Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 144

Thread: Does God respond to Man?

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    Good one, Fig!



    That's what I've been saying all along, Fig.
    Which takes us back to Romans 5. By Adam, death came into the world and only by Christ did the resurrection occur or overcoming death. Thus, Christ overcame both spiritual and physical death. Physical death was overcome by the resurrection of Christ for all. Spiritual death is overcome by Christ for those who take the opportunity to repent.

    Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. (All will overcome physical death via the resurrection of Christ).


    Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. (Because of Christ we have the opportunity to overcome spiritual death by repenting of our sins and turning over our will to him.)
    Last edited by BigJulie; 06-17-2009 at 11:02 AM.

  2. #102
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    I've already ****n your universalistic understanding of the p***age out of the water.

    Enough already.

  3. #103
    Fig-bearing Thistle
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    I've already ****n your universalistic understanding of the p***age out of the water.

    Enough already.
    What part of "all men" did you not understand?

    What part of "good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people" do you not understand?
    Last edited by Fig-bearing Thistle; 06-17-2009 at 07:18 PM.

  4. #104
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    What part of "all men" did you not understand?

    What part of "good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people" do you not understand?

    What part of CONTEXT don't you understand?

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    What part of "all men" did you not understand?

    What part of "good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people" do you not understand?
    Fig, did you see Father's JD full examination of context explaining why this verse is not understood as I read it? I mean, after all of that discussion, I thought it was finally concluded that it was Christ that had to overcome physical death and not just anyone. Did I miss it somehow?

  6. #106
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    Fig, did you see Father's JD full examination of context explaining why this verse is not understood as I read it? I mean, after all of that discussion, I thought it was finally concluded that it was Christ that had to overcome physical death and not just anyone. Did I miss it somehow?

    Yes, Christ overcame physical death. I never said it came from anyone else. It's the UNIVERSALISITIC understanding of Mormonism that EVERYONE HAS ETERNAL LIFE,to which I disagree.

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    Yes, Christ overcame physical death. I never said it came from anyone else. It's the UNIVERSALISITIC understanding of Mormonism that EVERYONE HAS ETERNAL LIFE,to which I disagree.
    Nope, Mormons do not believe that everyone has eternal life. Where ever did you hear that? What we do believe is that all are saved from physical death. Eternal life and overcoming death are two different things as one can certainly inherit eternal ****ation. I think you mistake eternal life to mean living forever. It doesn't. Eternal life is the opposite of eternal ****ation. How can one experience eternal ****ation if one is not around to experience it?

    Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal ****ation:
    Last edited by BigJulie; 06-17-2009 at 08:36 PM.

  8. #108
    Fig-bearing Thistle
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    Nope, Mormons do not believe that everyone has eternal life. Where ever did you hear that? What we do believe is that all are saved from physical death. Eternal life and overcoming death are two different things as one can certainly inherit eternal ****ation. I think you mistake eternal life to mean living forever. It doesn't. Eternal life is the opposite of eternal ****ation. How can one experience eternal ****ation if one is not around to experience it?

    Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal ****ation:
    Perhaps JD is confusing immortality with Eternal Life?

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    Perhaps JD is confusing immortality with Eternal Life?
    I think you are right. That may explain the whole difference we have with Romans 5. He may read the free gift, unto the justification of life, means eternal life rather than overcoming death brought to man by Adam's transgression.

  10. #110
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    I think you are right. That may explain the whole difference we have with Romans 5. He may read the free gift, unto the justification of life, means eternal life rather than overcoming death brought to man by Adam's transgression.

    Immortality = eternal life.

    It's Mormonism that has artifically re-defined terms.

    And that's Mormon confusion.

  11. #111
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post
    I think you are right. That may explain the whole difference we have with Romans 5. He may read the free gift, unto the justification of life, means eternal life rather than overcoming death brought to man by Adam's transgression.

    At last we're getting somewhere!

    Of course "justification of life" MEANS ETERNAL LIFE which includes "overcoming PHYSICAL death brought to man by Adam's transgression".

    The problem is Mormon underestimation of "Adam's transgression".

    You think it means ONLY physical death whereas the Bible clearly teaches it goes WAY beyond physical death to include SPIRITUAL DEATH.

    But you don't believe in spiritual death and that's why you can't understand the Book of Romans either.

  12. #112
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    At last we're getting somewhere!

    Of course "justification of life" MEANS ETERNAL LIFE which includes "overcoming PHYSICAL death brought to man by Adam's transgression".

    The problem is Mormon underestimation of "Adam's transgression".

    You think it means ONLY physical death whereas the Bible clearly teaches it goes WAY beyond physical death to include SPIRITUAL DEATH.

    But you don't believe in spiritual death and that's why you can't understand the Book of Romans either.
    No, I know that Adam's death meant both physical and spiritual death. I do believe in spiritual death. Do you understand that we spiritually died when we sin? God's justice means that we do not need to pay for Adam's transgression. In Adam all men died, in Christ all are made alive. In other words, our spiritual death is our own doing through sin. On the other hand, our physical death was brought about by Adam. Justice then means that God has undid the sin of Adam and the physical death that was brought to all of us. We will all be resurrected. Do you not believe this?

    Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. (All will overcome physical death via the resurrection of Christ).

  13. #113
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    No, I know that Adam's death meant both physical and spiritual death. I do believe in spiritual death.

    Uh, not according to the Bible's MEANING of the term, BJ. You expose this in the very next sentence:


    Do you understand that we spiritually died when we sin?
    No, I understand BIBLICALLY that we're BORN INTO SIN. We were physically born DEAD ON ARRIVAL SPIRITUALLY.

    Again, your premise is that people are somehow born "neutral" and it's only BY some willful sinning that one THEN spiritually "dies".

    The Mormon understanding of "spiritual death" is extremely DEFICIENT, Julie.





    God's justice means that we do not need to pay for Adam's transgression. In Adam all men died, in Christ all are made alive. In other words, our spiritual death is our own doing through sin. On the other hand, our physical death was brought about by Adam. Justice then means that God has undid the sin of Adam and the physical death that was brought to all of us. We will all be resurrected. Do you not believe this?

    Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. (All will overcome physical death via the resurrection of Christ).

    Justification to life is NOT talking about physical life/resurrection but is in reference to ETERNAL LIFE, the undoing of SPIRITUAL DEATH.

    This has been explained to you several times now, to which you offer no reasoned re****al, but your Mormon-induced belief. Here's a commentary which might shed light on your erroneous understanding of the p***age:


    Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary on Romans 5:

    19. For, &c.--better, "For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so by the obedience of the One shall the many be made righteous." On this great verse observe: First, By the "obedience" of Christ here is plainly not meant more than what divines call His active obedience, as distinguished from His sufferings and death; it is the entire work of Christ in its obediential character. Our Lord Himself represents even His death as His great act of obedience to the Father: "This commandment (that is, to lay down and resume His life) have I received of My Father" ( Jhn 10:8 ). Second, The significant word twice rendered made, does not signify to work a change upon a person or thing, but to cons***ute or ordain, as will be seen from all the places where it is used. Here, accordingly, it is intended to express that judicial act which holds men, in virtue of their connection with Adam, as sinners; and, in connection with Christ, as righteous. Third, The change of tense from the past to the future--"as through Adam we were made sinners, so through Christ we shall be made righteous"--delightfully expresses the enduring character of the act, and of the economy to which such acts belong, in contrast with the for-ever-past ruin of believers in Adam. (See on JF & B for Ro 6:5). Fourth, The "all men" of Rom 5:18 and the "many" of Rom 5:19 are the same party, though under a slightly different aspect. In the latter case, the contrast is between the one representative (Adam--Christ) and the many whom he represented; in the former case, it is between the one head (Adam--Christ) and the human race, affected for death and life respectively by the actings of that one. Only in this latter case it is the redeemed family of man that is alone in view; it is humanity as actually lost, but also as actually saved, as ruined and recovered. Such as refuse to fall in with the high purpose of God to cons***ute His Son a "second Adam," the Head of a new race, and as impenitent and unbelieving finally perish, have no place in this section of the Epistle, whose sole object is to show how God repairs in the second Adam the evil done by the first. (Thus the doctrine of universal restoration has no place here. Thus too the forced interpretation by which the "justification of all" is made to mean a justification merely in possibility and offer to all, and the "justification of the many" to mean the actual justification of as many as believe [ALFORD, &c.], is completely avoided. And thus the harshness of comparing a whole fallen family with a recovered part is got rid of. However true it be in fact that part of mankind is not saved, this is not the aspect in which the subject is here presented. It is totals that are compared and contrasted; and it is the same total in two successive conditions--namely, the human race as ruined in Adam and recovered in Christ).

  14. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    [QUOTE][QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    Uh, not according to the Bible's MEANING of the term, BJ. You expose this in the very next sentence:

    No, I understand BIBLICALLY that we're BORN INTO SIN. We were physically born DEAD ON ARRIVAL SPIRITUALLY. Again, your premise is that people are somehow born "neutral" and it's only BY some willful sinning that one THEN spiritually "dies".
    We are neutral when we are born or spiritually alive because Christ atoned for the sins of Adam. Therefore, infants who die are not dead spiritually.

    The Mormon understanding of "spiritual death" is extremely DEFICIENT, Julie.
    The Mormon understanding of spiritual death takes into account the atonement which overcame Adam's sins. If you believe that all men are born spiritually dead, then you must believe that infants who die are dead to God forever.


    Justification to life is NOT talking about physical life/resurrection but is in reference to ETERNAL LIFE, the undoing of SPIRITUAL DEATH.
    No the justification that is to ALL men is to physical death. God is a just God and therefore, would not have us perish because of the acts of Adam. Therefore, we all will be resurrected. Our spiritual death is our own doing through sin, not because of Adam.

    This has been explained to you several times now, to which you offer no reasoned re****al, but your Mormon-induced belief. Here's a commentary which might shed light on your erroneous understanding of the p***age:
    Why on earth would I believe the commentary of a bunch of men? I have explained myself well. I read the scriptures as they have been written...I read ALL to mean ALL and MANYto mean MANY. I don't read ALL to mean partial or not all. My way of reading Romans makes way more sense. Your way condemns infants to hell as they are born dead not because of their own sins,but because of Adams and Christ's atonement is of no effect to the sins of Adam. How can God be a just God if he holds us accountable for the sins we have never committed?

    Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary on Romans 5:

    Fourth, The "all men" of Rom 5:18 and the "many" of Rom 5:19 are the same party, though under a slightly different aspect.
    Why on earth did Paul use different words if he meant the same thing? Look at the way they spin this to get the meaning they want. It is quite clear without all the explanation.

    You have yet to answer my question...do you believe all will be resurrected or not?
    Last edited by BigJulie; 06-18-2009 at 10:24 PM.

  15. #115
    Fig-bearing Thistle
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    What part of CONTEXT don't you understand?
    Do you have a hierarchy for Bible verses or something that helps you determine context? Some verse in Romans being at the top perhaps?

  16. #116
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    Do you have a hierarchy for Bible verses or something that helps you determine context? Some verse in Romans being at the top perhaps?
    Why...YES!! But this goes for ALL of the Bible, not just Romans:

    Explicit texts help one to interpret non-explicit or implicit texts.

    Context, however, establishes ITSELF...and NOT according to some "hierarchy".

  17. #117
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Father_JD
    Uh, not according to the Bible's MEANING of the term, BJ. You expose this in the very next sentence:

    No, I understand BIBLICALLY that we're BORN INTO SIN. We were physically born DEAD ON ARRIVAL SPIRITUALLY. Again, your premise is that people are somehow born "neutral" and it's only BY some willful sinning that one THEN spiritually "dies".

    We are neutral when we are born or spiritually alive because Christ atoned for the sins of Adam. Therefore, infants who die are not dead spiritually.
    Not according to the Bible:

    Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

    It's NOT referring to the sex act as "sinful" but that we are BORN INTO A SINFUL CONDITION.

    Now instead of offering yet more Mormon belief, ADDRESS this verse.

    Quote:
    The Mormon understanding of "spiritual death" is extremely DEFICIENT, Julie.

    The Mormon understanding of spiritual death takes into account the atonement which overcame Adam's sins. If you believe that all men are born spiritually dead, then you must believe that infants who die are dead to God forever.
    The atonement's efficacy of overcoming spiritual death is FOR THE REDEEMED AND ONLY THE REDEEMED. NOT for mankind in general!! Infants are in God's hands one way or another. We can INFER from some texts that GRACE is applied to them should they die in infancy.



    Quote:
    Justification to life is NOT talking about physical life/resurrection but is in reference to ETERNAL LIFE, the undoing of SPIRITUAL DEATH.

    No the justification that is to ALL men is to physical death. God is a just God and therefore, would not have us perish because of the acts of Adam. Therefore, we all will be resurrected. Our spiritual death is our own doing through sin, not because of Adam.

    That's your Mormon opinion, it just doesn't MEASURE up to what scripture teaches: Justification does NOT REFER TO PHYSICAL DEATH, but to be declared forensically INNOCENT in the spiritual sense.


    Quote:
    This has been explained to you several times now, to which you offer no reasoned re****al, but your Mormon-induced belief. Here's a commentary which might shed light on your erroneous understanding of the p***age:

    Why on earth would I believe the commentary of a bunch of men?

    Uh, how about because they KNOW the Bible a heck of a lot better than you?????


    I have explained myself well. I read the scriptures as they have been written...I read ALL to mean ALL and MANYto mean MANY. I don't read ALL to mean partial or not all. My way of reading Romans makes way more sense. Your way condemns infants to hell as they are born dead not because of their own sins,but because of Adams and Christ's atonement is of no effect to the sins of Adam. How can God be a just God if he holds us accountable for the sins we have never committed?
    No, the Bible's way does NOT condemn infants to hell...this is your straw-man argument based upon your erroneous understanding of THE FALL. We ARE held accountable for the sins we commit...so who said anything about sins "never committed". As typical, you REFUSE to engage your OWN condition, but instead prefer to bring up either the hypothetical "pygmy in Africa" or the dead infant scenario as if this answers YOUR dilemma.


    Quote:
    Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary on Romans 5:

    Fourth, The "all men" of Rom 5:18 and the "many" of Rom 5:19 are the same party, though under a slightly different aspect.

    Why on earth did Paul use different words if he meant the same thing? Look at the way they spin this to get the meaning they want. It is quite clear without all the explanation.
    It's BASED UPON OTHER SCRIPTURES and in comparison one with the other. It's Mormons who REFUSE to read the Bible in CONTEXT, but prefer instead to pull out individual verses OUT OF CONTEXT which you think support Mormon conditions.

    You have yet to answer my question...do you believe all will be resurrected or not?
    I've answered this several times:

    The Redeemed are RESURRECTED UNTO ETERNAL LIFE.
    The ****ed are RESURRECTED UNTO ETERNAL DEATH.

    Got it now?

  18. #118
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Father_JD
    Uh, not according to the Bible's MEANING of the term, BJ. You expose this in the very next sentence:

    No, I understand BIBLICALLY that we're BORN INTO SIN. We were physically born DEAD ON ARRIVAL SPIRITUALLY. Again, your premise is that people are somehow born "neutral" and it's only BY some willful sinning that one THEN spiritually "dies".
    Then according to you, the atonement has no affect.

    Not according to the Bible:

    Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
    This verse makes Romans 5 so important. David could say, in sin I was conceived, but because of the atonemen of Christ, the sin of Adam is erased and I am free to choose for myself eternal life or eternal death. Of course, the atonement hadn't happened yet, so imagine the rejoicing when Paul explained that Christ had given all a clean slate to start with.

    It's NOT referring to the sex act as "sinful" but that we are BORN INTO A SINFUL CONDITION.

    Now instead of offering yet more Mormon belief, ADDRESS this verse.
    I did.

    Quote:
    The Mormon understanding of "spiritual death" is extremely DEFICIENT, Julie.
    The Mormon understanding of spiritual death doesn't just look at the effects of Adam on sin, but the effects of Christ on life.



    The atonement's efficacy of overcoming spiritual death is FOR THE REDEEMED AND ONLY THE REDEEMED. NOT for mankind in general!! Infants are in God's hands one way or another. We can INFER from some texts that GRACE is applied to them should they die in infancy.
    Then to you, only the redeemed should be resurrected. But all are, and there lies your problem. As grace is applied to infants, it is applied to all men---why do infants get this grace and all men don't? Because men are capable of bringing about their own spiritual death by their own choices. Infants on the other hand, have never had the ability to accept Christ and therefore are not held accountable for something he have never been able to do, namely sin. There is no INFERING if you understand Romans 5 about infants----there is sure knowledge that they are not held accountable for the sins of Adam.


    Quote:
    Justification to life is NOT talking about physical life/resurrection but is in reference to ETERNAL LIFE, the undoing of SPIRITUAL DEATH.
    No it is not. If that was the case, it would not say ALL men. All men will be resurrected, but only some man will take that opportunity given by Christ, the cleaning of the slate, to have eternal life.


    That's your Mormon opinion, it just doesn't MEASURE up to what scripture teaches: Justification does NOT REFER TO PHYSICAL DEATH, but to be declared forensically INNOCENT in the spiritual sense.
    My Mormon oppinion is the truth. Your opinion leaves infants being inferred to God's grace. I read it as it states, ALL means ALL and many means many...your have a bunch of scholars who haven't got accountabity figured out and so they make it fit their thinking rather than just reading the words.


    Quote:
    This has been explained to you several times now, to which you offer no reasoned re****al, but your Mormon-induced belief. Here's a commentary which might shed light on your erroneous understanding of the p***age:
    You keep going to commentaries. Just read the p***age. It makes perfect sense. I don't need light to be shed on the perfect light already given in the gospel. Your explanation leaves us in the dark as to infants. Do you think God would be so cruel to young parents who have lost a child as to leave them INFERRING what will happen to their baby? Don't lecture me about my Mormon-induced belief. Your corrupt men induced belief shreds the love of God into something that has to be INFERRED.




    Uh, how about because they KNOW the Bible a heck of a lot better than you?????
    I know the Holy Ghost and that superceeds what any man says.



    No, the Bible's way does NOT condemn infants to hell...this is your straw-man argument based upon your erroneous understanding of THE FALL. We ARE held accountable for the sins we commit...so who said anything about sins "never committed". As typical, you REFUSE to engage your OWN condition, but instead prefer to bring up either the hypothetical "pygmy in Africa" or the dead infant scenario as if this answers YOUR dilemma.
    Wait a minute...first you say that the well being of infants can be INFERRED that some type of grace applies. Now you are saying that we are only held accountable for the sins we commit---but before you were saying that we are held accountable for the sins Adam committed---remember, being conceived in sin stuff? You were the one who talked about sins never committed because you are the one insisting that we are born spiritually dead and that life is only given to those Christ choses to redeem. To me, Romans explains how the sin of Adam is overcome and life is again given to all men---it is now up to them whether or not they sin and cause ****ation for ourselves. I thought you whole argument is that we are born ****ed (in a sinful state) because of the sin of Adam? Which one is it? Did Christ overcome this sin of Adam for all men or not?




    It's BASED UPON OTHER SCRIPTURES and in comparison one with the other. It's Mormons who REFUSE to read the Bible in CONTEXT, but prefer instead to pull out individual verses OUT OF CONTEXT which you think support Mormon conditions.
    I read the Bible as is, which is why I do not need to go to a commentary to explain it. I just repeat what it says.

    I've answered this several times:

    The Redeemed are RESURRECTED UNTO ETERNAL LIFE.
    The ****ed are RESURRECTED UNTO ETERNAL DEATH.

    Got it now?
    [/QUOTE] Eternal ****ation---when did eternal ****ation turn into eternal death?

    So, you agree that all are resurrected? How and why? Wasn't the promise to Adam death (both spiritual and physical) came into the world because of his sin? How was that overcome physically?
    Last edited by BigJulie; 06-19-2009 at 03:07 PM.

  19. #119
    stemelbow
    Guest

    Default

    JD...you have to prove your point, not just fill up threads with words.

    Here you say:

    First we must DEFINE terms, figgie. No doubt you're thinking of such verses as "God resists the proud, but gives GRACE to the humble" as a "response from God to man for the choices mankind makes, etc".

    So, for your own edification I'm gonna give you the uses of the word, "Grace" which is the English word for "Charis".

    I'll be happy to address "faith" afterwards. What you apparently seem to forget/ignore (take your pick) is the reality that CONTEXT DETERMINES MEANING.

    So without any further ado, please read this entry on "grace" and THEN ask your questions.
    Show someone that the p***age in 1 Peter which you allude to holds a meaning of grace as something other than salvific. You never tried to do this in the other thread. how about trying it in this one?

    love,
    stem

  20. #120
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stemelbow View Post
    JD...you have to prove your point, not just fill up threads with words.

    Here you say:



    Show someone that the p***age in 1 Peter which you allude to holds a meaning of grace as something other than salvific. You never tried to do this in the other thread. how about trying it in this one?

    love,
    stem

    Sure. Read the CONTEXT and weep, Stemmy:

    1Pe 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:

    1Pe 5:2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;


    1Pe 5:3 Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.


    1Pe 5:4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.

    1Pe 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all [of you] be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

    1Pe 5:6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:

    1Pe 5:7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.


    1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:


    1Pe 5:9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.


    1Pe 5:10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle [you].

    Note:

    To WHOM is the epistle written?

    TO THE ELDERS OF THE FLOCK, I.E. BELIEVERS ALREADY IN THE FAITH AND LEADERS. This is enough to demonstrate that the meaning of "grace" here can NOT be of the salvivic kind.

    Note:

    The context also engages the believers SUFFERING for the faith. A promise to those who "humble themselves" that in due time God will exalt them.

    Again, point 1 dispels your notion.

  21. #121
    Fig-bearing Thistle
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post
    Sure. Read the CONTEXT and weep, Stemmy:

    1Pe 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:

    1Pe 5:2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;


    1Pe 5:3 Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.


    1Pe 5:4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.

    1Pe 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all [of you] be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

    1Pe 5:6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:

    1Pe 5:7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.


    1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:


    1Pe 5:9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.


    1Pe 5:10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle [you].

    Note:

    To WHOM is the epistle written?

    TO THE ELDERS OF THE FLOCK, I.E. BELIEVERS ALREADY IN THE FAITH AND LEADERS. This is enough to demonstrate that the meaning of "grace" here can NOT be of the salvivic kind.

    Note:

    The context also engages the believers SUFFERING for the faith. A promise to those who "humble themselves" that in due time God will exalt them.

    Again, point 1 dispels your notion.
    Nowhere does it indicate that the words:

    "for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble."

    is NOT a UNIVERSAL and self-evident principle that Peter is teaching and which applies to all of human-kind, (not just elders). But you seem to think it is a principle that applies to no one in the world, EXCEPT Elders who are already saved?

    That seems like a hyper-narrow very, to restrict the application of this principle to Elders in the church, and only Elders.

    IMO.

    Thanks
    Last edited by Fig-bearing Thistle; 06-20-2009 at 07:01 AM.

  22. #122
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    Nowhere does it indicate that the words:

    "for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble."

    is NOT a UNIVERSAL and self-evident principle that Peter is teaching and which applies to all of human-kind, (not just elders). But you seem to think it is a principle that applies to no one in the world, EXCEPT Elders who are already saved?

    That seems like a hyper-narrow very, to restrict the application of this principle to Elders in the church, and only Elders.

    IMO.

    Thanks

    No, it's EVIDENT from the context that CHRISTIANS (Elders, younger, etc.)HAVE ALREADY RECEIEVED SALVIVIC GRACE, therefore this usage of "grace" is something other.

    You can go "nuh-uh" as much as you want...the context says you're in error, Fig.

  23. #123
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    This is a question regarding the gift of Grace, and Faith.

    What proof can JD and others provide that prove that the gift of Grace and Faith is NOT a RESPONSE from God to Man for the choices Mankind makes, and actions he undertakes.

    .

    Grace does not sit around watching TV until it notices someone do something first....

    Faith is a "response" to Grace working in our hearts.

    just look at Romans 5:8 to see this in Scripture "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

    This is how it is with us all...

  24. #124
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    so in other words,,,,,God always takes the first step...God starts the ball rolling....God reaches out to man....

    God reaches out and starts to save people that have not even given him a 2nd thought.....

  25. #125
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    This is a question regarding the gift of Grace, and Faith.

    What proof can JD and others provide that prove that the gift of Grace and Faith is NOT a RESPONSE from God to Man for the choices Mankind makes, and actions he undertakes.

    Thanks.




    I think this is a great question.....




    I need to think of a more ways to address this question....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •