I'm not sure how Satan used a snake to speak to Eve. Animals were placed under Adam's dominion; and since angels are ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation, perhaps different animals came under the jurisdiction of different ministering spirits, responding to Adam's dominion over the animals, under God. And since the snake was more subtle than any other creature, perhaps it was the more likely candidate to be used by Satan on this occassion.
But Adam could have rebuked it. God questioned Eve and Adam before explaining the curse which they would henceforward suffer because of their disobedience, but God never questioned the snake - and yet He pronounced to the snake the curse which it too would henceforward come under. Animals don't have moral responsibility - and yet the snake species still incurred a curse.
All of creation suffered in the fall. Plant and animal life became subject to death; even the very characteristics of some fauna and flora may have changed.
Perhaps the act of tempting Eve was part-and-parcel of Satan's fall - rather than his fall being something that had already taken place in previous aeons. And perhaps when a third of the angels fell with Satan that day, those animals which may have been under their jurisdiction may have at that time incurred the character changes that seem to reflect the fallen characteristics of those spirits.
As early as pre-flood times, some animals were already being called unclean while others were clean. Compare your feelings about a sheep and a pig, or a dove and a vulture. Satan is called Beelzebub, the lord of the flies. The Bible does talk about angelic creatures in heaven, so perhaps some demons even look like the animals which may once have been their jurisdiction before the fall. Jesus said, "Behold I give unto you power over snakes and scorpions and over all the power of the enemy".
Even some plant life changed its characteristics after the fall: thorns and thistles and perhaps strangling vines and poisons may have come into existence at that time.
All of physical creation groans, waiting for the redemption, the manifestation of the sons of God, when corruption shall be swallowed up in victorious resurrection. Perhaps the planet itself and the heavens shall be made anew.
We are waiting for the Day when our own bodies, and flora, and fauna, and the earth and heavens itself, shall be made new at the coming of our Lord and Savior.
In the meantime, we can exercize our Christ-given authority over snakes and scorpions and over all the power of the enemy. Jesus bound the strongman, and spoiled his goods - and anyone who believes in Jesus will do as He did and greater works shall he do because He returned to the Father.
Friday, January 08, 2010
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Responding to Supernatural Phenomena With Opennness and Integrity
It ought to be our aim to build a culture of integrity, as well as a culture that embraces whatever God is doing, in our churches. The two ought to be able to exist side-by-side.
The Apostles never expected anyone to believe anything which they couldn't verify - yet that attitude of integrity didn't dilute the level of the power of God which they saw manifested in their midst. It helped.
Embracing the move of God with childlike faith does not mean that we should be intolerant of people who like to check something out before they embrace it.
In fact, when we are sure of our facts, we ought to wish for people to ask us for the evidence - we ought to welcome critical investigation of any miracles we have experienced - so God gets the glory after the infallible proofs have been presented.
Paul said, "...provide things honest in the sight of all men..."
Luke mentioned "...many infallible proofs..." which formed the basis of his Gospel.
When Peter and John heard a rumour that Jesus was risen from the dead, they ran to the tomb, and saw, and believed, and thereby qualified as Apostles of the Lamb - because they became eyewitnesses of His resurrection.
Our faith is based on the reliable witness of faithful men who saw, heard, handled, they ran to the tomb, they believed, their proofs were infallible. Even hundreds of non-disciples were able to verify the supernatural nature of the very same events that were being reported by the disciples in the four gospels.
Even the Pharisees said of Jesus, "...this man has done many miracles..."; and they said of the Apostles, "...it cannot be denied that a notable miracle has occurred..."
The Gospels were written as apologetics - to provide intelligent proofs for their testimony. So when somebody today asks for that type of evidence for an alleged miracle, it doesn't automatically mean he is cynical - it can show a willingness to embrace, to believe. If anyone is sure of a miracle, instead of criticizing such people, why not just present them with the evidence! That's what the Apostles did - otherwise we wouldn't have the four gospels.
In a court of law, someone does not qualify to give testimony about things concerning which he is not an eyewitness. The Apostles' testimony is reliable not only because they believed the women, but because they SAW for themselves. Seeing for themselves was a prerequisite for inclusion as one of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb. The Twelve Apostles were unique from modern-day apostles in that they were eyewitnesses of His resurrection. Jesus admonished Thomas for his doubts, yet He knew it was necessary that Thomas also should see Him after His resurrection so that he also could qualify as one of the uniquely chosen Twelve who should become eyewitnesses of His resurrection.
It's a matter of crossing our t's and dotting our i's - integrity is necessary in a faithful witness. Paul said, "I will not dare to speak about the things which God has not wrought by me".
Biblical manifestations such as healings and tongues are relatively easy to verify.
If someone was born blind, it's easy to find people who can testify to the truth that he was once blind. And it's as obvious as the nose on the faces of all his relatives and friends that he can now see - whether they are believers or not.
And it's relatively easy for people to admit something unexplainable is occurring when they hear someone speaking their language even though they know the person had never learned their language. That kind of thing is pretty easy to verify.
When it comes to phenomena such as feathers, oil, gold, gemstones and oil, the same criteria for authenticity that can be applied to healings, or to the reliability of the Four Gospels, ought to be tolerated, and more than tolerated - it ought to be sought and employed.
Certainly there is a danger that modern churches can fail to embrace the Holy Spirit. But one way we can help them is to provide credible evidence for phenomena that we are asking them to embrace.
That's what the Apostles did for us: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They manifested the power of God - and they didn't shy away from presenting credible evidence for the stories and miracles they were claiming.
It's not hard, when you know it's real.
The Apostles never expected anyone to believe anything which they couldn't verify - yet that attitude of integrity didn't dilute the level of the power of God which they saw manifested in their midst. It helped.
Embracing the move of God with childlike faith does not mean that we should be intolerant of people who like to check something out before they embrace it.
In fact, when we are sure of our facts, we ought to wish for people to ask us for the evidence - we ought to welcome critical investigation of any miracles we have experienced - so God gets the glory after the infallible proofs have been presented.
Paul said, "...provide things honest in the sight of all men..."
Luke mentioned "...many infallible proofs..." which formed the basis of his Gospel.
When Peter and John heard a rumour that Jesus was risen from the dead, they ran to the tomb, and saw, and believed, and thereby qualified as Apostles of the Lamb - because they became eyewitnesses of His resurrection.
Our faith is based on the reliable witness of faithful men who saw, heard, handled, they ran to the tomb, they believed, their proofs were infallible. Even hundreds of non-disciples were able to verify the supernatural nature of the very same events that were being reported by the disciples in the four gospels.
Even the Pharisees said of Jesus, "...this man has done many miracles..."; and they said of the Apostles, "...it cannot be denied that a notable miracle has occurred..."
The Gospels were written as apologetics - to provide intelligent proofs for their testimony. So when somebody today asks for that type of evidence for an alleged miracle, it doesn't automatically mean he is cynical - it can show a willingness to embrace, to believe. If anyone is sure of a miracle, instead of criticizing such people, why not just present them with the evidence! That's what the Apostles did - otherwise we wouldn't have the four gospels.
In a court of law, someone does not qualify to give testimony about things concerning which he is not an eyewitness. The Apostles' testimony is reliable not only because they believed the women, but because they SAW for themselves. Seeing for themselves was a prerequisite for inclusion as one of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb. The Twelve Apostles were unique from modern-day apostles in that they were eyewitnesses of His resurrection. Jesus admonished Thomas for his doubts, yet He knew it was necessary that Thomas also should see Him after His resurrection so that he also could qualify as one of the uniquely chosen Twelve who should become eyewitnesses of His resurrection.
It's a matter of crossing our t's and dotting our i's - integrity is necessary in a faithful witness. Paul said, "I will not dare to speak about the things which God has not wrought by me".
Biblical manifestations such as healings and tongues are relatively easy to verify.
If someone was born blind, it's easy to find people who can testify to the truth that he was once blind. And it's as obvious as the nose on the faces of all his relatives and friends that he can now see - whether they are believers or not.
And it's relatively easy for people to admit something unexplainable is occurring when they hear someone speaking their language even though they know the person had never learned their language. That kind of thing is pretty easy to verify.
When it comes to phenomena such as feathers, oil, gold, gemstones and oil, the same criteria for authenticity that can be applied to healings, or to the reliability of the Four Gospels, ought to be tolerated, and more than tolerated - it ought to be sought and employed.
Certainly there is a danger that modern churches can fail to embrace the Holy Spirit. But one way we can help them is to provide credible evidence for phenomena that we are asking them to embrace.
That's what the Apostles did for us: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They manifested the power of God - and they didn't shy away from presenting credible evidence for the stories and miracles they were claiming.
It's not hard, when you know it's real.
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
'Appearance of Age' at Time of Creation
When God created man on the sixth day, fruit was already available on trees (Genesis 1:16) even though the trees had only been created three days previous (verses 12,13). That means, God created the trees with the 'appearance of age'.
When God created the stars, moon and sun - evidently their light immediately appeared on earth on that same day - even though the light from the closest star currently takes eight years to arrive on earth. That means, God caused the light to begin arriving immediately, giving an 'appearance of age' for the universe.
Modern dating methods used by scientists cannot take into consideration that God caused things to happen in a day which currently take years.
Grace vs. Legalism or Licentiousness
Today I had an online chat with a friend about the subject of legalism vs. licentiousness especially as regards to our evangelism style.
It was centred around the statement in the Epistle of Jude, "Faith without works is dead". I make it my aim that my view on "legalism vs grace" always comes across as "pure, peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy" (James 3:17). James talks about the importance of expressing our knowledge and wisdom with "meekness" of wisdom (verse 13) rather than with "strife" (verse 16).
Our chat went something like this - and, leave a comment if you sense anything lacking in my appreciation of God's heart:
John
Hi
been preaching lately?
Friend
not for a few weeks been very busy wid uni
what about you?
John
Yes
Friend
thats great were do you preach?
John
One-on-one
Friend
hows that going?
yeah I prob will have to do one on ones for a while
John
So I guess it's not really called Preaching when it's one-on-one is it
Friend
whats your thought on james concerning works as evidence of salvation?
John
I agree with James
Friend
na not really
yeah it is hard for people to understand we are not pushing a works salvation isnt it?
John
James was talking to people who were adulterers
People can't be continuing in that lifestyle and expect to be saved
Friend
can you show me where it talks about adulteres?
I thought he was talking about abraham and rahab as well
John
4:4
Friend
do you think 4:1-2 can be included in this idea?
John
Yes because the whole letter was written to the same people. James was also addressing people who were cursing others (3:10)
Friend
and I noticed boasting in chapter 3
John
He was addressing people who were saying that it is God Himself who was tempting them to sin, as if that justified sinning (1:13)
He was writing to people who were warring amongst themselves (4:1)
Friend
now looking at it that way it seems it encompasses almost everything, what about the beggining where he adresses the 12 tribes dispersed?
Friend
yeah it is an interesting book, how would you adress someone who said to you "NO you are preaching a works salvation"
John
It was mainly Jewish people whom James was addressing
He called them "sinners"
Friend
yes well they were the first convert
John
Paul never addressed true believers as "sinners" even the Corinthians who had a lot of stuff still to fix up!
But James was addressing "sinners"
He was addressing the types of people who employ destitute people as labourers and then refuse to pay them even when they cry out
Friend
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
if these people were not saved whats the faith trying about?
John
Yes his letter addresses a variety of people at various sections of his Epistle. So when we interpret each section, it helps if we understand exactly who he was addressing in each section, and what those people were up to
John
I think it's highly appropriate to tell an adulterous man who is cursing people and waging war, completely ignoring the poor, and refusing to pay wages, that it's not enough just to say, "I'm a Christian".
Friend
could adultery also include adultery with the world?
Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
John
I suppose it would depend on how 'adultery with the world' is being expressed in the individual's life. If he's continuing in adultery, cursing, and deliberately ripping disadvantaged people off, then yes, he is committing adultery with the world
It's also important to remember what type of situations Moses was addressing when he gave them the Law.
Moses was addressing a world which was so warped that they needed to be told that it's not a good idea to have sex with animals.
He was addressing a world which needed someone to tell them that it's not a good idea to have sex with your mother
John
He was addressing a world which needed to be told that it isn't right to own a slave against his will for the rest of his life and mistreat him or her
Friend
Do you think that the people of that day did not think it was wrong to murder?
John
I think many of them were so entrenched in these things and their conscience was so dulled and they delighted in one another doing such things. God was sending the Israelites into a land of people who thought it was okay to cause their children to walk through fire in sacrifice to their gods
Friend
Im not sure I agree at this point
Im not sure might take some time to think about it though it is interesting concept the last few paragrapghs
John
Yes so it was this same type of blindness and self-deception that James was probably addressing - Jews who had been scattered amongst the Gentiles and who had picked up their lawless ways of living.
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was okay!
Friend
I dont know I would have to read the book more indepth with those thoughts in mind
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was okay!
John
okay
Friend
Isnt this a lot of whats going on now?
John
Yes it sure is
Friend
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was
Friend
So can we apply those scriptures to people who are acting like that? How would you approach it if they were screaming legalist?
John
I heard the other day about a Pastor who had invited a guest speaker to his church, and the pastor sent two girls to the guest-speaker's hotel room. It's just wrong!
Friend
which church was this in the USA or Australia?
John
USA. And I heard about a Pastor in Pakistan who was lying about his ministry to attract money, and when a fellow-Pakistani exposed him, he had him beaten up. It's just wrong!
Friend
just a passing thought were you named after johnathon edwards?
oh that happens all the time not so much the beating up but the lying about a ministry we had a few come here and they were arrested
John
I don't think any sensible person with a good heart, would argue with us and call us 'legalistic' if we warn someone who thinks it's okay to keep committing adultery, lying, extortion etc.
And you are right - these things are all too common
Friend
haha what type of "christians" have you been exspoused too?
John
I've met Christians who think it's okay to commit fornication
Friend
I meet them all the time in the clubbing district when witnessing, friends from many different churches, the see nothing wrong with it
John
There is a big difference in my opinion between someone who falls into sin and feels really bad about it and confesses it and wishes they won't do it again - and someone who actually teaches that it's not a sin or that it's okay to keep doing it and who doesn't really wish to change or feel bad at all.
Friend
you tell them its wrong to get drunk and sleep around they either mention legalism or christian liberty
i agree with you on the difference I myself have fallen into sin several times
grevious sin
Have felt really convicted about it and had to put it right
John
Yes these people even try to quote the Bible. They are getting close to the type of situation which James was warning about. And that's why Paul said,"Be not deceived, God is not mocked..." We do reap what we sow - eternally. But there is a big difference between someone who sins a hundred times and confesses it with grief everytime, and someone who doesn't feel bad and even thinks God is okay with it. I would approach these two types of people in a similar yet slightly different way.
John
We all have sinned brother. But if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to... It's those who don't confess it as sin who are in trouble. And these are the one's James was addressing with statements like "faith without works is dead" and "weep and howl ye sinners"
Friend
yes, so you would agree we are to test oursleves to see if we are truely in the faith?
John
Well, on the one hand, we can be too introspective, we can feel held-back by our sins even though we've confessed them. But on the other hand, if we are utterly disregarding others, and making a lifestyle of it, then yes - we urgently need to examine ourself.
Remember that when Paul wrote to "examine yourselves" he was addressing people who were getting drunk at church and completely despising the poor.
Friend
What do you think caused all this problem concerning people that live in continuous sin with no repentance?
Friend
And call themselves christians?
John
...Paul was not only addressing people who were getting drunk AT CHURCH but who also thought it was okay to have a member who was sleeping with his stepmother, doing things which even the unbelievers wouldn't do!
But if somone feels bad about what they've done, Paul told them how to treat him. He said, "Confirm your love to him, welcome him, lest Satan take advantage of his sorrow"
John
See the difference? If we apply James and Pauls statements to the same type of situations, then we are correctly applying the Word.
But if not, we might not be conveying God's heart exactly
Friend
ummm what about a serial rapist they are often sorry, can a serial rapist be a christian?
John
Not if he teaches that it's okay
Friend
what id he is sorry everytime and knows its wrong?
John
If he can scarcely look up to heaven for shame, and cries out to God and says, "How could I have done that?!!! God, forgive me!" Then he is forgiven, 70X7. But if he comes to church with a brazen attitude and when confronted, says it's okay, then someone needs to tell him that faith without works is dead.
Someone needs to tell him, "Examine yourself, see whether ye be in the faith".
Friend
I not sure I agree, the fact that someone is raping all the time is evidence of being lost and had never been made a new creature
John
Yes I suppose it all depends on whether the person is coming looking for help, or whether they don't feel they need help. James was addressing people who obviously didn't believe they needed help. They even justified themselves.
I would address a person differently if he came admitting his need for help, than I would if it was someone who was actually teaching that fornication is Biblical
Friend
I have to get back to my studies, I am doing a unit that hates God they teach that God is dead in a post christian world so its pretty fullon. Was good talking to you about this you have given me something to think about. keep up the witnessing and pray for us as we will pray for you
John
Thank you. I pray for a soul-winning year for you! You're an inspiration.
I'm inspired by your example and zeal
Friend
Thanks for the encouragement we need it, we just done a video with mormons and are are doing one with 7th day adventists this week, we actually go and talk to them and discuss the scriptures with them
so pray for that
so pray for that
John
Remember, it's not he who just talks to souls, but he that "winneth" souls, that is wise.
Good on you. You are labouring abundantly for the Lord. A good example of hard work.
Love and blessings brother.
Friend
thanks
John
:):)
Friend
cya mate and God bless
It was centred around the statement in the Epistle of Jude, "Faith without works is dead". I make it my aim that my view on "legalism vs grace" always comes across as "pure, peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy" (James 3:17). James talks about the importance of expressing our knowledge and wisdom with "meekness" of wisdom (verse 13) rather than with "strife" (verse 16).
Our chat went something like this - and, leave a comment if you sense anything lacking in my appreciation of God's heart:
John
Hi
been preaching lately?
Friend
not for a few weeks been very busy wid uni
what about you?
John
Yes
Friend
thats great were do you preach?
John
One-on-one
Friend
hows that going?
yeah I prob will have to do one on ones for a while
John
So I guess it's not really called Preaching when it's one-on-one is it
Friend
whats your thought on james concerning works as evidence of salvation?
John
I agree with James
Friend
na not really
yeah it is hard for people to understand we are not pushing a works salvation isnt it?
John
James was talking to people who were adulterers
People can't be continuing in that lifestyle and expect to be saved
Friend
can you show me where it talks about adulteres?
I thought he was talking about abraham and rahab as well
John
4:4
Friend
do you think 4:1-2 can be included in this idea?
John
Yes because the whole letter was written to the same people. James was also addressing people who were cursing others (3:10)
Friend
and I noticed boasting in chapter 3
John
He was addressing people who were saying that it is God Himself who was tempting them to sin, as if that justified sinning (1:13)
He was writing to people who were warring amongst themselves (4:1)
Friend
now looking at it that way it seems it encompasses almost everything, what about the beggining where he adresses the 12 tribes dispersed?
Friend
yeah it is an interesting book, how would you adress someone who said to you "NO you are preaching a works salvation"
John
It was mainly Jewish people whom James was addressing
He called them "sinners"
Friend
yes well they were the first convert
John
Paul never addressed true believers as "sinners" even the Corinthians who had a lot of stuff still to fix up!
But James was addressing "sinners"
He was addressing the types of people who employ destitute people as labourers and then refuse to pay them even when they cry out
Friend
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
if these people were not saved whats the faith trying about?
John
Yes his letter addresses a variety of people at various sections of his Epistle. So when we interpret each section, it helps if we understand exactly who he was addressing in each section, and what those people were up to
John
I think it's highly appropriate to tell an adulterous man who is cursing people and waging war, completely ignoring the poor, and refusing to pay wages, that it's not enough just to say, "I'm a Christian".
Friend
could adultery also include adultery with the world?
Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
John
I suppose it would depend on how 'adultery with the world' is being expressed in the individual's life. If he's continuing in adultery, cursing, and deliberately ripping disadvantaged people off, then yes, he is committing adultery with the world
It's also important to remember what type of situations Moses was addressing when he gave them the Law.
Moses was addressing a world which was so warped that they needed to be told that it's not a good idea to have sex with animals.
He was addressing a world which needed someone to tell them that it's not a good idea to have sex with your mother
John
He was addressing a world which needed to be told that it isn't right to own a slave against his will for the rest of his life and mistreat him or her
Friend
Do you think that the people of that day did not think it was wrong to murder?
John
I think many of them were so entrenched in these things and their conscience was so dulled and they delighted in one another doing such things. God was sending the Israelites into a land of people who thought it was okay to cause their children to walk through fire in sacrifice to their gods
Friend
Im not sure I agree at this point
Im not sure might take some time to think about it though it is interesting concept the last few paragrapghs
John
Yes so it was this same type of blindness and self-deception that James was probably addressing - Jews who had been scattered amongst the Gentiles and who had picked up their lawless ways of living.
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was okay!
Friend
I dont know I would have to read the book more indepth with those thoughts in mind
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was okay!
John
okay
Friend
Isnt this a lot of whats going on now?
John
Yes it sure is
Friend
And who adopted a 'belief' in Christ but whose lifestyles hadn't changed one little bit and they thought that was
Friend
So can we apply those scriptures to people who are acting like that? How would you approach it if they were screaming legalist?
John
I heard the other day about a Pastor who had invited a guest speaker to his church, and the pastor sent two girls to the guest-speaker's hotel room. It's just wrong!
Friend
which church was this in the USA or Australia?
John
USA. And I heard about a Pastor in Pakistan who was lying about his ministry to attract money, and when a fellow-Pakistani exposed him, he had him beaten up. It's just wrong!
Friend
just a passing thought were you named after johnathon edwards?
oh that happens all the time not so much the beating up but the lying about a ministry we had a few come here and they were arrested
John
I don't think any sensible person with a good heart, would argue with us and call us 'legalistic' if we warn someone who thinks it's okay to keep committing adultery, lying, extortion etc.
And you are right - these things are all too common
Friend
haha what type of "christians" have you been exspoused too?
John
I've met Christians who think it's okay to commit fornication
Friend
I meet them all the time in the clubbing district when witnessing, friends from many different churches, the see nothing wrong with it
John
There is a big difference in my opinion between someone who falls into sin and feels really bad about it and confesses it and wishes they won't do it again - and someone who actually teaches that it's not a sin or that it's okay to keep doing it and who doesn't really wish to change or feel bad at all.
Friend
you tell them its wrong to get drunk and sleep around they either mention legalism or christian liberty
i agree with you on the difference I myself have fallen into sin several times
grevious sin
Have felt really convicted about it and had to put it right
John
Yes these people even try to quote the Bible. They are getting close to the type of situation which James was warning about. And that's why Paul said,"Be not deceived, God is not mocked..." We do reap what we sow - eternally. But there is a big difference between someone who sins a hundred times and confesses it with grief everytime, and someone who doesn't feel bad and even thinks God is okay with it. I would approach these two types of people in a similar yet slightly different way.
John
We all have sinned brother. But if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to... It's those who don't confess it as sin who are in trouble. And these are the one's James was addressing with statements like "faith without works is dead" and "weep and howl ye sinners"
Friend
yes, so you would agree we are to test oursleves to see if we are truely in the faith?
John
Well, on the one hand, we can be too introspective, we can feel held-back by our sins even though we've confessed them. But on the other hand, if we are utterly disregarding others, and making a lifestyle of it, then yes - we urgently need to examine ourself.
Remember that when Paul wrote to "examine yourselves" he was addressing people who were getting drunk at church and completely despising the poor.
Friend
What do you think caused all this problem concerning people that live in continuous sin with no repentance?
Friend
And call themselves christians?
John
...Paul was not only addressing people who were getting drunk AT CHURCH but who also thought it was okay to have a member who was sleeping with his stepmother, doing things which even the unbelievers wouldn't do!
But if somone feels bad about what they've done, Paul told them how to treat him. He said, "Confirm your love to him, welcome him, lest Satan take advantage of his sorrow"
John
See the difference? If we apply James and Pauls statements to the same type of situations, then we are correctly applying the Word.
But if not, we might not be conveying God's heart exactly
Friend
ummm what about a serial rapist they are often sorry, can a serial rapist be a christian?
John
Not if he teaches that it's okay
Friend
what id he is sorry everytime and knows its wrong?
John
If he can scarcely look up to heaven for shame, and cries out to God and says, "How could I have done that?!!! God, forgive me!" Then he is forgiven, 70X7. But if he comes to church with a brazen attitude and when confronted, says it's okay, then someone needs to tell him that faith without works is dead.
Someone needs to tell him, "Examine yourself, see whether ye be in the faith".
Friend
I not sure I agree, the fact that someone is raping all the time is evidence of being lost and had never been made a new creature
John
Yes I suppose it all depends on whether the person is coming looking for help, or whether they don't feel they need help. James was addressing people who obviously didn't believe they needed help. They even justified themselves.
I would address a person differently if he came admitting his need for help, than I would if it was someone who was actually teaching that fornication is Biblical
Friend
I have to get back to my studies, I am doing a unit that hates God they teach that God is dead in a post christian world so its pretty fullon. Was good talking to you about this you have given me something to think about. keep up the witnessing and pray for us as we will pray for you
John
Thank you. I pray for a soul-winning year for you! You're an inspiration.
I'm inspired by your example and zeal
Friend
Thanks for the encouragement we need it, we just done a video with mormons and are are doing one with 7th day adventists this week, we actually go and talk to them and discuss the scriptures with them
so pray for that
so pray for that
John
Remember, it's not he who just talks to souls, but he that "winneth" souls, that is wise.
Good on you. You are labouring abundantly for the Lord. A good example of hard work.
Love and blessings brother.
Friend
thanks
John
:):)
Friend
cya mate and God bless
Monday, January 04, 2010
God's Integrity
During the work of creation, God began every action with His Word - with a spoken pronouncement of intention and will, in consultation with the other members of the Godhead, that is, with two or three witnesses. And He later assessed each of His own works, and deemed it to be not just "good" but "very good".
The Six Days of Creation Lasted 24hrs Each
Each of the six days of creation probably lasted for 24hrs each - not for a thousand years. The Biblical day starts at night, followed by day. And each of the six days of creation consisted of one period of darkness followed by one period of light. If the darkness lasted 500 years, followed by 500 years of light, photosynthesizing plants could not have survived. It also would have necessitated that God later sped-up the speed of the earth's rotation on its axis - but the Bible doesn't mention that any such speeding-up of the earth's rotation ever occurred.
Genesis 1:1 and the Age of the Universe
Even though Genesis 1:1,2 doesn't begin with the usual "And God said..." like the rest of the events of creation, I think it's probable that no part of the earth nor of the universe existed before the first of the six days of creation which are described for us in Genesis chapter one.
Each of the events described in Genesis 1:1-5 probably took place on the first day of creation.
Probably nothing was created at any time prior to the first day.
It says, "In the beginning..." not "In a beginning...". There was only one beginning.
Genesis 2:1 summarized the creation-week like this: "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." If the previous chapter was not meant to describe the creation of all things in six days - but a mere refurbishment of the existing heavens and earth - then it would have instead summarized the creation-week by saying something like, "So tat's how God's long-awaited refurbishment of the ancient heavens and earth were done". But instead chapter one was not described as being a mere improvement or refurbishment of the heavens and the earth - it is summarized as being the story of creation from the "beginning" right up to the time when they were "finished". The whole thing appears to have taken place within those six days.
But even if the heavens and the formless earth were indeed created before the first day of creation, that was before light existed, and before the sun and stars existed, before there was day and night or seasons and years. Conditions would have been so different that even if that period left remaining visible marks on the universe or on the present-day earth, it would be impossible for those marks to indicate the age of the earth based on dating methods that may be possible under present conditions.
Each of the events described in Genesis 1:1-5 probably took place on the first day of creation.
Probably nothing was created at any time prior to the first day.
It says, "In the beginning..." not "In a beginning...". There was only one beginning.
Genesis 2:1 summarized the creation-week like this: "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." If the previous chapter was not meant to describe the creation of all things in six days - but a mere refurbishment of the existing heavens and earth - then it would have instead summarized the creation-week by saying something like, "So tat's how God's long-awaited refurbishment of the ancient heavens and earth were done". But instead chapter one was not described as being a mere improvement or refurbishment of the heavens and the earth - it is summarized as being the story of creation from the "beginning" right up to the time when they were "finished". The whole thing appears to have taken place within those six days.
But even if the heavens and the formless earth were indeed created before the first day of creation, that was before light existed, and before the sun and stars existed, before there was day and night or seasons and years. Conditions would have been so different that even if that period left remaining visible marks on the universe or on the present-day earth, it would be impossible for those marks to indicate the age of the earth based on dating methods that may be possible under present conditions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)