John 3:14 "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:"
Numbers 21:8,9 "And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
"And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived."
The brass serpent, a type of Christ, (who became sin for us) was to be looked upon, that the bitten would live. If he did not, he would die. Those who lived, lived because they believed in faith what Moses told them they had to do. Look upon the brass serpent. Even so, for us to live, we must "look upon" the Savior, believing in him and his work on our behalf. The brass serpent was displayed before all, none were passed by. "..every one that is bitten... if a serpent had bitten any man..."
Whosoever looked upon it would live. "..even so must the Son of man be lifted up."
Revelation 2:18 "And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;"
Dr. Tim wrote: BTW, Connor, a member of my immediate family is on crystal meth. She is having psychotic episodes and we will have to have her committed. Two members of our church lost family members in the past two weeks, and a little six-year-old girl we had been praying for died. An eleven-year-old son of the pastor of a sister church had to be rushed by ambulance to a pediatric hospital in New Orleans. I could go on and on about the tragic things going on around me, and Iâ€™m sure all of us could. I donâ€™t know about anybody else, but I need a little comic relief once in a while. The Bible says that laughter does the heart good, and if someone can explain to me how we are supposed to laugh without ever being exposed to anything funny, I am, like Dumbo, all ears.
Will be praying for your family member, Dr. Tim. I know only too well the sadness of close family going in a destructive direction.
"Christ says Himself He gave himself as a ransom for 'many' - what does many mean?"
Romans 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Sometimes many means all. Or did Adam's sin only result in some being dead? In what way might we understand "much more" in this context?
B. McCausland wrote: 1. "... we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." However, only to those that "received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God" 2. "... the Lamb of God, ... takes away the sin of the world."
It does seem more than possible that the eternal God, who is outside of time because he created time, could sovereignly decree that man can express his will within man's limited context of time. That in no way diminishes the sovereignty of God, nor does it put man into a position of saving himself. After all, God is sovereign, isn't he? It might be helpful if we abandoned our either/or thinking, and admit God can decree what he wills.
Paul was zealous before his conversion, and remained zealous afterward. God doesn't change our basic personality; he changes our focus. We need not fear or resent any who are zealous for truth. There's room for it along the bumpy road we travel.
Christopher000 wrote: --- I suppose I went a little overboard on its future availability, but in todays climate of "My body, my choice", how long before anyone and everyone is given the legal right to just off themselves for any reason? Jack Kivorkian would be proud...
Not at all overboard, Christopher. It may well be that legal assisted suicide could become mandatory. You know, when you are no longer "useful" to society, etc. Now that might be overboard, but not so much in this sick world.
I'll give it a go, John, when I get to it. You have a long memory, my friend. Not sure I can bring it up clearly again. Aging takes its toll, no? Yet are we not being renewed day by day?
In the meantime, you mentioned Norman Smith and Lexiconis. Are they still with us? I remember the tender heart of Norman, who left the hostility he felt here. And Lexiconis, who wrestled with me without malice at times.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- To take a quotation from the article: '"Im old enough to have been around when polio was a real threat,â€ť said Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, D-Manhattan. â€śI believe in science.... Your personal opinions, which may be based on junk science [ and probably are ], do not trump the greater good.â€ť'
Quoting a big city Democrat, who ignorantly compares polio with measles, as if they have a clue. Next you'll be quoting Alexandria O Cortez.
Ah, the "greater good" theory. Another meaningless term, useful for power junkies. Fits right in with "public health" and "public safety."
How about this, Jim. NYS wants to give illegals free college and driver's licenses. (Not free for legals, btw) Illegals bring disease, for they are not screened as are legal immigrants. When did the increase in cases begin? Did you read the article? How many children with weakened immune systems are actually in school? Is 1000 cases of a relatively mild problem, out of a population of over 300 million, an issue the State has to flex its muscles about? No, but the issue is not public health, but lust for money and/or power, just like it always is. Connect the dots.
Darren Thomas wrote: Tell me, if no one, save God alone, knows the identity of the elect and non-elect among the mass of unbelievers, how does your original post make any sense? That salvation is achieved for and only applied to the elect is what we preach in our pulpits. So again I ask where is the avoidance? The truth of this glorious doctrine is hid from no one. ---
OK, so the truth of application to the elect is presented to the elect and the non elect. The truth of non application to the non elect is not presented to the elect and the non elect. I guess we agree on that. My question from the start is why not present the whole truth? There is no call in the question to presume to know who the elect and non elect are. As Spurgeon said, and you provided: "No man can be said to preach the whole gospel of God if he leaves out, knowingly and intentionally, one single truth of the blessed God.
Darren Thomas wrote: Read your own words of 6/14/19 3:56PM viz. "We also would not proclaim to a group of listeners, "Repent and believe the gospel. By the way, this only applies to the elect. If you're elect, your good to go; if not, you can't repent and believe the gospel, for your eternal condemnation was determined from before you were born." If you're elect your good to go, if not you can't repent and believe In other words you are asking unbelievers to know their election before they even attempt to repent and believe the gospel. This is a perversion of biblical teaching. But maybe that was the point because drawing an ugly caricature of the doctrines of grace serves your purpose? ---
Not quite, Darren. I said we would NOT tell the group, we would NOT reveal what you perceive as the whole truth to them, and I wondered why should it be hidden? There is no asking of non elect to determine their status. Status is irrevocable, right? The same words are spoken to the whole group. It is merely conveyance of fact to them. They can't change their election or pass by status. Why not tell them? You are willing to tell them to repent and believe, but not to reveal to them the whole truth about what election is. Why is that?
The foaming at the mouth gov. of NY will sign anything that is corrupt, bankrupt, or evil.
Here's the logic: "Democrat Jeffrey Dinowitz, the billâ€™s Assembly sponsor. â€śIf you choose to not vaccinate your child, therefore potentially endangering other children ... then youâ€™re the one choosing not to send your children to school.â€ť
So your unvaccinated kid poses a threat to the vaccinated ones. How so, since most people will vaccinate their kids.?Interesting how Democrats think, if that's what you call it. At least he didn't call them "our children" which they never are.
The religious freedom vs public health issue? Note religious freedom is personal and real, public health a meaningless abstract phrase, frequently used to promote sick ideas in the name of health.
Count the number of cases, see how many, if any, are serious, then tell us how this is a "public health" issue, Mr. Cuomo.
Christopher000 wrote: John UK Wrote: Christopher, how are you getting on with all this? Or are you getting more confused? No need to answer bro, only if you wish to do so. I've been in the shadows, following along, and soaking it all in, John. The differing perspectives by all, and how they're arrived at, is interesting, and good for learning.
Don't stay in the shadows too long Christopher. Every believing group should have its Barnabas.
Darren Thomas: You said: "Where in the Bible are there any instructions to the unconverted to determine if they are elect? Where in the Bible do believers have any instructions to determine who among the unbelieving are elect?
"You demonstrate a basic misunderstanding viz. that election is something that God does and only he knows absolutely who the elect are.
"To know and declare that God will only act upon the elect and pass over the non elect shouldn't lead any to presume to know who among their hearers falls within which category. This is the absurdity of your post."
Now if you point to where there was presumption to knowing who among the hearers falls within each category, perhaps I'll apologize for my absurd post.
Darren Thomas wrote: --- The believer in the doctrines of grace cannot be disingenuous in proclaiming that God loves all with the same saving love because that is a blatant lie. John UK wants to make this lie the heart of his message to the lost.
There's disingenuous, and there's disingenuous. We also would not proclaim to a group of listeners, "Repent and believe the gospel. By the way, this only applies to the elect. If you're elect, your good to go; if not, you can't repent and believe the gospel, for your eternal condemnation was determined from before you were born." Why the avoidance of truth, if that's what it is?
John UK wrote: --- God can be just, and condemn all men. God can be just and condemn some men. God can be just and condemn no men. God is just and must punish men for their sins. But here is the beauty of the gospel, that God can be just and the justifier of them that believe on Jesus. In Jesus there is an atonement, by a substitute; God's wrath fell on his only begotten Son. This is God's idea, not mine. This is God's plan, not mine. God may do as he wishes.
Indeed, John, but he will not do anything contrary to his character. As you have said, he is just whether he condemns all, some, or none. It is said men are chosen to be elect before time, thus before they exist. At the same time, it is said God "passes by" the non elect, leaving them in their sin. Here's the problem: We start the discussion with men already in existence. We go back before time to speak of the elect; why not the non elect? Neither the elect nor the non elect are sinners before they exist. Therefore the nons must be created for the purpose of destroying them. A blip of earthly life, followed by eternal separation and darkness. Really? For what? Double predestination is not in God's character, yet here it is presented. Religion posing as the Way?
Moses wrote: The inquisition from hell imposed by the bloody Roman Catholic Church, the great whore of the book of Revelation, the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus is by far the worst and greatest persecution ever to inflict the Church of God, yet the Church of Christ survived and conquered her venomous foully fangs. But the number 1 instrument, though, for the destruction of Modern Christianity are the millions of Modern fake bibles -- Vaticanus and Sinaiticus modernized English version straight from the bowel of her inquisitor the church of Rome. She is very much alive, deadly and very busy spreading her lies to the whole world.
Sorry Moses, but true Christianity can never be destroyed. Besides, there are enough imaginings done with your favored version as well.