Comments for The Preacher http://thepreacher.cac2.net Fear God and keep His commandments; for this is the whole duty of man - Ecclesiastes 12:13 Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:33:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on On Parenting by Susanne http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/23/on-parenting/comment-page-1/#comment-1192 Susanne Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:33:50 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/?p=298#comment-1192 Nicely said. :) Nicely said. :)

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by Susanne http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1183 Susanne Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:06:20 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1183 OK...thanks. I'll try to look a bit more specifically/contextually and see if that helps. OK…thanks. I'll try to look a bit more specifically/contextually and see if that helps.

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1182 gymbrall Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:46:40 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1182 Hey Ariel, Thanks for stopping by. How goes the church plant? I think I called you right around Christmas to see if you wanted to come to DC with me on Christmas Eve to protest the health care bill. I hope things are going well, Charles Hey Ariel,
Thanks for stopping by. How goes the church plant?
I think I called you right around Christmas to see if you wanted to come to DC with me on Christmas Eve to protest the health care bill.

I hope things are going well,
Charles

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by Ariel http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1169 Ariel Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:27:57 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1169 I also think the birth analogy is good. The way I sometimes communicate is that prior to regeneration, we have no alternative to knee-jerk sinning. Literally no other option. After Christ enters our lives, we have what we never had before--the option to do good and enjoy it. Not that plenty of knee-jerk sinning doesn't continue for some time... I think I owe you a phone call. I also think the birth analogy is good. The way I sometimes communicate is that prior to regeneration, we have no alternative to knee-jerk sinning. Literally no other option. After Christ enters our lives, we have what we never had before–the option to do good and enjoy it. Not that plenty of knee-jerk sinning doesn't continue for some time…

I think I owe you a phone call.

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1167 gymbrall Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:56:40 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1167 There are two things that come to immediately to mind: One, When God talks to those who He knows will not believe in Him, at the very least, because it is recorded in Scripture, it is primarily written for those who do believe. God is showing those of us who do believe, His faithfulness and His nature. When I read God's words to those who will not believe, I respond to His words. They provoke a fear in me, and an awareness of His love. But the second thing, is that Scripture is specific. I would recommend looking specifically at passages where God is saying these kind of things. Very often I have found that when I go back and read the chapters leading up to the section I am puzzling over, I have been looking at it far too narrowly or out of context. As far as the subcription to comments, I'll try to check that out. I want it to work... There are two things that come to immediately to mind:
One, When God talks to those who He knows will not believe in Him, at the very least, because it is recorded in Scripture, it is primarily written for those who do believe. God is showing those of us who do believe, His faithfulness and His nature. When I read God's words to those who will not believe, I respond to His words. They provoke a fear in me, and an awareness of His love.
But the second thing, is that Scripture is specific. I would recommend looking specifically at passages where God is saying these kind of things. Very often I have found that when I go back and read the chapters leading up to the section I am puzzling over, I have been looking at it far too narrowly or out of context.

As far as the subcription to comments, I'll try to check that out. I want it to work…

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by Susanne http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1166 Susanne Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:54:17 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1166 Well, Susan is right, but I liked your attempt and really the Romans 11 verses summed it up. Only God knows His own mind so my attempts at trying to make sense of things are a wasted effort. (PS...I subscribed to the comments, but haven't gotten ANY....good thing I keep checking back here. Thanks for all your replies. I really appreciate them.) Well, Susan is right, but I liked your attempt and really the Romans 11 verses summed it up. Only God knows His own mind so my attempts at trying to make sense of things are a wasted effort.

(PS…I subscribed to the comments, but haven't gotten ANY….good thing I keep checking back here. Thanks for all your replies. I really appreciate them.)

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1165 gymbrall Wed, 17 Feb 2010 02:42:24 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1165 Susan thought I might not be answering the question you were really asking, and if I'm not, please don't hesitate to ask it again or in a different way. Have a good evening, Charles Susan thought I might not be answering the question you were really asking, and if I'm not, please don't hesitate to ask it again or in a different way.

Have a good evening,
Charles

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by Susanne http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1164 Susanne Wed, 17 Feb 2010 02:39:27 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1164 I really like those verses you quoted from Romans 11. Thanks for your reply. I really like those verses you quoted from Romans 11.

Thanks for your reply.

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by gymbrall http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1163 gymbrall Tue, 16 Feb 2010 23:44:43 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1163 I don't know any other way to answer this, but with Scripture. The hermeneutic that I use for reading and interpreting scripture, is that just like other written works there are places that touch on a topic and then there are passages that are written about a topic. All throughout Scripture, God touches on aspects of election and his sovereignty (in Exodus where he says, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, in John 3 where Christ says that all those given Him by his Father will believe, In Acts, where it says that all those who were ordained to eternal life believed, in Isaiah 46 where God says, <i>For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, "My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure"; calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it.</i> And there are many more. Here's a good <a href="http:\/\/www.tentmaker.org\/lists\/SovereigntyScriptures.html" target="_blank">site</a> But the passage that speaks the most clearly and on the specific topic of election is Romans 9. I know a lot of people don't like it, and I've heard a lot of bad attempts at explaining it away. In the end, I got tired of trying to apologize for God. To the best that I can see from Scripture this is who He says He is. In this passage, Paul makes an orderly argument regarding the sovereignty of God in election. He starts out declaring that God loved Jacob and hated Esau and he did it apart from their works. And then he asks his first question, "Is there unrighteousness with God?", and by this he means, is God behaving in a way that is inconsistent with what He has promised and so in response he goes back in Scripture to the reference from Exodus about mercy and then he goes to Pharaoh where God tells him that He raised him up for no other reason than to destroy him and to make the name of God great. And he says, God has mercy on who he will have mercy and who he will, he hardens. And then he asks the question that you are asking. "How can God still find fault? For what man has done other than what God has made Him to be?" And the answer is similar to God's answer to Job, (who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Were you there when I laid the foundations of the earth?) In this case, the answer goes like this: <blockquote>Who are you to speak back against God? When a potter makes a thing from clay for his own pleasure, can the clay speak back? Does the potter owe the clay something? Can he go to a single bank of clay and from it take two lumps and from the one fashion a thing for honorable use and from the other a thing for dishonor?</blockquote> Now, there are some things I'd like to be clear about in this passage. This passage is NOT about man knowing who will be saved and who will not. It is first and foremost about the fact that God has made man for His glory. When we make man the center of the gospel, we rob something from God. The story of the bible is not God saving man, it is that before time, God the Father, Son, and Spirit conspired together to glorify themselves. That they chose to do so through glorifying and saving someone so undeserving of man is a benefit that we receive, but it is not the point of the whole thing, and when we make it the point of the whole thing we subvert the gospel itself. Romans 1-11 is a building up of the gospel taking in the picture of the Jews and the Gentiles and in many ways, is complete telling of the Gospel. It culminates in Romans 11, and this is how it does so: <blockquote>O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? <b>For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever.</b> Amen. </blockquote> I don't know any other way to answer this, but with Scripture.
The hermeneutic that I use for reading and interpreting scripture, is that just like other written works there are places that touch on a topic and then there are passages that are written about a topic. All throughout Scripture, God touches on aspects of election and his sovereignty (in Exodus where he says, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, in John 3 where Christ says that all those given Him by his Father will believe, In Acts, where it says that all those who were ordained to eternal life believed, in Isaiah 46 where God says, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, "My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure"; calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it.
And there are many more. Here's a good site

But the passage that speaks the most clearly and on the specific topic of election is Romans 9. I know a lot of people don't like it, and I've heard a lot of bad attempts at explaining it away. In the end, I got tired of trying to apologize for God. To the best that I can see from Scripture this is who He says He is. In this passage, Paul makes an orderly argument regarding the sovereignty of God in election. He starts out declaring that God loved Jacob and hated Esau and he did it apart from their works. And then he asks his first question, "Is there unrighteousness with God?", and by this he means, is God behaving in a way that is inconsistent with what He has promised and so in response he goes back in Scripture to the reference from Exodus about mercy and then he goes to Pharaoh where God tells him that He raised him up for no other reason than to destroy him and to make the name of God great. And he says, God has mercy on who he will have mercy and who he will, he hardens.
And then he asks the question that you are asking. "How can God still find fault? For what man has done other than what God has made Him to be?" And the answer is similar to God's answer to Job, (who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Were you there when I laid the foundations of the earth?)
In this case, the answer goes like this:

Who are you to speak back against God? When a potter makes a thing from clay for his own pleasure, can the clay speak back? Does the potter owe the clay something? Can he go to a single bank of clay and from it take two lumps and from the one fashion a thing for honorable use and from the other a thing for dishonor?

Now, there are some things I'd like to be clear about in this passage. This passage is NOT about man knowing who will be saved and who will not. It is first and foremost about the fact that God has made man for His glory. When we make man the center of the gospel, we rob something from God. The story of the bible is not God saving man, it is that before time, God the Father, Son, and Spirit conspired together to glorify themselves. That they chose to do so through glorifying and saving someone so undeserving of man is a benefit that we receive, but it is not the point of the whole thing, and when we make it the point of the whole thing we subvert the gospel itself.
Romans 1-11 is a building up of the gospel taking in the picture of the Jews and the Gentiles and in many ways, is complete telling of the Gospel. It culminates in Romans 11, and this is how it does so:

O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

]]> Comment on A few thoughts about free will by Susanne http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-1161 Susanne Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:55:25 +0000 http://thepreacher.cac2.net/2010/02/15/a-few-thoughts-about-free-will/#comment-1161 I understand what you mean and it does make sense that GOD is the one who opens our eyes. What I have a hard problem with are the times God seems to lament the fact that people don't follow Him. How can they when they are blind? How can dead people follow God?? It makes God seem crazy for not realizing the reason people don't follow Him is simply because He has not allowed them to. So if anyone is to be "blamed" for their lack of understanding and following...it's not the blind/dead person. Am I missing something? I understand what you mean and it does make sense that GOD is the one who opens our eyes. What I have a hard problem with are the times God seems to lament the fact that people don't follow Him. How can they when they are blind? How can dead people follow God??

It makes God seem crazy for not realizing the reason people don't follow Him is simply because He has not allowed them to. So if anyone is to be "blamed" for their lack of understanding and following…it's not the blind/dead person.

Am I missing something?

]]>