Reformed-cross

Gary: Its a terrible world we make for ourselves that will not allow for course corrections along the way. Remember, if you will learn anything, much of it will not be your own ideas. By the way, if youre thinking things through, then reasoning is a part of the process. Otherwise you must be waiting for a kind of un-reasoned inspiration like the apostles. Since the canon is closed the Holy Spirit restricts his teaching to what is within the sacred text and that puts you in the same position as the rest the Christians. Plus its always safer to offer a dismisal than it is to put out on the table what you really believe, instead have a go at it. R.E.

Your response was rather elaborate, thank you. This portion is all I have had time to go back to study. morphe when used 3 times in the new testament and several more in the LXX seem to reference change in the visual appearance of something but context appears to make it something more in Philippians due to the rest of the verse in question "thought it not robbery to be equal with God". There is much debate as to the meaning of this text. And it is nonsensical to say that it is affirming that he was equal with God due to the use of the terms 'thought it not robbery'. I cannot see it as anything other than his lack of desire to attain unto the fathers place or position. Which is supported by other scriptures that speak to the subordination of Jesus to the Father. The real key to this passage is found in the ἐκένωσεν or emptying. You say that it is not a divesting himself of Godhood, which I understand to mean an emptying of his divine power. But I look at the use of the term as it is applied else where and must disagree. Rom 4:14 For if they which are of the law [be] heirs, faith is made void2758 , and the promise made of none effect : Faith made void - 1Cr 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize , but to preach the gospel : not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect2758 . The cross being made of none effect 1Cr 9:15 But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for [it were] better for me to die , than that any man should make2758 my glorying void2758 . make Pauls glorying void. 2Cr 9:3 Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain2758 in this behalf; that, as I said , ye may be ready : boasting having been in vain Phl 2:7 But made2758 himself of no reputation2758 , and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: Twice it was used in the LXX in Jeremiah for אָמַל which speaks of weakness, exhaustion or to grow feeble. But here we wish to say it only means he took off his kingly robe and put on sack cloth and ashes? I can't see that in this. His divestment left him void of his godly divine power and ability that he had when he was in the form of God. The use of the term demands the emphasis of vanity or emptiness and when applied to the idea that Jesus the Son of God only acquired a human body but remained a powerful God if fails to do so. Moreover, it is impossible for someone who has all divine power to receive yet more power. Jesus received power upon his baptism of the Holy Spirit according to the book of acts. As well as he never displayed any act of power before then. The scripture declares openly that Jesus grew in wisdom. This is something that God cannot do unless there was a divesting of wisdom to say the least as he was only wise. Although your explanations sound good, they are wanting against the evidence that is contrary to Jesus maintaining his divine powers through the incarnation. Rather it suggests that after 30 years of perfect living as a mere man, God the Father openly declared him as his Son, gave him the Holy Spirit and power, and from that time forth unto the cross he was indwelt by the fullness of the Godhead or divinity bodily. Which would leave room for explanation of his crying out to God the Father for forsaking him upon the tree as it is entirely possible and plausible that the Holy Spirit left him to die alone there as a mere man. God cannot die. Some thoughts as I meditate on what has been said, Gary Hello: I said earlier to you in another post that I believe in the hypstatic union without the kenosis theory. The reason is because you have to interpret the scripture as telling you that God "changed" to a lesser being. To divest himself or to empty himself cannot mean that God is now only 70% God or something lesser. God is unchangeable and you can concordance that if you want. Therefore in light of clear texts, we interpret more vague texts with that boundry. Secondly, being filled with the Sprit is in regards to his humanity not his divinity. If Christ 'received' a filling of the Holy Spirit and yet "has the fullness of the Godhead bodily" we must modify our interpretation from how sinful, non-divine men understand it to improve them. Meaning that in respect to his humanity Jesus was filled with the Sprit, but in regards to his divinity, he need not be filled with the Spirit since Christ has the Spirit without measure. In short, Kenosis works only if you do not believe in the orthodox hypostatic union, or if you do not understand that to divest Christ of any measure of divinity ( even if its with sophisticated argument) you do not have a Christ of scripture but a kind of demi-god. Its because of those clear texts that declare his unchangeableness as God, Pauls use of emptying into a form of 'lesser' God-ness will not stand the test of critical analysis. As I said, to believe contrary to the hypostatic union as I gave you in the chalcedon creed puts you into difficulties with other scripture texts, then of course you must also modify those and so goes the downward movement towards error. The Philippians text is telling us that Christ didnt have to 'grab on to equality with God' as though he was stealing a prize. In fact just the opposite, its because he is fully divine and unchangeable that his emptying himself reveals a condescension to our level in the form of his humanity, not the lessening of his divinity. When interpreted this way, it eliminates the error of kenosis theory and I believe rightly explains what emptying was meant to convey. Christ is and will always be entirely human and is and will always be perfectly God. If you think for a moment, you will find this paradox in numerous places through out the scripture and its wonderful to see. But, if you tamper with the greek text and morph it into a proof of something that Christ is not or did not do, in the end you lose all the other wonderful examples of condescension and paradox. R.E.

Eleanor, Thank you for you inquiry. To ask whether I be 'over-thinking' it is to imply that it is much simpler than I am seeking to understand? This is how I perceive what you have said. I completely understand and agree with your thoughts here concerning the loss of righteousness and holiness as being a part of the 'image' of God that we suffered loss of in the fall. That is about us in dealing with the 'image' of God as a moral agent. I was proposing the 'image' of us in make up. How it is that we are like God. What he has revealed to us about him through us as Romans 1 speaks of when it says, "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them." What I have been seeing is more of a 'how' we work thing and what I have seen so far has really helped me to understanding what is necessary to restoring the complete image of God in me. My understanding of what separates man from God is that man became 'like' God in being able to make moral judgments and when mans judgment conflicts with Gods righteous moral judgment then man is pitted against God instead of aligned with him in perfect fellowship. With knowledge of this I seek to know God and his righteous moral standard that I may indeed be one with him in this aspect of my being. I consider knowledge of how 'humans' work in light of what the scriptures teach an important tool in the battle against the works of darkness. There are many things that I don't know that it is entirely possible that God may reveal unto me as I grow in my walk with him as my Father, Jesus as my Lord and the Spirit of Holiness as my guide. Most of which will be foolishness to those he does not reveal things too. One cannot have true understanding of anything outside of God the Father sending the spirit of understanding upon a man to reveal that which he wants him to know for his own purpose. The same with knowledge, wisdom, fear of the Lord, power and counsel. To me this is why fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. A mighty respect for who we are dealing with is a catalyst unto holiness. In Christ, Gary Well, I try to make things easy on myself. I've finally gotten the number of my brain cells down to a manageable size. If Scripture doesn't speak to it, I don't "worry my pretty little head about it." Only our spiritual image of God is dealt with in Scripture. And for me, where Scripture makes an end to teaching, I must make an end to learning. Because to pass muster with me, revelation and interpretation must be authoritative. In the faith, Eleanor Only our spiritual image of God is dealt with in scripture. Absolutely. God doesn't have a physical image so to speak. He is invisible. Our problem tends to be that we can't get away from thinking of things in a carnal sense to see that which is truly spiritual. Man has to completely divorce himself from his physical tabernacle if there be any hope of understanding what he is. Absolutely. Revelation and interpretation must be authoritative. And all revelation and interpretations authority is rooted in the inner witness of the Holy Spirit correct? Since the bible clearly says things which are opposite each other the only clear understanding of the truth presented must come from God through his Holy Spirit, right? Once, before I had any dealings with the Holy Spirit directly I was taught solely of man, who may or may not have been led of the Spirit, but a day came when I began to hear the Spirit speak within me and begin to correct my understanding of the scriptures via revelation. My authority rests in the foundation of what is presented in scripture and expounded upon by that which indwells me. Whether I am correct in my conclusions is based upon my ability to be able to hear and understand him who is within me. And he has clearly explained to me that I do not always do so and encourages me to dialog with others that he might use such conversations to guide me toward the definite reality of truth. He has brought me into direct contact with those who are in different forms of error and taught me the underlying principles of their error that I might better understand truth. This spirit has never led me to commit any sin and only seeks to conform me into the image of Christ as he is revealed to me in truth. My source of authority began as the bible alone and my understanding of it. Today it is the bible as the Word of God to be understood as the Spirit reveals the truth of it. Thanks for your reply and revelation of yourself to me. Gary Hello gdemoss: Fun questions and good for the heart and mind to think and ponder. A couple of things. In regards to "form" and"image". The greek text speaks about Christ's condescension in the term of 'morphe' where he is in the morphe tou theou 'form of God' to the morphen doulou 'form of a servant'. In regards to understanding Christ in his two natures, when Christ empties himself (kenosis) it is not a divesting himself of either Godhood or manhood, but it appears to be more in terms of condescension such as when a king would dress as a commoner; though the clothing depicts a low rank in society his person is nevertheless unchanged from any appearance of 'ourward form'. You make a differentiation between form and image, which are two different greek words. 1 morphe =form used in Philip 2:6; 2 charakter = image used in Hebrews 1:3. Though you make a differentiation, which I agree with in part, when consulting the hebrew word for image=tselem is much closer to form than character. But I believe the sacred authors are intending to say contexually two different things. Paul is speaking about condescension and therefore reveals the 'morph-ing' Christ from God to servant; the writer of Hebrews speaks of Christ as an 'exact stamping' or an exact carving in terms of the person of God the Son representing God the Father; which by the way is a mind-blowing revelation of the person of the Father. So in regards to man being made in the 'image of God' Ill quote John Gill I believe the above quote captures what I believe to be a very concise explanation and exactly what I believe. Our creation in the image of God represent both form in body (because Christ will be future incarnate) and in spirit because our character is to represent God on the earth spiritually, morally, ethically. In regards to the Trinity and the trichotomy of man it may be that you are on the right track and maybe not. I havent thought what youve said through enough to yea or nay it. Here's what I do understand. The Trinity can be looked at analogously by looking at various things that are created ( and this is where we run into deep trouble) to arrive at a simlitude or a representation of God from them. Such as water=steam, water, ice or the egg=yoke,white,shell and other such things. They loosely show that 3 can be one. But all created things fail if pressed to far. Why? Because God is uncreated, without beginning person. He is qualitatively infinitely beyond us as well as quantitatively infinitely beyond us. Because of the nature of God and the nature of man, analogies when pressed to hard always fail to pass the test. Paul in his most concise explanation of the indwelling Godhead says... Gr. (hoti en autōi katoikei pān to plērōma tēs theotētos sōmatikōs). Please allow Robertson from Robertsons word pictures bring this explanation. What interested me was the statement "not just one or more aspects of the Godhead" but the "fullness"=pleroma of God dwelt in Christ bodily. In effect the greatest manifestation of the Trinity is Christ (when rightly understood) and not as has been done from the other Christological errors. Lastly, not all believe in a trichotomy of man, many believe in a dichotomy (soul and body), the spirit being a part of the soul. But thats another thread. I think its tremendous to open up things like this to scrutiny, examination, thinking and questions. Bare dismissal of 'deep things' will leave the deep things for the ungodly and the cultists to twist and deform for their own ungodly and corrupt agenda. Bravo Gary. R.E.

Pretty Much For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 What He Says I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. Revelation 22:16-17 ~ The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Numbers 6:24-27 Love, Your Brother Joe Hello Joe: Its better if you actually answer the objections, when you quote scripture back to me, you have not made a case for or against my objection, youve only avoided actual interaction with the subject and with me. Its precisely because of inward assumptions that scripture can be mis-applied or misunderstood and Ive noticed that you leave only assumptions as the basis of your meanings instead of declaring them. Its ok with me, you dont have to respond, Im only saying your responses to alot of folks are built on un-spoken assumptions covered over with scripture quotes. Its ok to declare what you think, what you feel, what you believe and what your opinions are. God loves us for who and what we are, not just that we might be good concordances. R.E.

After reading this, I sense that you are referring to the second death. I truly don't know the composition of the lake of fire. Fire breaks down the elements is all I know and that God is able to destroy both soul and body. So I am left to wonder why this second death is accounted as eternal torture. Certainly the fear of such a thing is motivating, but it is a motivation unlike the Christ. The motivation of hell is more self serving in seeking to escape torment rather than the hope of eternal life that is based on caring for others. I find mercy to be greater than justice in Christ but I'd imagine God must eventually destroy that which destroys life for everyone. So that brings forth the question, is heaven and worship of God based upon the fear of going to hell? No, it cannot be so. That is a great distance from The God I see in the Christ. Moreover being dead in Christ is dying to sin so as to live in Christ. Hence he who overcomes the flesh has no fear of the second death. The only people I have read go into the lake of fire are those who take the mark of the beast. Revelation 2:10-11 10 Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you life as your victor’s crown. 11 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who is victorious will not be hurt at all by the second death. So what is this second death if not a permanent destruction, since death itself is thrown in there? Hello again Childeye: Wow, you ask some great questions. In regards to the worship of God, of course heavenly worship is not motivated by a fear of hell. We read of the song of the worshippers...Rev 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, Rev 5:10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth." I believe from this text and many others that we will praise and worship God because he ransomed us, purchased us, redeemed us, forgave us, loved us, chose us, sanctified us, preserved us, delivered us and brought us to himself to know him and enjoy him forever. This is the basis I believe of heavenly worship, in fact its identical with the worship we are to give God now. The difference being we are still at war, we are in the midst of our journey to the New Jerusalem and have not arrived yet. Hell is a motivator because God has instilled in humanity a piece of himself called 'value of life'. Its a defect to desire death, or destruction for its own sake. We all enter life born to enjoy and preserve that life we are given. Hell is not the cessation of being, it is not the end of life, it is the end of a quality of life, it is the removal of the blessing and beauty of God in that life. So, it is that all humanity saint and sinner enjoy the common grace and goodness of God because this is God's world, God's place where we dwell. Hell is the absence of the blessing of God, the absence of common grace, the emptiness of all God-given mercies and kindnesses that arrive new to us every day from the hand of God. Hell was prepared for devils to suffer the judgment of God, men are now entered into that same judgment since the fall. Since Jesus told us what hell's original intent was, and now man is subject to that same judgment, we would have to believe that angels would be burned up as well. When death and hell are thrown into the lake of fire as a part of the judgment of God, its representative to me that it is the end of death and the end of hell, so shall death never raise again, nor shall hell threaten again. In short men shall no longer be subject to those fears in heaven that we experience on the earth. Allow me to continue one step further. If the second death is cessation of being, there is no necessity for its eternality, there is no necessity for such vivid and terrifying explantions of who goes there and what they shall suffer because to believe they cease to exist means they cease to suffer not only in terms of the kind of punishment but in terms of the length of punishment. Which again connects a curious thing "Why give the damned a resurrection body if they are to cease to exist?" My questions are rhetorical you need not answer, Im only saying that death does not represent cessation of being, it represents absence of the life of God and all that entails to a person. This is what I find to be the most biblical in my mind and most accurately representative of what death means as viewed from scripture. R.E.

what is a reformed evangelist? In this case it is a designation of biblical stance. I believe the scriptures teach what the reformers taught hundreds of years ago, I believe that those biblical interpretations most clearly and precisely represent Jesus Christ, the scriptures, salvation, judgment, covenant, sanctification, sovereignty and many other doctrines in the best possible understanding. Though not perfect Im sure, when looked at systematically and biblically depicts God's message to men the best. That being said, as an Evangelist I preach and teach according to those doctrines set down by the reformers in the creeds and confessions. Although I probaby dont adhere 100% in every position, I find my conclusions to be the most biblical to my understanding. R.E. I see. So how do you view predestination? From the outside or inside of time or both? For example I believe that Christ was dropped into time and hence there is power from the inside to change what was inevitable death after the fall of man. However I also believe that God knew from before creation, that there would be vanity in heaven, and used the flesh of men to expose the ignorance and folly that such vanity was based upon. Namely not knowing nor properly esteeming the person of God, and the dire consequences of a false image of god upon the wills of angels and mankind. Hello Childeye: I take a supralapsarian view. I share the same opinion as you as to the expose' of sin to the entire universe through the deeds of men. At judgment day all will be made known. as to time, -lapsarian respects the fall not time perse, but I think I understand your meaning. R.E.

Hell is a necessary part of what it means for God to be just, righteous, holy, pure without any admixture of falseness. Its because God is good and we are not that there is a hell. Hell is not the cessation of being, otherwise there could be no justice, there could be no reward to the wicked. Ceasing to exist is neither reward or punishment. It is an absence of being. If hell were a cessation of being then to warn people about it has no more effect than warning them about an attack of unicorns from the planet zebot. Its means nothing and cannot effect anything in them except at the very best cause a vain fear but has no basis in reality. That is the real rub, when someone believes that hell is just the cessation of being they are saying in effect there is nothing to fear from God. In this life you might get in trouble, but once dead you are untouchable, you are past even God's hand to hold you accountable and require justice for himself for the sins committed against him. With this kind of teaching a man might as well launch all the nuclear warheads and destroy the whole planet and all life on it, and in the end being the greatest murderer of all eternity, he would not suffer any punishment, any accountability, nor would he suffer any loss or feel the slightest tinge of remorse. In fact, it would be as though God gave him a free-pass to be the biggest thief and destroyer without even so much as an angry glance. Clearly this is not the representation of God, or of his view of sin, or of his view of the acts of men in the world. There is no love in God if there is no justice in God. Insofar as one values life and people he will require and expect justice in this world and the next. Jesus taught this very truth. Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. R.E.

.... I'm saying that faith is not the same as choice. For example a woman fought through a crowd for she believed if she could just touch the hem of the garment of Jesus, she would be healed. She did touch his garment and power went out of Jesus even without his assent and she was healed by her faith. Her faith however preceded her decision, or choice, to to try and touch his garment..... The Offer For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 The Choice For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. John 3:16-21 The Two Results The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:35-36 The End Hello Joe: Choice has never actually been the problem, the rub has always been in the origination of choice. Does God bring about that choice or is man the author of his choice. The scriptures are clear, that when it comes to salvation Christ is the author of our faith . Heb_12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. Looking at the context of Hebrews here Jesus did what he did in order to speak to men and show them that there is a way out. a real deliverance from sins power and punishment and that way of deliverance is faith in Jesus himself. Jesus not only authors faith in our hearts he revealed the love of God in all the many ways he lived and spoke, therefore we have a pattern, a picture of righteousness in which to follow. Heb_5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.. In short, our faith is not born of human invention or a product of simple intellectual reasoning, it is a gift whereby we are empowered to respond to heavenly invitations. I say, its not a human invention to choose or believe, its a divine blessing of God whereby men that do not seek him, begin to seek him and find him. Eph_2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. Our unbelief is met with God's drawing, our weakness is met with Christ giving faith, our judgment is met with Christ bringing in eternal salvation which he authors and which he alone gives. The birth place of our faith is in Christ, so that in the end our final residence will be in Christ. R.E.

what is a reformed evangelist? In this case it is a designation of biblical stance. I believe the scriptures teach what the reformers taught hundreds of years ago, I believe that those biblical interpretations most clearly and precisely represent Jesus Christ, the scriptures, salvation, judgment, covenant, sanctification, sovereignty and many other doctrines in the best possible understanding. Though not perfect Im sure, when looked at systematically and biblically depicts God's message to men the best. That being said, as an Evangelist I preach and teach according to those doctrines set down by the reformers in the creeds and confessions. Although I probaby dont adhere 100% in every position, I find my conclusions to be the most biblical to my understanding. R.E.

what is a reformed evangelist?

I am a 5 point card carrying calvinist. Reading through many of these posts its easy to see why the confusion exists. Of course in other places its simply because some one has a bias that is not biblical pers-se but philosophical. In other places its because the questioner or accuser is ill informed or has made assumptions made from their own logic not based upon the actual doctrinal position of the dissenter. By the way, Id be happy to answer questions from anyone regarding the reformed faith. R.E.