Bernard, can you provide a scriptural basis for making the sign of the cross when praying. That is what the comment to John Yurich was about.
Also remember the offerings Cain and Abel made before the Lord. One was acceptable and the other was not. Why is that. Why did God destroy Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire before the Lord. Were they not worshipping God sincerely? But that was not what God commanded them to do and as a result of their doing it their way, God killed them. God is sovereign and He is Lord. Does He not have a right to command how He is to be worshipped?
What these guys reject is that ALL men are born sinners. They want to claim that they don't become sinners until they sin (Pelagians). They are not fitted for destruction because of their rejection. They reject because of their sinful nature.
This is interesting. I was always under the assumption that the souls of the believers went to Paradise (Luke 23:43), also referred to as Abraham's Bosom (Luke 16:22) before the resurrection of Christ. However 3 passages caught my attention.
(Luke 23:43) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in PARADISE παραδεισω.
(2 Corinthians 12:4) How that he was caught up into PARADISE παραδεισον, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
(Revelation 2:7) He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the PARADISE παραδεισου of God.
Three times paradise is mentioned, two of them seem to refer to Heaven itself because it occured after the resurrection, once prior. What is the distinction? Any thoughts?
Mr. J. One passage that would trouble them is Matthew 27:50-53, "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52. And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53. And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."
These I believe to be the Old Testament saints, including John the Baptist of which JD claims would not be resurrected until the last day at the final judgment with all of the rest of the OT saints. It is true that ubtil Christ made the atonement for sin, the souls of the believers remained in Abraham's Bosom. Now the souls of the believers, OT and NT are in Heaven awaiting the resurrection of the body. Even Paul said that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
The souls of the saved are in hell today awaiting the resurrection of their earthly bodies to be cast eternally in the Lake of Fire at the final judgment.
Hold on there JD, Eph. 2:8 tells us that it is BY GRACE are ye saved THROUGH FAITH and not that of yourselves. That grace is the gift of God. It is God who births you into His family, you cannot birth yourself into it. (John 1:13)
So for you to say that the new birth comes as a result of believing is placing yourself as the source and author of your salvation. God responds to your demands, not we respond to His demands.
Secondly on another point, if you do a word search, you will find that the word Holy in conjunction with the Ghost, you will find "αγιου" which is not capitalized and not a noun but an adjective: masculine singular genitive from lexical Form αγιος.
JD, no one is changing the subject. We are still dealing with the ministry of the Holy Spirit in salvation. If the new testament believers were saved by the regeneration of the new birth and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the old testament believers were not, then you must conclude that God has two different plans of salvation. That is the point I am trying to make.
JD wrote: DB, You have been at least the greatest critic of me as a dispensationalist as anyone here and have offered the least amount of biblical reasoning, which is saying something.
On the one hand I get accused of using reasoning to discern and work through scripture, then I get accused of not using reasoning. What do you want from me? If the Holy Spirit didn't indwell OT saints, what was he there for anyway? Did he just sit around doing nothing?
And I have been dying to ask you this. Did God have any kind of spiritual relationship with Israel? Perhaps that will define our differences and understanding of the Old Testament.
I retract and apologize for my previous comments about you not using scripture to support your arguments. You've been doing a good job the last day or two.
The word of God is not a deck of playing cards to be shuffled and dealt out like a card game. You cannot just simply throw out the cards you don't want to play with and keep those that you do. That is how dispensationalist view the word of God. They are not looking at the Bible as a whole to see that God is not divided. They want everybody else to provide chapter and verse, but can't even do it themselves.
God just didn't simple invent the Holy Spirit after the resurrection, the Holy Spirit is eternal and had an essential role in the OT saints as well as the NT saints. Just because it is not clearly defined in the OT does not mean it wasn't so. God's plan of salvation has always been the same, through the Lamb that was slain before the foundation of the world. It was as if it was a done deal and that is what the OT believers had faith to look foreward to.
Although he has no problem with a "pretrib rapture" eventhough there is no specific verse containing those words cojointly. He has to get a few words here and a few words there to come up with his conclusion. In that he sees no problem with deductive reasoning, but he expects everybody to have a specific chapter and verse to prove their theology. It is a "do as I say, not as I do".
Mr. J wrote: DB - your attack on Minnow is low - especially where you accuse him of placing theologians above Scripture.
Mr. J. He said it, I didn't. His smug remarks about JD holding to the KJV 1611 while he held to the writers of theReformed Confessions. He does not offer any scriptural proofs for any of his positions, but only what theologians comment about them. What would you conclude?
I do not agree with JD on several key points, mainly his dispensational slicing and dicing of scripture like a whopper chopper. I do not agree with JD on his sovereignty of freewill over the sovereignty of God. However he has presented several unrefutable proofs from scripture on baptism by immersion. I have yet to see any strong arguments supporting the other methods.
Personally, I lean to the LBCF, but my positions stated here are backed up from scripture, not theologians.
At least you have provided many good arguments and willing to back them up with scripture. I have a lot more respect for someone like you than many of the others who don't know why they believe what they believe.
Icon O'Clast wrote: Do you deny the human authorship of Scripture?
(2 Pe 1:20-21) "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
Icon O'Clast wrote: Do you deny the 100% human nature of Christ?
That has no bearing to the point. He is indeed 100% divine and 100% man.
Were the writers of the Reformed Confessions 100% divine and 100% human as well?
Icon O'Clast wrote: God is the author of Scripture yes, but it is also of human authorship. The Holy Spirit is our teacher yes, but He uses people to teach people. It is always the Divine and the human together.
That sounds more like synergism to me.
What happened to God's sovereignty? Isn't He capable of transforming the lives of His people by His power. Isn't the same Holy Spirit that guides the pastors and teachers the same Holy Spirit that indwells and resides in the believer.