keslc

Shelby, go check out the thread on Romans 14:20-23, very good!

I'm sorry, I don't understand this. Can you please clarify? Thanks!

This is a great passage! I think there have been some good explanations given. I also think this is a perfect example of what I was talking about in the "woman's role in worship" thread. Again, a great example of Paul speaking to conflict and avoiding it by not partaking in things that would cause your brother to stumble. This can be applied to so much more than food or drink. (many of the things discussed on this forum tattoos, women's roles, drinking, etc...) I love that! I think that puts it much clearer! I totally agree with that. I don't think that is license to do whatever we want to do, but in cases (such as discussed on this forum) where christians often disagree, I think it is prudent to bring it in prayer to God and see where He leads you with it. I don't believe God won't convict you if you come to Him with a sincere and seeking heart, truly wanting to know if you're wrong. He will let you know when you're wrong. God Bless! :hug:

Ray, I guess I feel the same as you. As I said in an earlier post, I feel that that scripture is speaking to the idea of not causing conflict in church or within the worship, not about females in their roles per se. The theme of conflict and avoiding it comes up time and time again in Pauls writings, the theme of women remaining silent does not. Also, the idea of women not ministering through evangelizing, preaching, leading is NOT thematic throughout the Bible, rather evidence that God uses women in those roles is. Like you said, we need to look at the scriptures as a whole and not just pulling verses here or there that fit our needs. BTW, I want to make clear that my feelings have NOTHING to do with women's rights or women's lib or feminism or anything like that. I said previously that I agree women are to be modest and submissive to God and their husbands. I don't feel that is demeaning and I'm not all riled up thinking everyone is a bunch of chauvenists. Please understand that my feelings are based on scriptures not a feminist agenda.

I think that throughout scriptures (bot OT and NT) God has used woman for many purposes to furthur His kingdom, including evangelism and preaching. ( A samaritan woman at that!) John chapter 4 tells the story of Jesus teaching a samaritan woman at the well. What did that woman do when she believed Jesus was the Messiah, she went into her town proclaiming it! (vs. 28-29) because of her proclaimation, many samaritans believed (vs. 39-42) If she had done wrong, Jesus would have reprimanded her, don't you think? Also, Acts 2:17-18 says, "In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy." I think that speaks to God using women and gifting us as well as men. The scriptures in which women are told to remain silent in church I feel speaks more to the idea that conflict should be avoided and discouraged within the church body. Women are encouraged to ask their husbands in private if they have a question so as not to cause disputes and strife within the congregation. (1 corinthians 14:34) That said....I do feel Godly-women need to have modesty and submit themselves to God, first, and to the Godly-leadership of their husbands in their homes. I don't think women should seek out the pulpit just to prove some point about sexism or other agendas than that of a calling by God. I do think God calls women to the pulpit and uses us there.

Thank you! As I respect yours.....

stupid question....what's AFK? I thought I was hip to all the lingo! LOL! and ROFL! one thing though....I still don't have all the smilies down and sometimes they can be distracting (but cute!) I wish I was more smiley hip!

I never said I thought every part of both sides were wrong or without merit. I just took exception to the implication that by not claiming one side or the other meant I had no interest in and/or wasn't capable of a deep Biblical study.

Of course it is subscribing to what another "human teacher" has interpereted. Why is this such a negative, and seemingly powerful point that people hoist around? Your human, and you interpret, which makes you a human interpreter. When you get on worthy and speak of your view, that makes you a "human teacher". Whether or not you've done "personal study and prayerful consideration" Do you think Calvin didn't prayfully and personally study? He is the same as you, and he probably did it more prayerfully and more personally. Same goes for Arminius. The question simply is where do you stand on these 5 issues. To say you do not "wear a brand" is to say that you "don't wear clothes". All the brands are listed above. The point is if you say you don't agree with any of these positions, then you don't know what you believe. Just saying I don't agree with any is like saying "I don't wear clothes". The options above are pretty much all the options you can have, that is why it's broken down as it is. If you believe in free will, whether you admit it or not, your more with Arminius, if you're a "God Chooses" kind of person, whether you like it or not your more on the Calvin side. It's not about choosing brands but saying where you stand on the issue. If I say I"m not a calvinist, but I believe all of Calvinists teachings, well your a Calvinist, sorry! You wear clothes, whether you rip the brand name off so no one can tell what your wearing, or you bear it blatantly, you do wear clothes. You have a side on this issue, and the sides are above. If you say "i don't agree with any" you either have another belief, or your just plain scared to admit that you agree with one of these two men in some way. I believe in free will, but that doesn't drop me into the "arminus" bin. God is bigger than two catergories. My point about "brand names" is that a label really means nothing to me. The Holy Spirit is my teacher. When I read the Word, I pray over it and listen for the Spirits leading I don't consult "Calvin" or whoever. A person can walk about saying they are a "Billy Grahamist" (as a generic example of a brand name, lol) and I don't think that suddenly makes them more knowledgable on the Word than anyone else. I don't put my faith in another humans interpretation of the Word, but in what the Holy Spirit reveals to me in my study. Discussing it with other humans and stating my opinion does not make me a teacher, but a discusser. I think there is value in discussing it with others as it challenges me to deeper study and seeking.

If that is what you are comfortable with, than that's great. As for me, I am not comfortable being "generic", but prefer a "brand name". Lots of study in the word is what causes one to realize what and why they believe, to understand the God they worship on a deeper level, and to be able to share that God with others. To me, being 'generic' means not delving deeper, not understanding more. 'Brand name' means I've studied and sought and prayed, and I agree with a very renowned teacher (of which there are many) who has much credibility and merit. I'm sure there are reasons you believe what you do - books you've read, teachers/Pastors you've listened to. They made sense, they backed up what they taught you, and you believed it. You got saved because someone taught you about Christ. Nothing wrong with recognizing good, credible and sensible teaching. by not labeling myself in NO WAY means I don't "delve deeper" into Bible study. I am very offended by that statement. Wearing the badge of "calvinist" or whatever is not indicitive of a deeper study of scriptures. I feel it is subscribing to what another *human teacher* has interpreted the Bible to be, not a "deeper understanding" based on personal study and prayerful consideration and listening to the Spirit. I could pay alot more for a pair of "brand name" jeans or buy a pair of "generic" at Wal-mart, buying the more expensive doesn't make me smarter, just makes me feel better about myself.

Certainly, both Calvin and Arminius have some merit to their respective positions. But I just consider myself a plain ol' Christian, no brand names. I don't believe in creeds or catechisms. Not the kind of thing that I can explain by any short formula like a TULIP. Thank you Stevehut! Me too! God is too big and wondorous to break down into some formula. I do go to a church with a list of beliefs (doctrines) like many do, but those are not the end all and be all of what I believe all of God to be. As Shelby said, there is too much of God to fit into a nice neat little box and label ourselves like that.

This is an interesting way of putting it, and your emphasis on the word "made" is very intruiging. (It is interesting that as we argue for differing points, we inevitably prove the other belief to the other person, isn't that odd? ) IF God knew that they would sin and still "MADE" them, didn't he "make them" disobedient? If God didn't want them to sin, could he have stopped it? Who said he had to make adam and Eve? He could have said, NOPE If their going to sin I"m not Going to make them, because I don't want anyone in sin. IN fact, why create satan, obviously God knew satan would fall, yet he created him anyway! Why? It's all in HIS Plan. It's all to His glory. I don't understand it all, and maybe never will, But the fact is if God allows a decision to be made, It's within His plan. Therefore it is predestined, predetermined. Fact is God plays an active role in every decision, he made you and allowed your decision to occur, and therefore he has predestined it to be so. God Made people who would choose to deny Him, and He knew they would deny Him! That's against His will! How could he make something that would choose to deny him? Oh he can and he did, all to show His mercy on those of us whom he has chosen. --------- In 1 Thessolonians 4:3 paul is not talking to unbelievers an Believers, He is only speaking to believers...this verse doesn't really apply here. --------- As far as the Book of Romans goes... It is very much a book about Salvation. The first 11 chapters are explicitly talking about Salvation and how it all works. 12-16 are simply, now that your saved live like this. I'm glad we can toss ideas back and forth freely, usually by now someone would have told me to send my False Doctrine to hell with me (o.k. maybe not but some have come close ) God bless you, and your belief, even if it disagrees with mine in this area. This is an interesting way of putting it, and your emphasis on the word "made" is very intruiging. (It is interesting that as we argue for differing points, we inevitably prove the other belief to the other person, isn't that odd? ) IF God knew that they would sin and still "MADE" them, didn't he "make them" disobedient? If God didn't want them to sin, could he have stopped it? Who said he had to make adam and Eve? He could have said, NOPE If their going to sin I"m not Going to make them, because I don't want anyone in sin. IN fact, why create satan, obviously God knew satan would fall, yet he created him anyway! Why? (ok, having problems with the quoting mechanics, lol!) Anyway, my use of the word "made" was not as in "created" I meant as in "caused them to sin". I, too, have no answers as to why God allowed sin to enter the world or why he created satan or why he created man knowing man would disobey, so I am with you there. That's one of the reasons we have faith right? To follow Christ even when there are things we don't understand! It's all in HIS Plan. It's all to His glory. I don't understand it all, and maybe never will, But the fact is if God allows a decision to be made, It's within His plan. Therefore it is predestined, predetermined. Fact is God plays an active role in every decision, he made you and allowed your decision to occur, and therefore he has predestined it to be so. I just have a hard time with God playing a part in disobedience. I can't imagine that is in His nature as I understand it. It would leave us unaccountable for everything we do. I just can't see it! We are responsible for our decisions, we are accountable for our decisions, that is why we can be punished for our decisions unless we are repentant and come to Christ. I think I have stated my view and I know you've heard what I had to say, as I did you. Unless you ask another question or want me to say something else, I will agree to disagree. Like I said, though, I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about this. I hope you feel like this has been a good discussion and hold no ill feelings, I don't hold any ill feelings at all! Take care, friend! God bless!

The real issue here isn't really about predestination, but of free will and whether or not people have free will. It sounds like it is suggested that we can't have free will because God is Soveirgn (sp?) and has control over everything. Well, yes, God is soveirgn, and He CAN do anything He wants to do, but! He has also given us choices that we have to make on our own. Here is some scripture: Genesis 2:16 - God is telling Adam, "you are free to eat of any tree in the garden....." he gives Adam and Eve a choice, to obey or not to obey. He knew they wouldn't, but that doesn't mean He MADE them disobedient. God cannot tolerate sin because He is HOLY, it is His will that we live a holy life (1 Thessolonians 4:3"It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body") therefore, He can't pre-destine people to be un-holy, that would be against His own will. He knows who will live an un-holy life and choose not to follow Him, but that is due to the choices He has allowed us to have and make, not because He made them that way. Make sense? Also 2 Peter 2 is very good in explaining this particularly verses 9,10,12! As far as Romans 9, I think that to use that for a predestination theory may be taking it out of context. Verse 11 is what says something specifically about the "elect". I think that is in reference to God "electing" the line of Israel to come through Jacob rather than Esau, not electing so and so from the history of the world to be saved. Also, the underlying theme for that entire chapter is more of a faith vs. works idea. Paul is talking about Israel and even though they tried to obtain righteousness through works instead of faith, those who are "my people" (followers of Christ, both Jew and gentile) will still inherit what God promised them. God can't go back on a promise, He doesn't lie. (just how I took that passage after some prayerful thought and consideration) On the cross, Jesus made a way for the WHOLE world to come to HIM, knowing that not everyone would, however. hence John 3:16 "....whosoever WILL MAY be saved". 2 Peter 3:8,9, "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." (bold added by me) I understand that this is one of those areas on which two christians may never see eye to eye. I appreciate the challenge to explain my position as it makes me seek the Word of God! I hope you feel the same! God Bless you!

Now you say that man is totally depraved, so if God doesn't choose and draw man to himself, is he capable of choosing God or is he totaly depraved (by that I mean totally dead, incapable of spiritual acts unless revealed by God) If God had chosen the "whole world" wouldn't everyone be saved? I agree, that salvation was opened to the broader span of "the world" as opposed to only the jewish nations. I'm curious Kels C and Shelby (hey that rhymes ) what you would have to say on passages like Romans 9. Read the whole chapter (maybe you have already I do not know) and tell me your take on the whole thing. You two are very honest, and open, willing to discuss without drawing swords... God bless your study. let me know what your thought are ... thanks Let me study that passage again and I will get back to you! I want to be sure of what I'm talking about when I discuss it!

I don't believe there is a "list" of that sort either. I agree, I believe God knows who will choose to follow Him and who won't, but I reject the idea that God has this pre-determined group He chose to save at random. That's what I was saying! Love ya, girl! :hug:

Absolutely! I totally agree in envangelizing and witnessing! Yes! BUT.....I am a little confused with this..... I'm not quite following. Christ chose the entire world when he took up the cross*. (John 3:16) We witness and evangelize so that others may choose to come to the Father through Christ, the Son. Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life noone comes to the Father but through me". We don't come to the Father because our name is on some special list, we, meaning ALL people jew and gentile, come to the Father by hearing the Word, coming to Christ, repenting and turning from our sins, believing on Him, having faith. One of doctrines of my church says "We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ has, by his suffering and death, made an atonement for the whole world, so that whosoever will may be saved." * context: samaritans who Jesus spoke to and they believed said this to a woman who testified so she would know they were not believers because of what she said, but because of what Jesus said and who He was, John 4:42, "then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world" The samaritans were able to be saved because they believed in Christ and that He was to save THE WHOLE WORLD. At that time it would have been the furthest thing from ANYONE'S imagination that samaritans could have been chosen by God for anything! They were hated! But because Jesus made an atonement for everyone, they too were covered by his blood and forgiven and saved. I guess that's where I struggle with the concept that there is this list somewhere and only those on that list (regardless of opportunity they've had to accept Christ and whether or not they have accepted Him) will go to Heaven. God is just and merciful his promises of forgiveness and salvation are for all who believe and accept it. It's entirely possible that I am misunderstanding what you wrote too! (I do that sometimes, lol!) If so, please explain again so I have a clearer picture of what you were saying! Thanks!

that is also what I believe! But you knew that Shelby! (we go to the same church) I really think, though, that there are a hundred points on which christians can get all bent out of shape about and go around in circles arguing. I don't believe Jesus wants us dividing ourselves in this manner. (not that this is happening here, but it's something to be aware we don't get wrapped up in, kwim?) The idea of the "elect" is something that I have a hard time with. I tend to feel more like LadyC has said. I always wonder what then is the point of the great commission given by Jesus to the apostles to "go into all the world" if God had already "selected" those he would save. Sounds like we were being sent on a wild goose chase if that was how it was. I don't think God is in the business of sending people on wild goose chases. Pehaps I'm not understanding the whole concept there or, like someone said earlier, I'm getting it out of context. Anyway, pretty good discussion here!

I agree!

Well, recently actually I had a dream in which a demon confronted me and said to me that "God will let you down. You can't win" I felt scared in my dream, but I used scripture and said, "resist the devil and he will flee" and another verse that I can't remember at the moment, lol. ANyway, I woke up and prayed asking God for wisdom and peace. Then I went back to sleep. Don't know if that experience says anything to you about warfare in your sleep, but that's what happened to me!