not bring in any clarity for me to understand how correct you are in your explanation.  As you have said, you did not directly address the verses I mentioned and it is a concern for me. There is no apparentness in the contradiction between two ‘truths’, but it is virtual.  Then, the other one is not at all a truth and that is Calvinism.

I hope you accept the verse “Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you” (Acts 13:40) is undoubtedly a warning. A warning has a purpose of its own. Heeding to the warning relieves a person from a danger and ‘heeding not’ takes that person to his doom. Responsibility lies with that person and he exercises this responsibility on his own, which is what we call ‘Freewill’. Absence of freewill takes out the chance to exercise responsibility. Your Predestination teaching says there is no free will, then how an unbeliever will be made responsible for not believing?

I pondered Acts 2:23 & 4:24-30. I am coming up with this understanding:

Acts 2:23 “Him [Christ], being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, YOU have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death.’ [Underlining & caps as added by you]

 

Your statement: This verse clearly teaches that the crucifixion of our Lord was planned, predicted, and determined before it happened and all the devils in hell or all men on earth could not keep Jesus from the cross – it was determined by a sovereign God. Yet, at the same time, wicked men- acting freely- were charged with this wicked act.

 

My view: There are two important aspects I could see in the verse. First one is God’s determined purpose of delivering Christ. The purpose of God had been to draw a new covenant between Him and the mankind through His Son Jesus. This covenant started with Jews at first, but not to end with Jews only. As a mediator of this new covenant, Jesus had to be offered as a sacrifice on the cross. According to the view of this world, whoever crucified must be a guilty person. God in His eternity decided to prepare Jesus to take the form of guiltiness (though He was sinless).  For this God raised the person with lawless hands to crucify Jesus.  Here comes, the other important aspect that is God’s foreknowledge.

 

God did not hide the fact that what actually Jesus was sent to this world for. We read it in verse 22. God’s attestation of Jesus was actually a gospel to the Jews first. At the same time God foreknew that all the Jews would not accept Jesus and many will rise against Him.  According to this foreknowledge, God made use of these lawless Jews to deliver Christ on the cross. I do not see that these persons were made evil at the time of God’s delivering Jesus, but were already evil by nature. Not accepting Christ as attested by God (V22) was actually their grievous sin than that of their crucifying Him. Here I remember what Jesus said on the cross: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do”. I am very much sure God would have definitely forgiven them for their crucifying Christ (After all, they were the tools in the hands of God for fulfilling His purpose). Then the events happened thereafter as narrated in the verses 44-46 were the signs for them to accept Christ as their Saviour. Still there was an opportunity for them to glorify Christ as the centurion did (V47). God is kind enough towards everyone on this earth and anticipates that everyone to make use of their opportunity.

 

I trust my above explanation is suitable to Acts 4:24-30 also.

 

God’s predetermination of delivering Christ to die on the cross is general truth and this offering is for everyone on this earth and there is no God’s predetermining of selecting a few for Him (without their freewill).  Hence I do not hesitate to say once again that Acts 13:40 & 46 topples Calvinism devoid and it is my concern that you did not directly address these verses.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracah   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 8:31:56 AM Close

The existence, actions and speeches of some have no purpose or meaning and therefore meaningful communication is impossible with them. Communication with them breaks down. In the case of such, logical construction and arguments give way to irrational, illogical conclusions and ultimately to absurd speech.  

Some postings on this Forum repeatedly prove the need for Divine Illumination for human beings in their ordinary cognitive activity. The self sufficient FREE WILLERS would not rely on special Divine (Supernatural) assistance for completing cognitive activity and it is overwhelmingly evident from their absurd writings.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 10:37:36 AM Close

My reasoning on Scriptural subject will be a babbling (Acts 17:18) to some one who are ready to mocking at me and I remember here what Paul said: “Hearing you will hear, and shall not understand; and seeing you will see, and not perceive; for the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them” – Acts 28:26, 27

According to them, their communication is possible with persons like me, only if we accept the rubbles of their Calvinism. I will continue with my task commissioned to me on this forum as long as the Holy Spirit permits me, none of these persons can forbid me (Acts 28:31).

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracah   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 12:19:13 PM Close

Some people steadily move down from ridiculous to redundant. Upto some point others may mockingly tolerate them as they invite derision. Once they cross the limit they are not even fit for mocking; and could easily be avoided without any consequential loss for any. They are dumped!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 12:19:47 PM Close

 

Dear kristianjude,
Let me make a humble & sincere request. Study the subject of hermeneutics [science of interpretation, particularly of Bible] and get some basics understood. This will help you tremendously in your future. If interested, I can post the names of some books that are available as electronic books. They are very reasonably priced.  Such studies will pay dividend all through your Christian life.
Tom Johns
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 28 Sep 2012 1:05:20 PM Close

 

Dear 'kristianjude' a.k.a. 'kristine,'
 
Your explanation is wanting on what you termed as 'Calvinistic predestination.'  Could you explain it?  This is the third time, I am asking for an explanation.
 
You began your 28 Sep 2012 posting, Your scratching the surface of the subject does not bring in any clarity for me to understand how correct you are in your explanation. It is interesting to note that while you are accusing Brother Tom Johns that way; you have not even provided an explantion of your terminology, ‘Calvinistic predestination.’ It was your terminology and I am asking for an explanation for the third time. Are you in the habit of writing “to bring clarity” for others to understand? You are not. Your lack of understanding is what is not giving clarity to what you write. If you disagree with my statement, then tell us what you mean by “Calvinistic predestination.”  
 
On freewill of man, you wrote, “…Responsibility lies with that person and he exercises this responsibility on his own, which is what we call ‘Freewill’…” I ask you to show from the Scriptures, the Bible, that ‘freewill’ is what you defined that to be. You should not force-fit your idea into the Scriptures, but the Scriptures should reveal and you should deduce your ideas from it.  If you force-fit, as in the wheel-combo in a locomotive, then you are considering yourself superior to God and His word.
 
I am asking for two things and they are from your writings on this thread. First, what is your ‘Calvinistic predestination?’ Second, how did you come-up with your definition of the ‘freewill’ of man?
 
Shalom Malekim!!!
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 29 Sep 2012 4:16:25 AM Close

I can identify the person who made the post dt.28 Sep 2012 12:19:13 . He thinks for himself he is wise. But, they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise ( 2 Cori 10:12)

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : palatty   View Profile   Since : 29 Sep 2012 3:01:04 PM Close

 Dear Bro. beracah,

I appreciate your comment. What you have said is the crux of the truth.

I am astonished at the extreme patience level of Br. Tomj and Br. avoid-legalism trying to teach an unteachable! I am anxiously reading every posting to see how they tame a shrew. If they succed, I will say, even a person without an experience of salvtion, who absolutely knows not God, can be taught the most unsearchable Spiritual truths.

P.A.Paulose

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 1 Oct 2012 10:56:04 AM Close

I know Mr.Paulose is very impatient and he is a cannibal with a Christian mask. He has once told he loves to eat my flesh (His post Dt. 3 Jul 2012 3:00:26 PM - www.keralabrethren.net/boardkb/view.asp?id=2319&forum=General).

He is an over proud of his fake ‘spirituality’. Refer to my comment in my post dt.3 Jul 2012 11:23:00AM – “One of your statements reads:  “I and all true believers do rightly understand the verses that I have quoted and we know the importance of divine diligence” Saying so, you mean that persons like me who do not ‘rightly’ understand the verses as you have ‘understood’ are not true believers and thus we are not God’s chosen. You know the importance of divine diligence and hence you will ignore the importance of a believer’s diligence. Read 2 Peter 1:10,11 (http://www.keralabrethren.net/boardkb/view.asp?id=2319&forum=General)

These people want to teach me. They want to be always the teachers.  Because they think that they had learned all and every thing in the scripture. There is nothing in the scripture left unknown to them. When did I beg these fellows to teach me and finally they found that I am unreachable. I am not here to teach any one and to learn from some idiots (idiots are only some).  I am writing my understanding, my belief.  I refute what I see an error.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 1 Oct 2012 11:10:03 AM Close

Dear Tom Johns,

I agree that I have no acquaintance with hermeneutics. But I don’t think many who refute you on many issues are not as poor as I am in hermeneutics. Leave out the Arminian scholars. Their hermeneutics can not be acceptable to you.  Then, what about the renowned Brethren teachers who squarely refute your predestination? Is the science of interpretation they follow not of what you follow? Who did author the books you recommend? Must not have they been influenced by Calvinism?

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 1 Oct 2012 1:23:25 PM Close

Dear 'kristianjude,' a.k.a. 'kristine,'

Let me ask once again about two thing you mentioned in your postings on this thread, "First, what is your ‘Calvinistic predestination?’ Second, how did you come-up with your definition of the ‘freewill’ of man?"

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 3 Oct 2012 10:26:54 AM Close

George,

I am not Calvin and not the author of Calvinism. This teaching has been across the world for about five hundred years, which is before the birth me, you and your grand parents. This erroneous teaching has been widely in Christian debate circle right from its beginning.  This is not unknown to you and you are not unaware of what it is. Your intention of asking me what it is is your silly way to divert this thread from discussing about Acts 13:40 & 46. You have no stuff to speak about these verses.

Pay close attention to Acts 13:40 and find out for your self that there is a free will of man.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 3 Oct 2012 12:20:01 PM Close

Dear Kristianjude,

You are still bringing out Acts 13:40. I wrote several days ago "Let me share with you an important lesson. If you see two truths that seem to be in antinomy [=a contradiction between conclusions which seem equally logical, reasonable or necessary,] in the Bible, accept that they both are the absolute truths. One such truth will not make the other a lesser important truth."

Tom Johns

 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 3 Oct 2012 1:15:02 PM Close

 

Dear ‘kristianjude,’ a.k.a. ‘kristine,’
 
I know that you are not Calvin or the author of Calvinism. Do you know whether Calvin is the author of Calvinism? He is the author of many things, but I do not know that he wrote that. I am not sure about the ‘Calvinistic predestination’ and ‘freewill’ of man. I cannot find those two terms in the Bible. I see those terms in your first posting on this thread, as well as on other threads. Therefore, I am asking you to explain them for my understanding. Those two terms are what you use to contradict what is in the Bible.
 
On 20 Sep 2012, you wrote at the initial post of this thread, The crucial point I am emphasizing is that if Calvinistic predestination is true, such a warning is not at all necessary, simple sharing of gospel is enough. Those who are predestined for salvation will automatically get saved without their freewill and according to Calvinism; the proclamation of gospel is only for the selected ones. Then, I do not understand why the warning should appear here irrelevantly.”  You wrote about some “crucial point” and that contained ‘Calvinistic predestination’ and ‘freewill.’ Now you are saying that defining those two terms that are crucial to establish whatever you want, is ‘silly.’ Let me quote from your 3 Oct 2012 post, Your intention of asking me what it is is your silly way to divert this thread from discussing about Acts 13:40 & 46. Are those two crucial in your discussion or not? If not, then why are you fixated with those terms? If they are, then you should explain them, because you are fixated to refute or accept them. Do you find them in the Bible for you to bring them into this discussion? Once you brought them as crucial point of discussion, then asking for explanation is not ‘silly.’
 
Once that explanation is done by telling where in the Bible you see what you are trying to defend, then we could discuss Acts 13:40-48. When you are trying to contradict one and establish the other, then you have to explain them to others, especially when those terms are not in the Bible.
 
Thank you for telling me that Calvinism is older than me and my grandparents. That does not explain ‘Calvinistic predestination’ or ‘freewill.’ I wrote about predestination as taught in the Bible. I also wrote that the salvation is not by the will of man. If the salvation is not by the will of man, then what is this ‘freewill’ you are trying to propagate? How is that different from the ‘will?’   If it is, then what is it? If it is not, then how that which is not by the ‘will’ of man becomes by his ‘will?’
 
You also wrote on 3 Oct 2012, “Pay close attention to Acts 13:40 and find out for your self that there is a free will of man.”  Are you saying that the warning to beware of those who try to establish what is not revealed in the Scriptures is of importance? On the other hand, are you saying that the two terms, ‘Calvinistic predestination’ and also the ‘freewill’ are in that verse? I do not see any of them in that verse. However, I see that Christians should be watchful about those who try to teach what is not revealed in the Scriptures. You are trying to teach what is not in the Scriptures. That is why you are not explaining the two terms that you wrote as ‘crucial point’ in this discussion, and then you claim that explaining them is ‘silly.’ When the explanation of ‘crucial point’ is ‘silly?’
 
If you do not have an answer, you could say so.
 
Shalom Malekim!!!
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 4 Oct 2012 10:59:24 AM Close

Dear Tom Johns,

For my insisting on Acts 13:40 against Predestination you are adhering to, you have reproduced the following from your earlier post:

"Let me share with you an important lesson. If you see two truths that seem to be in antinomy [=a contradiction between conclusions which seem equally logical, reasonable or necessary,] in the Bible, accept that they both are the absolute truths. One such truth will not make the other a lesser important truth."

Please note that I too have already written as follows:

I hope you accept the verse “Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you” (Acts 13:40) is undoubtedly a warning. A warning has a purpose of its own. Heeding to the warning relieves a person from a danger and ‘heeding not’ takes that person to his doom. Responsibility lies with that person and he exercises this responsibility on his own, which is what we call ‘Freewill’. Absence of freewill takes out the chance to exercise responsibility. Your Predestination teaching says there is no free will, then how an unbeliever will be made responsible for not believing?

My reply would not have been satisfactory to you, which is a different issue. To continue this discussion further is at your discretion.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 4 Oct 2012 12:51:31 PM Close

Dear 'kristianjude,' a.k.a. 'kristine,'

Could you explain your sentence, "Responsibility lies with that person and he exercises this responsibility on his own, which is what we call ‘Freewill’," from the Scriptures?  I asked for this before and you have not provided any answer.  Your silence states that you have none from the Scriptures.  Are you reciting what was proposed and stated by another person?  It appears so.

Shalom Malekim!!! 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracah   View Profile   Since : 6 Oct 2012 4:16:56 AM Close

There are many things concerning God and His ways that our finite minds could not comprehend. Some of them remain as paradoxes and antinomies. Who among mortals have logically understood the Love of God, the Grace of God, the Redeeming work of God, the Humility of God, and the Patience and forbearance of God, etc??  

I have substantially borrowed ideas form Dr. Scot M Peck and most of the following are verbatim copies:

 

There are many conflicts fought under the banner of some ideology or deeply held beliefs among Christians. Given the divisive and destructive results, are these ideologies and beliefs scriptural or mere misapplication of scriptural passages for ‘proof texting’ of otherwise unscriptural ideas?

 

People approach very casually and simplistically

-      The God of Eternity;

-      The depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God;

-      His unsearchable judgments;

-      His paths that are beyond tracing out; and

-      The Incomprehensibility of His works.

 

They fail to realize and submit to the unassailable truth that in the end:

ALL THINGS POINT TO GOD as we read in Romans 11:36 –

 

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.

 

Here is a quote attributed to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr who once said:

 

“I don’t give a fig for the simplicity of this side of complexity,

but I would die for the simplicity on the other side”

 

To journey to the other side of complexity, we are challenged to make a radical shift in thought. We are invited to move way beyond any simplistic understanding in order to know God and the ways of God. We cannot discover the radical truths of God through a rigid stance of static certainty. A cautious yet commanding sense of “knowing with humility” is required.

 

The other side of complexity is not always linear or static, ultimately it is a process. This process involves mystery at its core, but it also encompasses a journey of change, of healing, and of the acquisition of wisdom. On this journey into the other side we may experience a sense of epiphany – those flashes of insight where many things that seemed quite complex begin to make more sense when viewed from a spiritual perspective.

 

Like all transitions in life, the transitions we make toward understanding the other side of complexity are likely to be difficult, even chaotic. We will encounter paradox, and in learning to understand paradox, we will experience psychic pain. In particular it is the pain of loss of old ideas and the sense of certainty they provided. Just when we get comfortable with all that we think we know, something will come along to rattle us out of complacency. Thus, it is imperative that we be open minded and courageous on this journey. We must gather all our resources – emotional, intellectual and spiritual – to endure the sense of loss involved in letting go of the barriers to our ability to think paradoxically, to think with integrity.

 

One paradox is that the simplicity on the other side does not always look simple. Many things about God, for instance, always seem like extra-ordinarily complex and incomprehensible. I believe in Trinity - God as three Divine persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The three persons are distinct yet coexist in unity, and are co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial. At the very same time I embrace the paradox and know in the deepest sense that God is ONE.

 

Courtesy Dr. Scot M Peck.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 9 Oct 2012 4:13:49 PM Close

 

Dear ‘kristianjude,’ a.k.a. ‘kristine,’
 
You wrote on 17 Sep 2012, in the thread, Doctrinal compromise in family life;’
 “I appraise everything I hear as a teaching in the light of the Scripture.” I asked about how this is true in your life on that thread and you did not provide any answer to show that you appraise everything in the light of the Scripture. You wrote on 4 Oct 2012, in the thread, Acts 13:40 topples Calvinism devoid;’ “Responsibility lies with that person and he exercises this responsibility on his own, which is what we call ‘Freewill’.” I asked for an explanation and you failed to provide it again. Therefore, I conclude that you are “devoid” (your term) of any explanation according to what you claimed to be on 17 Sept 2012. Of course you did those two statements in two different IDs.
 
I have already shown in the thread ‘Freewill of Man,’ that there is no verse that states about man having freewill, when he is before God, especially to attain salvation. It is written in the first chapter of the Gospel written by John that men are given the right to be called children of God not because of his will, but by God’s will.
 
Freewill of man, in the common use of that term, indicate that one person’s will is independent, mutually exclusive, and is at liberty from another person’s will. When it is only independent and mutually exclusive to each other, then those may not be liberty to do what they want. They are independent and mutually exclusive. The wills that are independent and mutually exclusive must be at liberty to do according the wills to claim to be free. This is true about the nations also. Before God, no man is at liberty to do what he wants to do according to his will. Man’s will is under the jurisdiction of God’s authority of judgment. This happened when God told Adam that the day he eats of the fruit of certain tree, he will die. After hearing those words from his Creator, Adam and his descendants are under that judgment. They came under that judgment when Adam ate that forbidden fruit in rebellion to God’s command. It is appointed to men to die and then to be judged. James Arminius rebelled against this and provided a definition to make his idea of freewill to be above God’s word that men are not free to do what they want without facing ramification. You follow James Arminius’ path and are in rebellion to God’s will. You are not at liberty to do whatever you want to do. If you think that you are at liberty to be at enmity with God without the wrath of God abiding on you, I will be interested to read that from the Scriptures.
 
Shalom Malekim!!!
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page


Post reply Here

please login to continue..

Registered Users, Login below:

Username Password
Problem Login?

New User? Register Now

Forgot User Name or Password? Click Here

Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::



HOME
Back to Top