Submitted as a comment by BU family member Geogie Porgie
I was once challenged to expand on an outline given by Kaiser in Toward An Old Testament Theology, and read the Bible to discover that the Old Testament Theology is best unified under the theme “The Promises of God” and that the entire Bible could really be seen inter alia, as a catalogue of a large number of promises which God has made, and a record of how he has kept several of these promises.
As I made a deeper search to see where I could find promises that were not immediately as obvious as the major fulfilled promises or of the covenants, and as I extracted and attempted. to co- ordinate the promises that I found, I discovered that it is not unreasonable to conclude that nearly everything of major significance in the Bible depends on a promise of God.
In any argument or discussion with respect to the promises of God in any part of the Old Testament or the Bible as a whole, it is imperative that we ask and answer honestly the following important and relevant questions as the Bible text is carefully perused.
Has God indeed truly made any significant promises?
- If so, what are these promises? To whom were they made? Of what general or lasting significance are they? Do they have any relevance at all for contemporary men? If so what is the relevance?
- If God has indeed made any promises, has He been faithful in keeping any or all of these promises to date? If not, why not?
- If He has indeed fulfilled any, what does this say about His character? What is the further significance of His fulfilling these promises? Were the fulfilled promises completely or only partially fulfilled?
- If he has fulfilled even a single promise, what is the significance or implication for mankind?
- If He has only fulfilled some of His promises why is this? Is this because He was unable? Incapable? Untrue? Dishonest? Will He ever get around to fulfilling the unfulfilled portions? If so, When? Does He care that some men are seriously depending on Him to fulfill His promises?
- Are the as yet unfulfilled promises of serious import? Should we be concerned about whether God will get around to fulfilling these or not?
If so, How? Why?
The Bible was read, and reread in sections according to 16 basic divisions, and the promises therein listed and discussed to indicate whether the stated promise is as yet fulfilled or unfulfilled.
Where the promise has been fulfilled, the location in the Bible where its fulfillment is recorded was pointed out, and any New Testament correlation explained. For example, the several New Testament scriptures which comment and prove that God kept the promise of Genesis 3:15, are grouped in the chapter on Genesis 1-3.
The important significance of the flood as taught by Jesus in Matthew 24:38-39; Luke 17:27 and Peter in 2 Peter 2 5; 2 Peter 3:5-12, as it relates to the certainty of a future universal judgment at the second coming is explained.
In discussing the Abrahamic covenant in the section on the Patriarchal period, the relevant Scriptures in Romans 9-11 and Galatians are reviewed. In the case of promises that are not as yet fulfilled, the point at which these promises will be fulfilled as identified in the New Testament were found.
This study proceeded period by period and book by book, using the basic division of the Bible in the quest and adventure of seeking the promises of God. I found adequate evidence to answer the questions listed above most conclusively.
The answers on Genesis constituted my 400 page dissertation for my DMin.
178 responses so far ↓
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM
David
Thanks for elevating my comment to the status of a thread.
ROK opined at // February 25, 2009 at 6:44 pm
GP
One question you left out is why “Promises” and what is conditional upon those promises?
Rok I didnt think that I needed to address that question since there were so many presented. But perhaps you can offer an answer to that question.
Please note that “promises” here include warnings, prophecies or predictions and also the covenants, some of which are conditional as you suggest. The major conditional covenant is of course the one given at Sinai (i.e the law).
Perhaps I can give a general note on the covenants.
Donkey with flying wings // February 25, 2009 at 7:28 PM
It’s interesting to note how people think because “it’s on the bible” that it has some eternal significance… well, that’s because we in this part of the world have been brought up from childhood to believe the bible is ‘the word of God’ and everything in it has to endure until the end of time.
OK… everybody must choose. However ‘the problem’ is — people who just blindly believe are robbed of their birthright… the ability to THINK.
That was fine when we lived on a flat earth in the Middle Ages. But since then the world got to be round and we live in different times… nobody in these days can live in a whales belly for days, etc.
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Here is my notes on the covenants.
Consideration and tracing of the Old Testament promises throughout the Bible reveals that the major Old Testament promises that are as yet unfulfilled, and many of those that are fulfilled, are associated with the eight major covenants which explain the outworking of God’s purposes with man.
The promises of the Covenants of God are thus a major focus that must be addressed in a serious study of the Bible. It is therefore necessary to state some principles about covenants.
The Covenants of God is a major plank in the study of the Bible because it is in these grand promises given to Israel that we ascertain the outline of God’s dealing with Israel (and man in general) throughout the ages.
Remember that God promised in Genesis that he would bless the world through Abraham and his seed (his people and ultimately Christ.)
According to C.I Scofield, “A covenant is a sovereign pronouncement of God by which he establishes a relationship
(1) between himself and an individual (e.g. Adam in the Edenic Covenant, Genesis 2:16ff.)
(2) between Himself and mankind in general (e.g. in the promise of the Noahic Covenant never again to destroy all flesh with a flood Genesis 9: 9 ff.) , (3) between Himself and a nation (e.g. Israel in the Mosaic Covenant, Exodus 19:3ff.), or
(4) between Himself and a specific human family (e.g. the house of David in the promise of a kingly line in perpetuity through the Davidic covenant, 2 Samuel 7: 16ff).
The following important principles about covenants must be firmly grasped. Biblical Covenants are either conditional or unconditional. The Mosaic Covenant or Sinaitic covenant or the Covenant of the Law, that God made in Exodus 19:5 is the only conditional Covenant in the Bible.
It was a conditional one, because the fulfillment of all the promises God made to Israel at this time were on the condition that they obeyed his voice and keep his covenant commandments, as implied by the words, “if ye will obey, then ye will be” followed by “all the people answering “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do (Exodus 19:5, 8).
The key wording in a conditional covenant is thus “If you will… Then I will”. The outcome of the promises contained in a conditional covenant is therefore based upon man’s faithfulness. “If you will do (such and such) then I will do (whatever I promised). This is clearly exemplified in Exodus19:5 ff., or Deuteronomy 28 especially verses 1 and 5 where this covenant is stated
All of the other covenants are unconditional, because in each of them, God Himself is responsible for keeping the terms of the covenant. They are “unconditional in the sense that God obligates himself in grace by the unrestricted declaration, “I will,” to accomplish certain announced purposes despite any failure on the part of the person or people with whom he covenants. The human response to the divinely announced purpose is always important, leading as it does to blessings for obedience and discipline for disobedience.”
It is noteworthy that the phrase “I will” occurs seven times in the wording of the Abrahamic Covenant, twelve times in the Palestinian Covenant, seven in the Davidic Covenant, and seven times in the Noahic Covenant. This clearly marks them as unconditional covenants. Consequently their fulfillment is not conditional on human faithfulness, but on God’s faithfulness.
“The three universal and general covenants are the Adamic, the Noahic and the Edenic in that the whole race is represented as present in Adam in his failure. All the other covenants are made with Israel or Israelites and apply primarily to them although with ultimate blessing to the whole world.”
When studying the great Covenants of the Bible, one must keep firmly fixed in mind that they were generally made directly to Israel, or men like Adam and Noah who existed before the formation of this nation. With the exception of the aspect of the New Covenant that affects the Church, they were not made to the members of the Body of Christ during this present age.
Ephesians 2:12-13 helps us to appreciate this. It reads hus “Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh; who are called Uncircumcision (Gentiles) by what is called the Circumcision (Jews) made in the flesh by hands; that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.”
Another very important point to ponder when studying the covenants is to recognize their foundational importance in our understanding the Scriptures, and our comprehension of God’s agenda for the future.
Without a firm, intellectual grasp of the data supplied to us from studying the promises in the Covenants, we will drift aimlessly in our study of the Word and will get caught in the trap of “devotionalizing” the Old Testament to oblivion. Without the collective data of the covenants, any “theories” concerning Biblical Eschatology will be just that-theory.
But when the covenants are thoroughly studied, it will become clear that they lay the foundation for the Pre-millennial teaching, although they do not give any definitive information on the Rapture. That is a truth never really alluded to in the Old Testament, the translation of Enoch and Elijah being the exception.
This principle is also demonstrated by the fact that there is in the Abrahamic Covenant a threefold provision to the descendants of Abraham. God promised to Abraham (and to his physical posterity); Land, Seed (i.e. A great Nation of the world), and that through his seed, there will be a blessing to all the nations of the world.
Each of these three aspects of the Abrahamic Covenant are later amplified in the other three unconditional covenants. The Land promised in the context of the Abrahamic Covenant is amplified in the Palestinian Covenant. The “Seed” (i.e. great Nation) aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant is amplified in the Davidic Covenant, and lastly the “Blessing” aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant is amplified in the New Covenant.
As part of the Abrahamic covenant of Genesis 12:1 3, God had promised inter alia to make of Abraham a great nation. This was partially fulfilled under the terms of the Davidic covenant. History confirms that the nation was indeed a great nation as it reached its zenith under the rule of David and Solomon.
In the Palestinian covenant of Deuteronomy 30:1 9 the promise concerning the possession of the land of Israel given in the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:8) is stressed; here the conditions under which Israel entered the land of promise is at this point in time the most important thing God wants to get through to His people.
In the Davidic covenant of 2 Samuel 7:12 17, upon which the future kingdom of Christ was to be founded (Romans 1:3), the everlasting covenant term or condition of the Abrahamic covenant is stressed because the promise to David was to establish the kingdom (the great nation of the Abrahamic covenant—Israel was its zenith in the period of the monarchy) and to establish his house and kingdom forevermore.
Verification of the principles of the covenants are inevitable, since all the aspects of the principles depend on God’s immutability and ability to keep his promises. This is confirmed by Scripture passages such as Joshua 21:45 which reads “There failed nothing of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.” Similarly in Joshua 23:14b we read “and ye know in your hearts, and in your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spoke concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof.” Again in 1 Kings 8:56 “Blessed be the Lord, who hath given rest unto his people, Israel, according to all that he promised; there hath not failed one word of all his good promise, which he promised by the hand of Moses, his servant.”
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 7:39 PM
GP
I see you want me to answer based on your proddings. While you pointing me to Moses, I would want to begin with the promises to Abraham and before that the protection afforded Adam & Eve after they left the garden and Cain.
Then we can come through the promise not to flood the earth again and most of all the promise of eternal life.
Quite apart from your discovery of promises, the Old Testament long ago was known as the “Book of Promises” to the Jews.
My question is, what is the significance of the promises? Politicians walk about and promise people to get a vote. Their manifesto is also a book of promises. We can understand the politician but what is God looking for in return? Why was it necessary to heap so much promises on man?
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 7:44 PM
MANY people who study and believe the Bible are quite intelligent, and dont just blindly believe.
There were many great scientists who believed, and I dont think they can be said not to be capable of thinking.
It as you say … everybody must choose.
Most commentators believe that Jonah died in the whales belly and was resussitated. This seems to be the interpretation given by Jesus when he referred to Jonah as a type of himself.
At any rate, it is well documented that in fact that there is a record of a man having been swallowed by a great fish and to have lived the tale.
Let me look up the reference so you can check it for your self.
That was fine when we lived on a flat earth in the Middle Ages. But since then the world got to be round and we live in different times… nobody in these days can live in a whales belly for days, etc.
David // February 25, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Not a problem GP, you have Chris H to thank who opined to us via an email that your comment is worthy of highlight and we agreed :-)
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Thanks again David & thanks CH!
Rok I didn’t point you to Moses per se. That was more en passant. I agree that the Abrahamic Covenant is one of the major promises in the Word, and I have so noted in the comments above on covenants. It is difficult to fully understand the Word without appreciating the Abrahamic covenant. (I am not talking about salvation here now, I am talking about understanding the Word.) I have also noted the Edenic and Noahic covenants though not in great detail above.
I don’t think that we should compare the promises made by politicians with the promises of God for one moment. I believe, and this a thread that can also be followed through the Bible, that God wanted to fellowship with mankind. And so he created a whole world as a habitat for man- but man lost out on that paradise. In Revelation 21 we see that God gets his greatest wish.
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 8:10 PM
I believe I scanned the below about 10 years ago from
McGee.J.Vernon. JONAH, Dead or Alive? Thru The Bible Books
The age old question remains. Can a fish swallow a man? There are several accounts on record of men being swallowed by large fish and living to tell the tale. Grace W. Kellogg, in her excellent little booklet on the subject, The Bible Today, has compiled a list of the records -which have been authenticated-of the experiences of living creatures in fish who later were rescued alive. We are quoting from this section of Grace W. Kellogg’s book in full:
“There are at least two known monsters of the deep who could easily have swallowed Jonah.
They are the Balaenoptera Musculus or sulphur-bottom whale, and the Rhinodon Typicus or whale shark. Neither of these monsters of the deep have any teeth. They feed in an interesting way by opening their enormous mouths, submerging their lower jaw, and rushing through the water at terrific speed. After straining out the water, they swallow whatever is left. A sulphur-bottom whale, one hundred feet long, was captured off Cape Cod in 1933. His mouth was ten or twelve feet wide -so big be could easily have swallowed a horse. These whales have four to six compartments in their stomachs, in any one of which a colony of men could find free lodging. They might even have a choice of rooms, for in the head of this whale is a wonderful air storage chamber, an enlargement of the nasal sinus, often measuring seven feet high, seven feet wide, by fourteen feet long. If he has an unwelcome guest on board who gives him a headache, the whale swims to the nearest land and gets rid of the offender as he did Jonah.
“The Cleveland Plain Dealer recently quoted an article by Dr. Ransome Harvey who said that a dog was lost overboard from a ship. It was found in the head of a whale six days later, alive and barking.
“Frank Bullen, F.R.G.S., who wrote, ‘The Cruise of the Cathalot,’ tells of a shark fifteen feet in length which was found in the stomach of a whale. He says that when dying the whale ejects the contents of its stomach.
“The late Dr. Dixon stated that in a museum at Beirut, Syria, there is a head of a whale shark big enough to swallow the largest man. He also tells of a white shark of the
Mediterranean which swallowed a whole horse; another swallowed a reindeer minus only its horns. In still another Mediterranean white shark was found a whole sea cow, about the size of an ox.
These facts show that Jonah could have been swallowed by either a whale or a shark.But has any man besides Jonah been swallowed by either a whale or a shark and lived to tell the tale?
We know of two instances.
“The famous French scientist, M.de Parville, writes of James Bartley, who in the region of the Falkland Islands near South America, was supposed to have been drowned at sea. Two days after his disappearance, the sailors made a catch of a whale. When it was cut up, much to their surprise they found their missing friend alive but unconscious inside the whale. He revived and has been enjoying the best of health ever since his adventure.
“Dr. Harry Rimmer, President of the Research Science Bureau of Los Angeles, writes of another case, ‘In the Literary Digest we noticed an account of an English sailor who was swallowed by a gigantic Rhinodon in the English Channel. Briefly, the account stated that in the attempt to harpoon one of these monstrous sharks, this sailor fell overboard, and before he could be picked up again, the shark turned and engulfed him. Forty-eight hours after the accident occurred, the fish was sighted and slain. When the shark was opened by the sailors, they were amazed to find the man unconscious but alive! He was rushed to the hospital where he was found to be suffering from shock alone, and a few hours later was discharged as being physically fit. The account concluded by saying that the man was on exhibit in a London Museum at a shilling admittance fee; being advertised as “The Jonah of the Twentieth Century.” “In 1926 Dr. Rimmer met this man, and writes that his physical appearance was odd; his body was devoid of hair and patches of yellowish-brown color covered his entire skin.
“If two men could exist for two days and nights inside of marine monsters, could not a prophet of God, under His direct care and protection, stand the experience a day and a night longer -so why should we doubt God’s Word?”
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 8:13 PM
GP
“God promised to Abraham (and to his physical posterity); Land, Seed (i.e. A great Nation of the world), and that through his seed, there will be a blessing to all the nations of the world.”
Now we cooking with gas. Land? He promised the Hebrews & Israelites some land? So am I to assume that the land promised was somebody else’s? Did God have spare land hidden some where?
Now don’t get me wrong, I am just trying to find out the nature of the promises and to whom were the promises made and why the promises were made.
It would seem to me that if all the land was God’s land, then what promises of land had to be made? Obviously, all the prime lands were already occupied by other races and nations.
What was so wrong with these other nations that without any motive they are invaded to secure lands for the Israelites. It would seem that God set a precedent for the Jews to follow which they seem to be doing to this day. However, nowadays it is about controlling the spoils of a country.
For example, Jews and banking; ownership of means of production in countries other than theirs; controlling trade in certain commodities, etc.
Don’t you think that the promises of special treatment means that the Jews are special and that therefore the jews have a right to feel special? That they are truly God’s “chosen people”?
When Christ said that you should forgive your brother 70 times seven, do you think he was referring to Jews forgiving Gentiles?
While we speak of anybody converting to Christ, do you believe that was a statement opened to all and sundry or just to the Jews? Are the promises in the Bible confined to the Jews? If not, where is the evidence?
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 8:38 PM
GP
Jonah in the belly of a whale.
I would posit that just as there were flying chariots, there were chariots that went beneath the sea. Funny enough, many of the earlier submarines were shaped like whales. Now I am not saying that as proof of anything, but we know that the men of those times could only describe what they saw within the confines of their knowledge.
Now here is the verse:
Jonah 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.
The Lord had prepared a big fish? What does that mean. One thing about the accounts is that while the observations lack specificity, the detail is certainly not lacking and if the passage said that the Lord prepared a fish, that in itself has meaning. Note the words “God prepared a fish” He did not summon the fish of the sea and ordered that Jonah be swallowed, he “prepared” a fish. He certainly was not about to cook the fish???
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 8:42 PM
GP
“MANY people who study and believe the Bible are quite intelligent, and dont just blindly believe.”
Now! Now! Now! GP. A long division sum that start out wrong can’t end up right. If you start with the wrong premises, brilliant or not, you will err. You shouls also state that these men start with certain assumptions.
Under the circumstances, brilliance does not matter and certainly cannot correct improper or incorrect assumptions.
Given that they start with certain assumptions, they do blindly believe.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 8:45 PM
GP
“I don’t think that we should compare the promises made by politicians with the promises of God for one moment.”
Come on GP, that was not a comparison, it was a human example to show that promises are not made in a void. I used that example because I cannot find anywhere else except through advertising, an example of promises to a nation.
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 8:58 PM
@ Rok
1- Are the promises in the Bible confined to the Jews? NO
If not, where is the evidence? All over the NT you will find promises made to believers.
All through the OT you will find promises (warnings) predictions made against the nations.
Some folk sing a silly chorus in their churhes. EVERY PROMISE IN THE BOOK IS MINE, EVERY CHAPTER EVERY VERSE EVERY LINE! This is most unscriptural. Where the promises are to Israel, Moab, Syria etc they are usually stated, whether it is a blessing or a curse (a negative promise if you like.)..
2 When Christ said that you should forgive your brother 70 times seven, do you think he was referring to Jews forgiving Gentiles?
I don’t think so. I think this was part of his general teaching.
3-Don’t you think that the promises of special treatment means that the Jews are special and that therefore the jews have a right to feel special? That they are truly God’s “chosen people”?
That God chose the Jews as his “chosen people” is a fact from the Abrahamic covenant. But Paul (a Jew) makes it very clear in Romans 9-11 that the Jews were chosen for a special purpose. Adam had failed, resulting in his removal from the garden. His offspring failed resulting in the flood. The post deluvian civilization failed resulting in the banishment of the folk from the plains of Shinar and the confusion of tongues. So God started over with Abram and decided to have a people to do his biding. THEY FAILED TOO! But since God had made an unconditional promise or covenant with Abraham he has not cast them off completely as taught in Romans 9-11.
The covenant at Sinai prescribed blessings and curses to the Jew for obedience or disobedience. It promised two removals from their land for this disobedience- both fulfilled under the Babylonians and under the Romans.
4-“God promised to Abraham (and to his physical posterity); Land, Seed (i.e. A great Nation of the world), and that through his seed, there will be a blessing to all the nations of the world.” Genesis 12, and the other reiterations of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis.
5- He promised the Hebrews & Israelites some land? So am I to assume that the land promised was somebody else’s? Did God have spare land hidden some where?
Obviously, all the prime lands were already occupied by other races and nations.
The answer to your question is found in Genesis 15:18-21
In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
15:19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
15:20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
15:21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
There was no spare land .Between the time of the banishment from Shinar and the Abrahamic covenant, the nations or peoples or tribes were occupying the land between the Nile & the Euphrates.
It is to be noted that they had to fight for this land, and that they never drove out all the peoples of these lands as ordered. They never actually occupied all the land that they were promised, even at their zenith under David & Solomon because of their disobedience.
Genesis 15:13 -16 is a prediction or promise concerning their stay in Egypt and its duration
15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land [that is] not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
15:14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
15:16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites [is] not yet full.
6- It would seem to me that if all the land was God’s land, then what promises of land had to be made?
This would be no different than if you had several plots of land and you promised them to your children, whether conditionally or unconditionally. I cant see why God cant have the same privilege.
7- What was so wrong with these other nations that without any motive they are invaded to secure lands for the Israelites?
Genesis 15:16 seems to indicate that God gave them over 400 years to repent of their sins just as he gave the people of the antediluvian age 120 years while the ark was being built as taught in 1 Peter.
8-. It would seem that God set a precedent for the Jews to follow which they seem to be doing to this day.
I don’t think that this set a precedent
9-. However, nowadays it is about controlling the spoils of a country For example, Jews and banking; ownership of means of production in countries other than theirs; controlling trade in certain commodities, etc.
After the Jews were displaced from their lands it would seem that some of them suffered in some places as in the holocaust in Germany, and that God blessed them in their trading and banking activities. It is not for me to say why.
Even in Bim they have some fellas that aint no smarter than you and I in certain positions. We get on with our lives. I don’t worry about the Jews, God promises to bless those who bless them and curse those who curse them.
I try to keep it simple.
Hope these are reasonable answers to your questions.
Anonymous // February 25, 2009 at 9:02 PM
A 1000 posts from now no-one will be any wiser.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:04 PM
GP
“that God wanted to fellowship with mankind. And so he created a whole world as a habitat for man- but man lost out on that paradise. In Revelation 21 we see that God gets his greatest wish.”
I put it to you that the Bible is God’s dialogue with the Jews. You cannot deny that.
If it was true that he created an environment for man, why were the other races left out of the conversation and why were other races to be invaded to provide a promise land for the Jews.
Any reference to man in the Bible is reference to the Hebrews and Israelites and not to any of the other races. Is that not why the Jews and the Talmud was attacked, even in the times of Christ?
When the Jews were called upon to explain their religion, their practices and teachings were deemed to be unethical in the first instance and then subsequently, the Bible (Talmud) of the Jews was suppressed for centuries and the Jews mocked.
I refuse to believe that the Jews were mocked because all the other races and religious sects were wicked. Show me the proof? I would posit that it was the other way around and that what we are adopting as our own, we have thoroughly misunderstood to mean us when in fact it is a conversation with the Jews.
I would also posit that the Talmud was more important to the Jews than the OT and that giving away the misunderstood OT (Bible) relieved their pressure although not ended it, because we turned around and accused them of killing Christ.
Now this is the point about the Bible. Because it was a Jewish thing and a dialogue with and about the Jews, the only people that could be blamed for Christ’s death is the Jews. Otherwise why would this charge be laid and why would the Jews (Israelis) accept that the blame for any harm to Christ would have had to have been done by the Jews.
Pat // February 25, 2009 at 9:11 PM
@ ROK
I am with you that those promises were made by the Hebrews god, to the Hebrews and do not apply to us gentiles. I see we agree also on the submarine things as well. I am so glad I had the ‘christianity’ scales removed from my eyes.
Now I am faithless, I can think freely.
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Rok
On Jonah & the Whale
I try to keep things simple. The word says that that the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. I believe that that is what it means. Jesus obviously thought so too, from the two references he made to this text.
It is noteworthy that in the book of Jonah that besides the great fish that God also prepared a worm, a gourd and an east wind- all of which obeyed Him. Only Jonah disobeyed.
I suggest you look up the Hebrew for “prepared”. God summoned a fish to do a specific task is a simpler and more reasonable interpretation than flying chariots and submarines. Why must you go off on these tangents?
As McGee used to say the fish is an incidental not an essential. The issue is not about Jonah in the fish’s belly. The importance of this incident is what Jesus said about it. That’s what ALL the other Bible teachers teach. And frankly Rok, with all due respect I prefer their teachings to yours!
Some good Bible scholars believe that Jonah actually died when he was thrown into the stormy sea, and that Jonah’s disobedience cost him both his money and his life Some of them have argued that the death of Jonah was necessary if he were to typify Christ who was to die and be in the grave three days and three nights. Such scholars believe that the Lord would not have used this incident as a type of his death and resurrection, unless Jonah had actually died.
However Epp opines thus:- “To me it is not too clear that Jonah died, but we need not press that point either one way or the other. What we must not overlook is that there were several other men in the Old Testament who were types of Christ, none of whom died during the incident that is pointed to as their picturing Christ’s death. Joseph was a type of Christ, but he did not die in the pit into which his brothers thrust him prior to their selling him as a slave. Isaac, the grandfather of Joseph, was also a type of Christ when he was offered by Abraham on Mount Moriah, but Isaac did not die during that experience. These, however, are not important matters now, the big thing is to remember that when God speaks the mountains tremble. When God takes matters into His own hands things begin to happen.”
What matters most is that Jonah was in the fish three days and three nights, and that this was a miracle not only for his benefit , but for ours as well. The importance of the statement that Jonah was in the fish three days and three nights is an oriental way of expressing the fact that he was in the fish so long that apart from God’s sustaining power he was dead and beyond the possibility of human resuscitation, as was the case recorded in John 11:17, and was intended, to portray Jonah’s preservation from death, or return to life as supernatural. This miracle was designed to teach us the doctrine of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ ( Matt 12:40). This is the main lesson to grasp in Jonah chapter one.
This incident is used by the Lord himself who, in citing it, verifies the truth of the narrative. Our Saviour declared that the only sign He was going to give the people of His day was the sign of Jonah. Just as Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights, so the Lord from glory would be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. Those who smile over the story of “Jonah and the whale” would do well to remember not only that our Lord Himself referred to it, but in what connection. He used it as a most solemn sign regarding the most solemn event of His life on earth. And He has expressly told us that in the great Judgment Day the men of Nineveh shall rise up and condemn the men of this generation, because they repeated at the preaching of Jonah, and behold a Greater than Jonah is here. We cannot imagine our Lord using these solemn words of a fictitious people and of a fictitious repentance.
To us who believe in the greatest miracle of all-the incarnation and resurrection of Christ-it is but a little thing to believe that God saved Jonah in this way to be a type of our Saviour’s resurrection. We have no alternative to believing Christ’s word that He did do so. There are certainly some of the many simple, but important lessons to be gleaned from this great, even though controversial chapter of the Bible.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:14 PM
GP
“15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land [that is] not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
15:14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
Who is to come out with great substance, the seed or the nations being served by the seed?
This is exactly what is happening today. GP. Are you from the seed of Abraham? Let us be real. The promises were not to you but to the Israelites and the Jews. Is that not true? So where does the Gentiles come into the benefits of the promises?
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:27 PM
GP
“It is noteworthy that in the book of Jonah that besides the great fish that God also prepared a worm, a gourd and an east wind- all of which obeyed Him. Only Jonah disobeyed.”
Well, we also saw the thing that went before the Israelites (a cloud by day and a pillar fo fire by night) parted the Red Sea. We also saw how Pharoah disobeyed God too and how God used the environment to kill the Egyptians that pursued the Israelites through the sea bed.
So we know that God has a way to manipulate the elements but as to creatures, where is there comparable evidence?
I could turn on a fan or turbojet and get a wind. Think about the force described in the landing on Mt. Sinai. The chgariots of the Gods were alawys covered with cloud. We know what clouds are (can be) made of.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Anonymous // February 25, 2009 at 9:02 pm
“A 1000 posts from now no-one will be any wiser.”
I hope you saw Pat’s comment. Are you still of the same mind?
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Rok
“that God wanted to fellowship with mankind. And so he created a whole world as a habitat for man- but man lost out on that paradise. In Revelation 21 we see that God gets his greatest wish.”
Before there were Jews they were Adam & Eve & Noah & Enoch etc who were not Jews.
At the time of the Jews greatest importance they were other nations, just as they are today. Even in the Hebrew prophets we read of God’s blessings to the Jews.
I do not see the Bible as God’s dialogue with the Jews. Paul makes this very clear in his epistles. He talks about Jews, Gentiles (unconverted Jews) and the Church (both converted Jews and Gentiles.)
Re
If it was true that he created an environment for man, why were the other races left out of the conversation and why were other races to be invaded to provide a promise land for the Jews?
Ask God that when you see him. It is not an important issue in the message of salvation, or the unifying phrase of the Bible I WILL BE WITH YOU. The Bible is a CHRISTOCENTRIC BOOK not a book about the Jews. Jesus taught this in John 5 and in Luke 24 in his discourse to the chaps on the road to Emmaus.
Re .
Any reference to man in the Bible is reference to the Hebrews and Israelites and not to any of the other races.
Read the Scriptures thoroughly and you will find that this is not so.
Re Is that not why the Jews and the Talmud was attacked, even in the times of Christ?
In Christ’s day Judea was controlled by the Romans as predicted (promised) in Daniel. The Jews have been attacked because they disobeyed the warnings of the covenant at Sinai. Everything is there spelled out including the two dispersals from their land.
NO one has said here that the Jews were mocked because all the other races and religious sects were wicked. Genesis 15 indicates that the Caananites would be displaced for their sin.
Rok I don’t deal too much with ramblings about what folk say about the Jews or extraneous info. I deal with what the Word states. I try to find out what the Hebrew or Greek says. I sift the teachings of men renowned for teaching the Word and come to conclusions about what makes sense. When I read these fellas work I find that they do the same.
Re Now this is the point about the Bible. Because it was a Jewish thing and a dialogue with and about the Jews, the only people that could be blamed for Christ’s death is the Jews. Otherwise why would this charge be laid and why would the Jews (Israelis) accept that the blame for any harm to Christ would have had to have been done by the Jews.
The Bible teaches that Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD or the WHOLE WORLD OF SINS in some translations.
The Bible teaches that a sacrifice had to be made for sin as far back as Genesis 3:15 BEFORE THE TIME OF THE JEWS.
You put too much emphasis on the Jews. Put the emphasis where it lies ON CHRIST!
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 9:43 PM
Rok
Genesis 15:13-14 is a prediction of the Exodus. It is the people of Israel who came out from Goshen and passed the Sea of Reeds who came out with great substance.
The nations of the world will be blessed through Abraham in the person of CHRIST – THE SEED (another thread that goes through the Bible) as taught in Galatians 3.
The Gentiles come into the benefits of the promises through Christ as taught in the prophets and in the Epistles.
In Romans 9-11 Paul explains that “Not all Israel is Israel!” You don’t have to be a Jew to be spiritual Israel; and unbelieving Jews are not spiritual Israel. Go read it in the DISPENSATIONAL chapters of Romans.
I particularly stated clearly that they are promises for the Jews, promises for specific nations, and promises for the Church and believers.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:43 PM
GP
“God summoned a fish to do a specific task is a simpler and more reasonable interpretation than flying chariots and submarines. Why must you go off on these tangents?”
You see, I think it is you who have gone off on a tangent. That is why I am telling you that the “so-called” scholarly interpretation of the Bible is flawed because it starts with assumptions, the same as I have.
You start with the assumption of this fairy tale God while I start from the assumption that this God of the Bible is not God at all but a race of people who have a more advanced technology and have conquered many of the things that our science have not been able to conquer up to today.
Now you cannot tell me that my interpretation is worng. The most you can say is that it is different. Furthermore, to start with an assumption of a fairy tale God is nothing more than blind faith. It certainly does not make sense, but that is because we are still in the technological stone age; obviously.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:47 PM
GP
“I particularly stated clearly that they are promises for the Jews, promises for specific nations, and promises for the Church and believers.”
You got me lost here. To which nations were promises made?
To which Church were promises made?
To which believers were promises made?
How could promises be made to other nations when it was a dialogue with the Jews?
Bush Tea // February 25, 2009 at 9:48 PM
@Georgie Porgie
GP, I real glad that you post this item – especially immediately after Robin Hood offered his analysis in the longggg thread.
You have just demonstrated perfectly why religion is so confusing.
How many people do you think understand or even bothered to try to follow your big long dissertation?
That sounds like a HC thing where a bunch of conceited bright boys get together to show off how many big words they can string together…. Fortunately, we know that you are not the typical product of that other place…
Man what bible study guide what!?!
I tell you already that the only guide needed to understand the bible is free for the asking, and that without that necessary guide, you could write the best flowing prose and it will be just so much nonsense.
All that believers are asked to do- is to preach the gospel, and to live a life which bears witness of the fruits of the holy spirit.
Obviously, there is no problem with HC types like you, MME and CH enjoying wanna selves…. but do not give the impression to others that this is the means to understanding any bible..
@ Robin Hood
Right on my brother. the ONLY reason that life exists as we know it, is for the process of the procreation of God.
While millions upon millions of humans are unaware, unconcerned, unprepared and unbelieving of this reality, those that do and endure to the end WILL BE BORN SPIRITUALLY INTO THE REALM OF GOD, AS SONS OF GOD. And each and every one born then, will be welcomed with great joy in that family.
No need for any complex study techniques to preach that good news(gospel) to everyone who cares to listen…
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 9:58 PM
GP
As far as I am concerned the following verses have been grossly misinterpreted:
Rom 1:13 Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
Rom 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
Rom 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
In no cases, the Gentile is less than the Jew even when the Gentile is “righteous”. Even so, it is saying that a righteous Gentile is not even righteous because they do not have the word of God; what does that mean?
Is God not the God of the lions, tigers, wolves, etc.? In all cases these are attempts to coerce the Jews into becoming of one accord. Note how non-righteous Jews are being coerced using example of the Gentiles.
It’s much like saying, if a dog can do it, so can you???
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 10:02 PM
BT
I do not discuss RELIGION
I discuss the BIBLE.
Re How many people do you think understand or even bothered to try to follow your big long dissertation?
We are supposed to be Bajans who went to school.
Last I checked ex students of all schools are running Barbados today- not only the ex Harrisonians.
I have never met fellas at HC who were conceited and got together to show off how many big words they can string together. We played familiar Bajan games, and were like other Bajan boys.
You have your way of studying the Bible. I have mine. I like and follow the ideas of Luther. Have a survey method. Do book studies. Chapter studies. Word studies etc. I tend to share what I learned in the hope that others might benefit therefrom as taught in 2 Tim 2:2.
The things I learned from here and there has made studying the Bible easy for me, and has aided retention and analysis.
I agree with you that believers are asked to preach the gospel, and to live a life which bears witness of the fruits of the holy spirit. However, there are others who have sought to obey 2 Tim 2:15 and 1 Peter 3:15 also and have written extensively on the Word.
My writings above are not a means to understanding but the manna glean by studying the Bible. I have been accepted and respected wherever I have taught the Word.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 10:08 PM
“I have been accepted and respected wherever I have taught the Word.”
I suppose that all the scholars that taught sciences in universities before einstein were all well accepted and respected, but they were teaching foolishness, weren’t they?
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 10:09 PM
@ Rok
Re
“I particularly stated clearly that they are promises for the Jews, promises for specific nations, and promises for the Church and believers.”You got me lost here.
I know that Rok. I know that.
To which nations were promises made? READ THE PROPHETS.
To which Church were promises made?
To which believers were promises made? THE CHURCH ARE THOSE WHO FOLLOW CHRIST. SO ARE BELIEVERS. PAUL ALSO REFERS TO THEM AS SAINTS.
Its all over the NT in the epistles Rok. Its no mystery.
You are al over the place in your understanding of Romans 9-11, but that is understandable. Most folk will tell you that Romans is difficult. It takes time to study and understand the Word Rok. Just like it takes time to study most things.
I heard a youngster just this Sunday do a good job with Romans 9.
How could promises be made to other nations when it was a dialogue with the Jews?
Chris Halsall // February 25, 2009 at 10:09 PM
@GP…
I found your top-most post very interesting. I would truly be interested in learning more of what is *actually* promised in this document.
And, perhaps even more importantly, what has *not* been…
Is your dissertation available to those of us who might be interested in reading same?
(P.S. I’m still (trying to be) on sabbatical, but am continuing to observe.)
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 10:11 PM
Yes Rok I teach foolishness. But foolishness is exactly what the teaching of the Word is called. Paul said so in 1 Corinthians 1, and he was right!
Mr Benighted // February 25, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Hey Anonymous // February 25, 2009 at 9:02 pm … “A 1000 posts from now no-one will be any wiser.”
Got that right! Go to the head of the class.
Can you imagine (suspected) educated people quoting all that chapter and verse from the original comic book.. ? ? ? as if all that gobbledygook has any appositeness in todays world – which, as the Donkey says, was flat and not round “in those days” when the sun was the center of the Universe, etc. etc.
We Bajans can only blabber on religion and race. And if you talk to the men, the conversation is about sex; if you talk to the women it’s about hair styles and dresses… Nothing else.
But I guess everybody is happy in their little bird cage, whistling prettily like Belgian canaries and swinging on their perches.
So who am I to be animadverting? “My life has no purpose, no direction, no aim, no meaning, but I’m happy. I can’t figure it out. What am I doing right?”
Charles M. Schulz (1922 – 2000)
Rock on fellow countrymen… see you at Crop Over.
Georgie Porgie // February 25, 2009 at 10:26 PM
CH
I started out by examining the promises in the shortest books in the OT and working to the longest.
As I went on I submitted what I wrote for correction. The men said since the men in NA usually turned thier dissertation into a book, my submissions would be too long, by the time I had finished all 39 O& books. So I confined my final work to Genesis.
There are not a great deal of promises in Genesis, but the ones there are very important. I also tackled a few controversial areas like are the angels that sinned in Jude the nephilim that copulated with the “sons of God” to produce “giants” in chapter 6.
If you send me an email address I can send it to you online.
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 10:41 PM
“Yes Rok I teach foolishness. But foolishness is exactly what the teaching of the Word is called. Paul said so in 1 Corinthians 1, and he was right!”
What can I say but thank you. I am sure that you are not all over the Bible because you quote what you want, no matter where it comes from to try to prove your point by linking what you are saying, but when I do it I am all over the place.
But just like Tech said, you HC boys think you clever and always looking to show off your vocab. You will notice how simple I keep mine because it is my mission that even the simplest man should understand what I write; neither do I respond to you in that jargon that you keep putting out.
Nobody here (except a few like yourself and Carlos) understands that jargon and sometimes even the use of simple words that have greater meaning; so why use it. Yet you would persist to dazzle. I tell you about the promises to Noah for example and you answer me talking about “Noahic and Abrahamic Covenants”.
Furthermore, the Old Testament was known as the book of promises for ages, centuries. So how come you had to discover it? Well! Well! Well!
What brilliance coming from HC! I may not know as much as you and I am the first to admit that because there are certain things not really worth knowing about the Bible, except as a mere intellectual exercise. I have avoided them, but I am not a novice simply because I keeping it simple. I am very much aware of what I am saying.
So you can send me to read this and that because I did not go to school and I would be reading it for the first time.
Read Prophets what!
Chris Halsall // February 25, 2009 at 11:01 PM
@GP… Thanks. Look forward to reading…
One of my e-mail addresses (as on my Contact Page) at my Blog is…
ideasblog at ideas 4 lease dot com
(Change two words to appropriate symbols. Remove all spaces.)
Everything sent to this address will be treated as confidential, unless explicitly otherwise stated.
Robin Hood // February 25, 2009 at 11:06 PM
@Bush Tea
“I tell you already that the only guide needed to understand the bible is free for the asking, and that without that necessary guide, you could write the best flowing prose and it will be just so much nonsense.
All that believers are asked to do- is to preach the gospel, and to live a life which bears witness of the fruits of the holy spirit.”
BT, the above statement are exactly my sentiments. I’m pleased to see you are of like mind.
Bush Tea // February 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM
@GP
Forgive me! but the lotta long talk REALLY is a big turn off.
What people want are simple answers to critical questions. How is it helpful to launch into complex concepts and dissertations instead?
When we were discussing “What is the purpose of our existence?” I was hoping for a clear simple answer from you – …
Now we are on to the promises of God and poor Bush Tea can’t even get your posts read – longer and more complex even than Carlos and PDC – and still no simple answers..
Robin Hood and Bush Tea have put forward claims that the major promise made by God happens to be the GOSPEL – that mere humans CAN BECOME sons of God – i.e. can become GOD!!! Just like Jesus did.
Now!
Can you say if this is accurate or incorrect – and what is the actual promise made -and preached by Jesus?
Anonymous // February 25, 2009 at 11:22 PM
Hey Mr Benighted,
I suppose I should address you as Sir being a night and all but …
Us Space Alien believers want equal time! I believe I was abducted by aliens and was sexually abused by Beyonce look alikes. I now frequent lonely cart roads at night hoping for a repeat. Is this experience really a metaphor on the futility of this existence as we contemplate the transition to a higher plane? Or is ESA White a very spirit(ual) product and if not why is it the official school beverage of Cawmere? What say you bloggers? Hic….
ROK // February 25, 2009 at 11:33 PM
I would like to draw readers attention to what I mean about God of the Bible.
First, this I consider to be the most shameful verse in the Bible, but moreso, this is an example of the inconsistencies in the Bible. Should add that some versions have this verse as as three words, “And God Repent”:
“Exodus 32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.”
This comes after Moses actually “rebuked” God for wanting to kill the Hebrews after perceiving that they were worshipping the Golden Calf.
This next verse speaks for itself and is in complete contradiction to how God behaved previously in Exodus. This however is being said by a man but see how warped the logic is, because God did repent. Worse is the evidence being brought forward by the speaker in support of the “logic”:
“Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? “
Robin Hood // February 25, 2009 at 11:35 PM
@ All
Listen up folk, the Gospel only means the Good News.
Now just what is the good news?
Jesus Christ taught that if one received Him, then they have received the Father (or His Father) as well. Now this being the case, if they would keep (endure) this up to the end they would then receive their share of all that Heavenly Father had to offer. (A promise & covenant here?). Also if one accepted the Lord Jesus Christ (note,I did not say “get religious”) then it should follow that they would want to follow all that He showed and taught to them. And also do as the Father had instructed. Capishe?
Am I as clear on this as I should be or am I sounding a bit garbled?
Robin Hood // February 25, 2009 at 11:42 PM
@ROK
A word of caution when quoting from the Bible………….. One ought to remember that the “Bible” as we know it was only from the times of James 1 of England. Before the English translation the writings had come through several other translations. The question is ……. after going through all these different translations how much of the English was eventually translated correctly when compared with the original documents?
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:05 AM
@ROK
I wonder if this rendition of Exodus 32:14 would help you to understand what I am saying about incorrect translation of the Bible.
Exodus 32:14. And the Lord said unto Moses, If they will repent of the evil which they have done, I will spare them, and turn away my fierce wrath; but, behold, thou shalt execute judgment upon all that will not repent of this evil this day. Therefore, see thou do this thing that I have commanded thee, or I will execute all that which I had thought to do unto my people.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:12 AM
Moses & God
Now when Moses was on the Mount and God had perceived the Golden Calf and said:
Exodus
32:09 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people:
32:10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.
32:11 And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?
We all talk about being saved if you are righteous. We firmly believe that if you live as a Christian among all theives that the thieves will be struck down and not you. That is why you live righteously.
We believe that God is just but in the above case, it did not matter to God who was righteous; all were going. His salvation was to obliterate them and make Moses’ seed into a great nation.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Robin Hood
Where did you get that from? That is way off base and seeks to justify why Moses killed 3000 men that day; He was comanded to do that by God?
Nah! Not in the hundreds of versions I have seen.
I am disturbed.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:27 AM
@ROK
“I am disturbed.”
Very glad to hear you say that, ROK, because that is exactly what the fullness of truth is really supposed to do.
Prick you to the very core! That’s what it’s to do!!
As they say, if you can’t take the heat, stay away from the kitchen.
…………….or go live in Alaska! :-))
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:30 AM
RH
If I had come across a Bible with that translation I would close the book.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:33 AM
@ ROK
You would, huh? I would think that this version makes a lot more sense in the particular context in which it is written
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:36 AM
RH
Even what we calling the original translations are not even so original because even before translation to English, it was reported that the clerics used to make insertions into the scriptures.
So who is to say how much more is fabricated. This places the Bible to my mind amongst the most unreliable accounts of history and scriptures that one could ever want. It certainly is not the truth.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:38 AM
According to your version which says…………”"the Lord repented”".
What utter nonsense, this is GOD we are speaking about here, not some member of the ungodly human species. ”” The Lord repented”"……. What in heaven’s sake would GOD ever have to repent about?
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:42 AM
Well you see, coming from a three word verse in what I was shown as the original text, which probably still stands on the pulpit of Codrington College (no guarantees in these times), I would be hard-pressed to believe that.
I have seen some modern English translations which I cannot take. It is full of insertions as I call them and in trying to bring it to modern terms, it has changed the meanings of a lot of the texts.
I suppose by the end of this century it will be totally overhauled and interpreted differently too; if it survives that long?
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:44 AM
@ ROK
Post of 12:36am.
Precisely my point and I would dare say B T’s point as well. That when dealing with the scriptures no amount of book learning or academic degrees will help you, unless you have the guidance of HIS Holy Spirit as well. Capishe?
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:45 AM
RH
Tell me that you making sport at me??
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:47 AM
ORIGNAL text, ROK, where would you ever find such in Barbados?
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:49 AM
I never “make sport” of spiritual things, ROK.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 12:53 AM
We have been expressly warned that we should not trifle with sacred things.
We do so at our peril.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 12:59 AM
RH
The slaves were warned not to run away and that they did so at their own peril.
I am not convinced that the Bible is sacred text and actually I think the Bible is trifling with my spirituality and testing my common sense and intelligence.
That does not mean I don’t believe in what you may call miracles, I see them everyday. I saw Usain Bolt.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM
Fantastic runner, Usain Bolt. And what stamina! Just goes to show what a bit of dedication and endurance can do!
I wish more people would show the same application when dealing with their own salvation! :-))
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM
RH
“ORIGNAL text, ROK, where would you ever find such in Barbados?”
You think we poor rakey when it comes to religion, nuh?
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:06 AM
RH
Of course you know I meant translation. Sorry.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 1:10 AM
“”You think we poor rakey when it comes to religion, nuh?”"
On the contrary, I am very well aware that most, if not all Bajans, have a fantastic understanding of religion.
However, I would like to add that I don’t think that “religion” will “save” anyone.
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 1:14 AM
“Of course you know I meant translation. Sorry.”
I don’t quite follow that statement. Explain further.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:18 AM
RH
These are the two translations I know. The latter one is Basic Bible English:
32:14 [kjv] And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.
[bbe] So the Lord let himself be turned from his purpose of sending punishment on his people.
32:14 於 是 耶 和 華 後 悔 、 不 把 所 說 的 禍 降 與 他 的 百 姓 。
32:14 于 是 耶 和 华 后 悔 ， 不 把 所 说 的 祸 降 与 他 的 百 姓
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 1:21 AM
Don’t mean a thing to me,ROKKIE
Robin Hood // February 26, 2009 at 1:27 AM
Gonna have to cut the switch here for now,ROK, I have a little grandson to look after early in the morning and he normally runs rings around me when I am fresh much less if I am tired. :-))
We’ll continue this …………..tomorrow?
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:42 AM
Also
Exodus 32:14 And Jehovah repented of the evil which he said he would do unto his people. – American Standard Version.
Was hoping to find the International Version but unsuccessful so far.
Sorry, ignore the foreign language in my last post.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:44 AM
RH
“On the contrary, I am very well aware that most, if not all Bajans, have a fantastic understanding of religion.”
“Fantastic?” Hmmmm….
I could agree with your last statement.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 2:50 AM
“There was no spare land .Between the time of the banishment from Shinar and the Abrahamic covenant, the nations or peoples or tribes were occupying the land between the Nile & the Euphrates.”
Of course not because the nations of Africa occupied this land; the entire stretch of the Nile. So they were sent by God to drive out the Africans from their lands.
Anybody who knows anything about the Nile would know that this is where the evidence indicates that the great African Civilisations started. I would suggest that the use of the word tribes is rather insulting.
199 // February 26, 2009 at 4:19 AM
I get a shock dis morning!! 67 comments in less than a day!! Dis subjek is even more popular dan Rihanna!!
Whoever said that Bajans were no longer a religious people have been proved wrong!!
Queenam // February 26, 2009 at 7:48 AM
@ ROK and others
Then the Lord relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened. Exodus 32:14 (New International Version)
The Scout // February 26, 2009 at 8:33 AM
Some people try to complicate Christianity. For me I live by the Law of Morality, I have a consience and that tells me if I’m doing right or wrong. Sometimes we try to get too technical and miss the true Christian way. I was just studying the book of Romans and the very first chapter was as relevent as if it was in the news recently. The Bible is the GREATEST book ever written.
Mr Benighted // February 26, 2009 at 10:11 AM
February 25, 2009 at 11:22 pm … Mr. Anonymous
99% of the people writing on this blog cannot understand humor… don’t waste your time!
As the man said… you cannot talk about 6, 7 and 8 to folks who know of 1, 2 and 3.
Move on!
Mr Benighted // February 26, 2009 at 10:13 AM
That should be … you cannot talk about 6, 7 and 8 to folks who know ONLY of 1, 2 and 3.
Sorry about that.
Ah Non E Mus // February 26, 2009 at 11:02 AM
What precisely is this thread about, David(BU) ?
Chris Halsall // February 26, 2009 at 11:48 AM
@Ah Non E Mus: “What precisely is this thread about, David(BU) ?
While I will never speak for David, if I may… The reason I suggested to David that GP’s post become a tangent to “the other thread” is I found it extremely interesting.
The questions GP posed are worth examining. From a strictly information/knowledge theory perspective, this could be a worthwhile exercise.
My personal ideal end-of-blog result is an inventory of promises formally defined and agreed to by /scholars/ of this particular body of language.
One of the reasons I’m interested in this dataset is that once this set is defined, we will then know what *hasn’t* been promised.
Valuable knowledge, IMHO.
(GP… This work has probably already been done. If so, and you are aware, could you provide references?)
Rohan // February 26, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Can God build a house too big that he can’t lift it. If he can’t do it, he’s not omnipotent.
Does God know everything before it happens? If he does, then you don’t really have free will.
And either way, if he already knows what’s going to happen, do you think praying to him will change his mind?
There is no God.
Now get on with your life.
Rohan // February 26, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Oh, and If you believe in the God of the bible, ask yourself where the other hundreds of Gods around the world came from? Either all Gods are real, or all (except yours of course) were made up by men. All except yours. Right?
Chris Halsall // February 26, 2009 at 12:29 PM
@Bush Tea: “Now we are on to the promises of God and poor Bush Tea can’t even get your posts read – longer and more complex even than Carlos and PDC – and still no simple answers..
BT, I *completely* agree with this observation.
Perhaps we could all try, on this thread, to keep all language to less than 100 words per “packet” (or, at least, as an average per individual)?
And, as an aside, another personal heuristic…
I have observed and concluded that those who talk the most, longest and/or the loudest usually have the least worth listening to….
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Chris
I have a theory that the promises of God were made to appease man and recompense man for the labours through which God put man.
Now while I cannot identify the labour required by God, or the benefit derived from mankind being on earth, I can still start with what the ancient civilisations had to say.
Somehow they felt that God (the Anunnaki) made us to be his (their) slaves. Is it a coincidence that slavery was practiced by humanity? Is it quite possible that the labour that built the pyramids, stonehenge and other ancient structures were seen as slave labour by the Gods?
Consider the possibility that the Gods have no use for us right now in that vein. However, the way they may have done it is to keep man’s mind subjugated until that day arrives when next he will put humanity to work.
As it is today, we are all slaves. We get paid but the blaring fact is that whatever you get paid is not just and that you are really working for a master, who controls your time for eight hours each day to do what that master wants you to do; and to the profit and benefit of that master.
Is not capitalism, socialism, communism, liberal democracy, etc. modern day forms of slavery?
Rohan // February 26, 2009 at 1:04 PM
Chris Halsall, I totally agree with this:
I have observed and concluded that those who talk the most, longest and/or the loudest usually have the least worth listening to.
–
Ask a christian a simple question like, “was God wrong when he sanctioned the murder of innocent children, or the rape of women?”
Instead of a simple, “Yes, that was obviously wrong!!”, you’ll get the longest meandering answer you’ve ever seen.
Chris Halsall // February 26, 2009 at 1:16 PM
@Rohan… This is, in my mind, a very interesting datapoint…
For some reason, some followers of *many* different belief systems seem unable to argue their positions “in the short form”.
This is not intended to be interpreted as to be constrained to the religious domains. This observation includes “financial gurus”, polititions and salespersons, et al….
Rohan // February 26, 2009 at 1:24 PM
This observation includes “financial gurus”, polititions and salespersons, et al….
–
Yup, agreed. Charlatans of all types need some time to work their magic. It’s almost like they’re trying to convince themselves at the same time they’re trying to convince you.
Chris Halsall // February 26, 2009 at 1:36 PM
@ROK: “I have a theory that the promises of God were made to appease man and recompense man for the labours through which God put man.
I share this theory. In fact, I would go further, and argue that most formalized religions have been deliberate attempts to *pacify* us; to encourage us to consume and reproduce.
I will *never* tell anyone that their belief structure is something they should not believe in.
I will, however, never hesitate from challenging any and all such structures, to test their resilience, logic and value.
Including, and especially, my own….
bobbie // February 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM
@Bush Tea: “Now we are on to the promises of God and poor Bush Tea can’t even get your posts read – longer and more complex even than Carlos and PDC – and still no simple answers..
Bush Tea is assuming that because he finds the posts long and complex and because he cannnot read them, that no one can read them. An obvious non sequitur.
Bush Tea does not know that there are many in churches all over Barbados that use study guides every week in thier Sunday school classes.This includes Adult Sunday school classes.
Whereas GP uses standard English Bush Tea talks about forces and BBE’s and a lot of nonsense.
This is all very amusing.
Friar Tuck // February 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM
In response to GP’s assertion that “the land between the Nile & the Euphrates” was promised to Israel, Rok, the sage complete with white hair and beard states categorically
“Of course not because the nations of Africa occupied this land; the entire stretch of the Nile. So they were sent by God to drive out the Africans from their lands.
Anybody who knows anything about the Nile would know that this is where the evidence indicates that the great African Civilisations started. I would suggest that the use of the word tribes is rather insulting.”
My African friends from Kenya tell me that there are several tribes that make up there nation. They don’t think its insulting when they talk about their tribes with their different accents dialects customs etc though they are all in the same nation. But Rok knows best, and all it seems.
If Rok had consulted a map or a map of Bible times, he would note that “the land between the Nile & the Euphrates” is nowhere on the African continent. The land between the Nile & the Euphrates has nothing at all to do with Africa.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Friar Tuck
I think it is you that had better check the map again and your history starting with the “Black-Faced People” of Sumer.
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Friar Tuck
“My African friends from Kenya tell me that there are several tribes that make up there nation.”
Your words. The tribes make up a Nation, or is it that the “Nation” make up the tribes?
Now these are my words:
“Of course not because the nations of Africa occupied this land; the entire stretch of the Nile. So they were sent by God to drive out the Africans from their lands.”
Furthermore, the stretch between the Nile and the Red Sea is properly on the continent of Africa… and where did I state that the land stretching from the Red Sea to the Euphrates is on the African Continent?
I suppose that Hawaii has nothing to do with the USA since it is not part of the American Continent.
You are so intent on doing your evil that you did not stop to digest what I wrote, did you?
ROK // February 26, 2009 at 7:59 PM
I think that I am going to do like Chris and take a sabbatical from the blog. It seems like my manner is offensive to some and I don’t like being offensive.
Therefore, I am off to do an internal reflection and see if I can mend my ways.
In the meantime, “Look for me in the whirlwind.”
Friar Tuck // February 26, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Sob sob sob
boo hoo boo hoo ‘
the hoary headed and bearded Rok is gone
he stop talking to himself
now he’s gone
sad sad sad
no more shit to read on the blog
no clown to make my day in giving me a good laugh
are you leaving in a jet craft or a flying chariot or a submarine?
come back Rok
please come back and spew some more shit on the blog
Khaidji // February 26, 2009 at 9:31 PM
My friends, some Bible verses pointed out some of the things that God gave us. After reading them I was inspired to write the following. I have summarized from the verses Six things that I mnemonically remember with PETS MC or as I say PETS My Code.
Things That Our God Gave Us
The Lord through His prophets asked that we
Have faith and promised us Life for Eternity
If we be perfect, of good comfort and of one mind
Never fearful but living in peace, we’ll find
God of Peace and Love shall be always near
Spiritually guiding us through the things we might fear
The Peace shall keep our hearts and minds
His Peace is purer than all other kinds
And this peace He gives with His Everlasting Love
To those who follow the Bible and His word thereof
Our God gave us Trust and ensures that we
Under His watch will sleep and dwell in Safety
Rest may elude you but know that He’s there
God watches every moment and hears every prayer
Our God of Peace and Love has given us Mercy
Divine forgiveness despite our former iniquity
God of Peace and Love gave us Comfort
A resolution to ease our bodies and souls that hurt
Various translations of His doctrines may
Exist, but if you on any doctrine will stay
Use His promise of Eternal Life and remember that He
Shared Peace, Everlasting Love, Trust, Safety, Comfort and Mercy
An Acrostic Poem from The Bajan Poetry Society
See Bible verses
2 Corithians 13:11:
Jeremiah 31:3
Philippians 4:7
Isaiah 26:3
Psalm 4:8
2 Corinthians 1:3-4
J // February 26, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Chris Halsall wrote “to encourage us to consume and reproduce.”
Actually most of us need little or no encouragement to consume and reproduce.
Consuming and reproducing are such fun.
J // February 27, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Love God.
Love your neighbour.
Amen.
Chris Halsall // February 27, 2009 at 11:24 AM
@BU Family… I’m actually trying to be serious about doing a sabbatical… But… Real-time is, after all, real-time…
I would like to let the record show that at this point in time, none of those promoting the Bible as a belief system have answered my simple question above.
GP… I still have not received your document. Please trust me: confidentially assured. Send it to David to send to me if you wish complete decoupling, or set up a new GMail account.
To counter Khaidji’s blatant attempt above to direct traffic to its site, let me please (temporarily) leave you with another knowledge set I personally believe is also worth considering.
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/
Namaste all.
queenam // February 27, 2009 at 1:45 PM
@ Khaidji // February 26, 2009 at 9:31 pm
God has
queenam // February 27, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Khaidji // February 26, 2009 at 9:31 pm
God has NEVER asked us to be Perfect. We CANNOT be so that line “If we be perfect, of good comfort…etc” is not accurate.
The correct translation is “complete” . We all know by now that the English is a limited language – therefore the KJV used the word ‘perfect’ to come as near as possible to the original translation. God asked us to be complete in him NOT PERFECT. How can one born in sin be perfect? I really hope that if you witness to anyone, you do not go around telling people that God expects us to be perfect. That is crap. If you truly walk with the Lord then seek to understand his word in a reasonable sense.
Straight talk // February 27, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Queenam:
There are 36.000 denominations of the Christian church.
Perhaps, in view of the many diverse translations, one must assume that spirituality is a totally, individually arrived at conclusion, and “organised” religion should keep the hell out of it.
Unless of course your way is the one true way.
Friar Tuck // February 27, 2009 at 9:11 PM
The silence on this blog can be cut with a knife since those two devils gone on sabbatical! WOW
anonymous // February 27, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Be carefull Friar Tuck !
Remember Luke 4:13 ?
And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.
One translation says the Devil departed from him till a convenient season.
Another one says he departed from him until another time.
Yet another says the devil departed from him for a time.
Though Satan departs for a season, we shall never be out of his reach till removed from this present evil world.
Those two main devils Rok & CH will be back, and bring their hordes and the devil’s other representatives with them, don’t worry.
Rohan // February 27, 2009 at 10:07 PM
Religion easily has the greatest ***** story ever told. Think about it, religion has actually convinced people that there’s an INVISIBLE MAN…LIVING IN THE SKY…who watches every thing you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten special things that he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish where he will send to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry for ever and ever ’til the end of time…but he loves you. And he NEEDS MONEY!!
– The late, the great, George Carlin.
anonymous // February 27, 2009 at 10:11 PM
What did I tell you Friar Tuck?
queenam // February 28, 2009 at 7:25 AM
@ Straight talk
There is a place for organized religion but I believe we should sincerely seek God’s guidance on interpretation. We can use about 2 different interpretations and find a balance there. More than anything else – I believe that we have one major factor going for us, we all have a conscience. whether we listen to it our not – that is where God has place his directives, I believe
queenam // February 28, 2009 at 7:46 AM
@Rohan // February 27, 2009 at 10:07 pm
What you described is correct – that i.e. it is religion, not christianity.
God is not a man, he is a spirit. Those ten things that you talk about was put there to show us that we are not perfect and can never be. They were put there to show us that we needed a saviour, so that when God looks at us, he sees what we are spiritually covered in – that is ‘the blood of Jesus’. he does not see the sin underneath. When he looks at the sinner, he sees all their sins, imperfections etc.
Yes when we die, we do go one of 2 places but we would have made the chose in our physical bodies. We are unable to choose after death. You do not want to take a gamble that heaven and hell are unreal. Be present at the death bed people who are coherent as they are about to leave this world – they are the best witnesses. I assure you that you will know there and then, whose spirit will live on in comfort and whose wouldn’t sad to say.
Many pastors asked for money but they are many ways of providing a tenth of your tithes. You can do it I believe, by providing some service to the church, or by even giving that 10% to someone who needs help etc. I think that 10% tithing has been totally abused. Yes the church needs support but, I find it wrong when I see a pastor having the best life offers and no one is looking at the single parent in the pew, the unemployed or disabled who cannot find a job – no one looks to take care of them. I think if the pastor is living ‘off the fat of the congregation’ then the poor in that congregation should be financially taken care of too. However, do not be discouraged, if you really need to know if there is something greater than you, take a chance and talk to him, I assure you, if you are sincere, he will respond but please take your eyes off the pulpit for the time being.
Anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Attention Queenam,
Christianity IS a religion. It is not something other than a religion. All the general critiques that are applied to religion MUST be applied to Christianity.
Anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 10:27 AM
And to anonymous @ Feb 27, 9:20 p.m.
Many Christians (as well as other religious people) are among the most “demonic” individuals known. A person’s general upbringing, culture and education (the real kind not just schooling) seems to be more influential factors in accounting for a person’s behaviour than the nominal tenets of a claimed religion. Religious views are often shaped to validate the wider culture and whatever the dominant power-relation structure at any given time not the other way around.
rohan // February 28, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Queenam, would you send your own child to hell. Say your child was disobedient over the span of 100 years (upper bounds of human life expectancy) would you send her to be tortured for 1,000,000,000 years (let’s just call that eternity)?
Does the punishment seem fit? A 100 years of doing wrong leads to 1 gazillion years of torture? But God loves you? I’m sure you wouldn’t do that to your own child, but God would do it to you.
Yeah, sounds about right.
anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 12:15 PM
God’s ways are not our ways nor are his thoughts our thoughts.
Your arguement might sound oh so very logical to you, but at the great white throne judgement you will wet your pants when you are sent to the lake of fire-as you deserve.
Pat // February 28, 2009 at 12:33 PM
anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 12:15 pm
God’s ways are not our ways nor are his thoughts our thoughts.
Your arguement might sound oh so very logical to you, but at the great white throne judgement you will wet your pants when you are sent to the lake of fire-as you deserve.
***********************************
Some God. You can have him. cheeeeeeeeupse
anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
I sure will Pat, I sure will.
Georgie Porgie // February 28, 2009 at 1:26 PM
This was perhaps the first promise listed in the Bible.
Genesis 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
This promise was a warning. Dont eat of that tree or you will die (both spiritually and physically).
Man disobeyed. Since Adam was our federal head as pointed out in 1 Corinthians 15:22 everyone has an appointment with spiritual death or separation from God.
1 Corinthians 15:22 reads For as in Adam all die….
In Romans 5 we read
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Rom 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.
Rom 5:16 And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.
Rom 5:19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
One man sinned and passed on the sin nature to all men, and so it is appointed unto men once to die..
The Scriptures teach in Ezekiel 18:4 & 20….The soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Now the question is have these promises (warnings) been kept or not?
Do we know of anyone who has died?
Soon after Adam sinned he was cast out of the presence of God – he was separated from God- he died spiritually. Some 900 years later he died physically.
Is physical death a blessing? To those who are suffering from illnesses it sure is!
Can one get away from keeping the appointment with spiritual death or the appointment with physical death?
Think about it?
Observer // February 28, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Georgie Porgie, man of many handles
Rohan // February 28, 2009 at 6:53 PM
So Anonymous I should be sent to the lake of fire as I deserve? Really? What have I done besides allude to the fact that your God is a prick. Looks like you are too. Until you develop the ability to think for yourself, you deserve each other…haha
bajangal // February 28, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Georgie Porgie:
God Bless You! If what you have written has only touched my heart alone — a fellow sojourner much in need of the comfort you have given in reminding me of the promises of God then know that your job was done.
Don’t Stop Believin’!
Georgie Porgie // March 1, 2009 at 12:05 AM
Question: Can one get away from keeping the appointment with spiritual death or the appointment with physical death?
a- Has anyone who has lived not died?
b- Will everyone die physically?
c- Wont everyone die spiritually?
Answer:
a- Enoch (Genesis 5:24) & Elijah were both translated to heaven without dying. They are a prefigurement of the believers who will be translated to heaven without dying at the rapture.
b- Everyone will NOT die physically according to 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 which reads
Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
In this verse Paul teaches that some believers will not die but will receive incorruptible bodies at the time of the rapture , at the same time that the dead believers are raised to receive their incorruptible bodies.
This truth is reiterated in I Thessalonians 4:16-17 which reads For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord
c- No everyone wont die spiritually. cf John11: 25-26Believers will not appear at the great white throne judgement spoken of in Revelation 20
20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.
20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire
It is noteworthy that all the above verses taken together corroboarates the teaching Jesus gave in
John 5:28-29 thus
28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
. 29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
It is important to note that all the dead are not raised at the same time. Those that have done good (i.e trusted I God’s provision for salvation) will participate in the the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil(i.e trusted I God’s provision for salvation), unto the resurrection of damnation.
Note this principle of good and evil (trusting and not trusting) is first presented in Genesis 4 in the story of Cain and Abel (cf Hebrews 11:4; I John :9-12 & Jude 11.
rohan // March 1, 2009 at 4:37 AM
Georgie Porgie. Answer these questions in one sentence if you can.
Is it a moral thing to kill innocent babies? (Yes, or no)
Is it a moral thing to murder soldiers in war after you catch them? (Yes, or no)
Is human sacrifice a moral thing? (Yes, or no)
Is raping a woman a moral thing? (Yes, or no)
If you answer Yes to any of those questions, please explain.
If you answer No to any of those questions (i.e call those actions immoral), then you’ve just accused your imaginary God of being immoral because he sanctioned each and every one of those despicable actions.
Do answer without a super long rambling reply if you can.
Thanks
Observer // March 1, 2009 at 5:40 AM
Is it moral to deceptively post under many names?
Elombe // March 1, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Observer, YES in an anonymous blog.
Robin Hood // March 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM
@GP
“In this verse Paul teaches that some believers will not die but will receive incorruptible bodies at the time of the rapture…………”
Can you point me to the exact place in the Holy Scriptures where it teaches this doctrine of a “rapture”, whatever that is supposed to mean?
Robin Hood // March 1, 2009 at 5:16 PM
@GP
“The concept of the rapture is a relatively new belief within Christianity, having been created in the mid 19th century.”
The above quotation was taken from the website Religous tolerance.org.
So from where is this new “doctrine” coming? Straight from the minds of “learned” men I suppose!
Georgie Porgie // March 1, 2009 at 8:02 PM
@ Robin Hood
I have given you the proof texts for the rapture above.
You will not find the word rapture in the Bible, just as you will not find the word millennium. However, the term is not as recent as you suggest. The word “rapture” evolved from the Latin verb rapio to snatch or sieze by force as it is used in the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. Its a very old term and a very old doctrine.
The concept of the rapture is very clear from the proof texts I quoted in 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thes 4. In both of these verses the idea of being suddenly snatched away is expressed.
I do not have my Strong’s or Vines here with me, so I cannot look up and give you of the bat the list of other NT verses where ‘rapio’ is used in the Latin version, or where the equivalent word is used in the Greek.
Robin Hood // March 1, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Thanks, GP, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one. This smacks of mans interpretation without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Gear Box // March 1, 2009 at 10:02 PM
If a God appear before me tomorrow I would get a heart attack… GP I want your emergency number just in case…
AAAAAAAAAAAghhhhhhhhhhhh
Bush Tea // March 1, 2009 at 10:16 PM
@GP
Help me here! If wisdom and knowledge is acquired through exhaustive study and the use of study techniques, how are the other spiritual gifts like healing, prophecy, Charity etc honed?
Rohan // March 1, 2009 at 11:34 PM
http://www.thegodmurders.com/id91.html
An interesting court case prosecuting God for the murders of every man, woman, and child he has killed in the bible.
A truly loving God indeed.
Georgie Porgie // March 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM
In previous posts I made a few remarks about “word studies” that were met with scorn. After all everyone on BU are experts about everything. We even have folk who have not studied the Bible who are experts. However, for what its worth and for those who are interested, here is an extract from one of my talks in which a word study was employed.
In Collosians 2: 14 Paul speaks of Jesus ‘blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us’. Now the word that Paul uses for handwriting is cheirographos. This word means a ’signature’ or a ‘written agreement’. It came to mean technically ‘a written agreement acknowledging a debt; a ‘certificate of debt’, a ‘bond’
A cheirographos was a document which acknowledged a debt that had to be paid. So Collosians 2: 14 tells us that Jesus erased or cancelling a certificate of debt that was held against us.
Now the interesting thing is this. There were two words used for cancelling a certificate of debt. The most common word for cancelling a certificate of debt was chiazein. Chiazein means to write the Greek letter chi, which has the same shape as a capital X, right across the document . There is recorded in the papyri an instance where after a trial in Egypt, the governor gives orders that a bond should be cancelled (chiazesthai), that is, ‘crossed out’.
But Paul does not say that Jesus Christ ‘crossed out (chiazein) the record of our debt; he uses the other word exaleiphein. This is of great significance, because exaleiphein means to erase or ‘to wipe out or to obliterate’. It is so used of ‘wiping out’ a memory of an experience from one’s remembrance or one’s mind; of ‘cancelling’ a vote or ‘annulling’ a law; of ‘can¬celling’ a charge or a debt or of ’striking a man’s name off a roll’ or list; of ‘wiping a family completely out of existence’. It always has this meaning of wiping something out as you would with a sponge.
It describes the effort using the contemporary chemicals and techniques the ladies used to remove stains and spots from garments, and grime from the tile grout in the bathroom etc.
Paul does not say that Jesus Christ ‘crossed out (chiazein) the record of our debt; he says that he ‘wiped it out’ (exaleiphein).
If you ‘cross a thing out’, beneath the cross the record still remains visible for anyone to read but if you ‘wipe it out’ the record is gone, obliterated for ever. It is as if God, for Jesus’ sake, not only ‘crossed out our debt, but ‘wiped it out’.
There is many a man who can forgive, but who never really forgets the injury that was done to him; but God not only forgives but wipes out the very memory of the debt. There is a kind of forgiveness which forgives but still holds the memory against the sinner; but God’s forgiveness is that supreme forgivenes which can forgive and forget.
God has forgotten our sin because it is blotted out by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.
In Hebrews 10:17 we read “And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more”
Have you availed yourself of this forgiveness?.
Georgie Porgie // March 2, 2009 at 12:34 PM
In a previous post, I noted that one can trace the idea that God wants to fellowship with man. Here are a few of my notes on the such a trace for interested serious Bible students, who read these posts, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IS WRITTEN, even though you do not post any comments.
In Rev 21: 1-3 we read….And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying “ Behold the tabernacle [ or dwelling place] of God is with men and he will dwell with them and they shall be his people and God himself shall be with them and be their God.
This scripture teaches that one of the results of the Lord’s second coming is that God will have his longest and dearest desire. The desire to dwell and share an intimate and close and special fellowship with mankind [1Jn 1;3]. The fact that God desires to fellowship with mankind is no secret, and one can easily trace this desire throughout the Bible as God interacted with Adam, Cain, (though un-seccessfully) and Enoch, who became a picture or type of the saint who at Christ’s second advent will be translated without seeing death and a picture of all believers whose removal at the rapture will provide for them an escape from the rigors of the tribulation period . “ For God has not appointed us [ all believers] to wrath, but [ has rather appointed us] to obtain salvation by [ or through ] our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us , that , whether we [are] awake or sleep [dead in Christ] at his coming, we should live together with him [ for ever].[1 Thes 5: 9&10].
God maintained a close relationship with the Patriarchs and even in his deepest and darkest days we read [in Genesis 39:21&23 ] about Jacob’s imprisoned son in Egypt for 13 years that THE LORD WAS WITH JOSEPH.
God abode [or tabernacled] with His people during their wanderings in the wilderness , signaling his presence in the pillar of cloud in the day and the pillar of fire at night. He demonstrated his presence to be and empower them for victory at the beginning of the period of the conquest of Canaan by appearing as the “ Captain of the Lord’s Host ” as recorded in Joshua 5: 13-15.
The period of the Judges was characterized by extreme wickedness and this period was well summarized by the comment that …..”in those days there was no king in Israel ; every man did that which was right in his own eyes [ Judges 17:6 &21:25].” Even then God did not desert his people and at the interface of this period and that of the kings God sought out an obedient child whom he could use and tells us of this boy in 1 Sam 3: 19 that …..THE LORD WAS WITH HIM. In the period of the kings God’s presence filled Solomon’s temple until he was forced to leave.
In the period of captivity God was with Daniel in the lion’s den and in his long service among wicked enemies as he served under five different administrations. God was with the three Hebrew boy’s in the fiery furnace [Dan3:24&25]. The Lord was clearly with the prophets before and during the exile. He was so involved , that when Jehoiakim sent men to kill Jeremiah ……the Scriptures records God’s personal involvement by telling us in Jer 36: 26 …. BUT THE LORD HID HIM !!
After the exile God found a man called Ezra of whom it is recorded in Ezra 7:10 that he had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord and to do it , and to teach in Israel statutes and judgements. This same man confesses in Ezra 7:28 that God was with him …..in the words “ I was strengthened as[ or because ] the hand of the Lord my God was upon me……”. He later reports in Ez 8: 22, that …. “ The hand of our God is upon all them for good that seek him”. In chap 8: 31, we are told that…”the hand of our God was upon us and he delivered us from the hand of the enemy , and of such as lay in wait by the way.”
Nehemiah records a similar experience in Neh 2:4b, &8b , 20, 4:20b, 6:16b and in Esther God was with his people as seen in Esther 2:15, 4:14 & 5:2.
We say all this to demonstrate that Scriptures records and provide adequate proof which attests to the fact that God has ably and diligently persisted in his desire to fellowship with men, even though we have been most unworthy of his interest. Psalm 23: 6 puts it thus …..” Surely goodness and mercy shall PURSUE ME ALL THE DAYS OF MY LIFE….. Pursue is following earnestly in an effort to catch up with some one who does not seem to want to be caught. That is the meaning of follow in that verse. That this is true is seen in Romans 5:8,10 and also 1John 4;9-10.
The New Testament opens with the announcement that the virgin’s child shall be called Emmanuel or GOD WITH US. And in John 1: 1 we are told that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. God wanted to be with us so badly that he came to stay on earth in the form of a servant and in the likeness of men[ Phil 2:7],so that one day [Phil3:20] he could change our vile body ,that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body….
God sent his Son to die so that HE MAY FELLOWSHIP WITH US……what condescension!!
God sent his Son to purchase our redemption so that HE MAY FELLOWSHIP WITH US!!
God came to be us because we could not go to Him…..we didn’t want to be with him while we were yet sinners , Christ [ GOD] died for us[ Rom5: 8 ].
When we were yet sinners he offered up his own Son [ Romans 8: 32 ; Hebrews 9: 26
God came to us in the person of His Son , but when God came to his own they received him not. So he offered us the same opportunity. He set his people aside temporarily and came to us Gentiles and offered us the same opportunity. How He longs to be with us. He sent his Son to procure the means of bringing us back to Him [1 Peter 2: 24]
GOD WANTS TO BE WITH US –HE WANTS TO BE WITH YOU….DO YOU WANT TO BE WITH HIM? What ever your decision …. THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST IS IMMANUEL !!
Chris Halsall // March 2, 2009 at 12:57 PM
@BU Family… If I may, in the Geek(SQL)… There’s nothing quite like “select now()”, is there?
@GP… In relation to your most recent posts dated 2009.03.02.1230 (543 words) and 2009.03.02.1234 (1124 words), may I please observe…
1. You are beginning to sound a bit like Carlos et al… Hysterical.
2. COULD YOU PLEASE NOT SHOUT???
3. You have an annoying tendency to radiate massive amounts of language containing very little data.
4. You have an annoying tendency to not answer questions directed to you.
5. Please note that you, Georgie Porgie, promised *me* a copy of your dissertation if I provided an email address.
5.1. I have provided an address, and provided two alternative routes for delivery (BU.David, or a new GMail account).
5.2. You have not provided said dissertation.
5.3. Please explain why.
5.3.1. Please let me know if you wish me to sign an NDA.
5.3.2. Please let me know if you need my FedEx account number.
5.4. GP, I would hate to think you wouldn’t keep a promise….
Observer // March 2, 2009 at 10:47 PM
no criticism of GP allowed?
Bush Tea // March 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM
@GP
I too, am disappointed at the uncharacteristic attitude that you seems to have adopted to anyone who questions your faith. Quite unfortunate as you have lots of information at your fingertips…
@Rohan
Your disdain is very interesting – funny almost. However I would caution that your contempt is based on very simplistic logic and clearly reflects a complete miss-understanding of matters relating to God.
It may well be worth your while to spend some time genuinely seeking to understand the issues before jumping to the kind of conclusions that you have…
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Here is another note from one of my talks to illustrate the purpose of checking the Greek or Hebrew and doing word studies in an attempt to determine what a particular Bible text is saying.
NT readers of the Pauline epistles will often be confronted with the term “adoption” and the concept or the doctrine of THE ADOPTION OF SONS, and the fact that believers have been declared in Romans 8:18 as joint heirs of Christ. not because of our own merit, but because the exalted Christ has exalted us to this position.
The word adoption in the New Testament is translated from the Greek word (huiothesia) which means “the placing of an adult son” and refers to the formal act of recognizing the maturity of an adult son. The word is found in five New Testament passages: Rom. 8:15,23: 9:4; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5. The believer is never called brephos or baby boy in the NT.
The believer is, however, called (teknon), a child which is growing up but which is still under parental care. Hence John 1:12, “…to them gave He power to become the sons (teknoi) of God.”—should strictly be children, as John always use the word teknon.
..
But a Christian is also in union with Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is called (huios), “an adult son”. So, in union with Him, we are said to be adult sons also, although we may be only babies (brephos) or (teknon) by experience.
To the people living in the predominantly Greek and Roman culture of the 1st Century A.D., the word (huiothesia) would bring to mind the ceremony of toga virilis, in which a 14-year-old boy went through an investiture ceremony with the adult male members of his family. At this ceremony, speeches of challenge to the youth would be made, and offerings would be made to the gods. Then, the boy would stand in the center of the group and take off the child’s garment that he wore (the toga praetexta). A new adult man’s robe, or toga, would be placed on him. This was the toga virilis, the “robe of a man”.
At this time, the 14-year-old was given adult privileges and responsibilities. He could conduct business in his own name, could buy and sell property, could marry, could vote in the Assembly, and in many other ways could carry on as an adult citizen. Of course, he was not mature enough or wise enough to exercise all of the privileges he had; and he was not experiences enough to live up to all of the responsibilities. But the seriousness of his position as a citizen was impressed on him; and if he was intelligent and hard working, he would grow up to be an adult having integrity and character.
Application: The spiritual use of the word “adoption” signifies the placing of a newborn child, in the spiritual sense, into the position of privilege and responsibility attached to an adult son. The question arises as to why a naturally born child needs to be adopted. Are we not, after all, “born again”? It is here that the true meaning of “adoption” comes in; because in the New Testament, “adoption” refers to a positional advance. The new believer is advanced positionally to his majority, even though at the time of salvation he is spiritually immature, a “babe in Christ”.
Because spiritual adoption takes place at the moment of salvation, there is really no period of childhood experience recognized for believers. The Christian has been placed into the privilege, liberty, and duty of a full-grown adult. Spiritual adoption imposes the same way of life on all children of God. This requirement is reasonable because the Christian life is to be lived in the sustaining and upholding power of the Holy Spirit. And this provision is available as much for one person as for another.
Therefore, the word “adoption” means that from the very first of our Christian lives we have full provision, the freedom to have a relationship with God on an adult basis, and the freedom to serve Him.
There is also a future aspect to “adoption”, that of our ultimate placing as adults in eternity, as shown in Romans 8:23. There we will have the resurrection body, we will see Christ face to face, and we will have no Sin Nature or human good. So we will be able to function perfectly in Christ, as adults in maturity.
Consequently, because the sense is often lost in translation and also because of semantic shift it is necessary to study the use of words in the original language to fully understand what a particular text is saying in the English versions of the Bible.
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 12:44 PM
BUSH TEA
In response to your two posts below.
Bush Tea // March 2, 2009 at 11:32 pm
@GP
I too, am disappointed at the uncharacteristic attitude that you seems to have adopted to anyone who questions your faith. Quite unfortunate as you have lots of information at your fingertips…
Bush Tea // March 1, 2009 at 10:16 pm
@GP
Help me here! If wisdom and knowledge is acquired through exhaustive study and the use of study techniques, how are the other spiritual gifts like healing, prophecy, Charity etc honed?
As you know, I am quite able to handle myself in responding to questions about my faith, and yes I do have lots of information at my fingertips, because I have studied the Word a little bit.
I have not adopted any attitude about questions put to me except to obey the tenets of Proverbs 26:4 and 5 which reads
4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
Although 1 Peter 3:15 enjoins the believer to “ sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear………there are also verses like 2 Timothy 2: 23 which teaches “ but foolish AND UNLEARNED QUESTIONS AVOID, KNOWING THAT THEY GENDER STRIFES.
And so following the advise of both the OT & the NT , and from years of sitting in discussions on the Bible when persons who did not read or study the Word were present only to cause trouble, I have learned that it makes no sense to attempt to answer all questions or comments posed. So wont apologize for refusal to answer any question that I chose to.
With respect to your question on “how are the other spiritual gifts like healing, prophecy, Charity etc honed?, it would seem to me that you have answered your own question. A spiritual gift is like all other gifts a GIFT! It is given! The proof texts are to be found in 1 Corinthians 12 & Ephesians 4.However, 2 Tim 2:15 makes it very clear that one must STUDY to show thyself approved unto God a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH. I have never met a good Bible teacher or expositor that did not study! Never!
I once heard a man at a particular church in Ch Ch start to do a week of meetings o Daniel. He confessed in his introduction, that before he started to write his notes that he had read over 12 commentaries on the book of Daniel, besides reading the text over and over again. With the amount of good information currently online it has become easier and easier to do this.
Please note 1 Peter 1:5 et secq and note that the word knowledge or its cognate is repeated in this book
1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge,;
1:6 And to knowledge temperance etc
Many gifts are given and must be developed by growing in grace and the knowledge of Christ (2 Peter 3:18)..Knowledge is foundational. You cannot do if you don’t know. You can not obey if you do not know, you can not know unless you study or are taught by someone who has studied.
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 1:05 PM
Bush Tea
I keep harping on techniques for studying and learning because I have been trying to learn or study or teach most of my life. I have found that embracing certain techniques makes life so much easier.
The night before I took finals in my first degree in Chemistry, during a study break in the library at Cave Hill I noticed a book on one of the shelves that I had never seen before.
On opening the same and looking at the introduction I was amazed to read that the reader stressed that there were only 5 reactions in Organic Chemistry.
He then listed them as
electrophilic addition,
electrophilic substutution, nucleophilic addition ,
nucleophilic substitution and rearangement.
And I wondered why no one in all the years I had been exposed to Organic Chemistry had not taught me that and simplified my life.
Since then as a learner and teacher I have sought to get and share such information because it helps students to grasp concepts more easily.
So it is with Bible Study. I thank God that at age 16 I was exposed to persons who taught me certain techniques and the concept and need to outline a passage.
Here is J Vernon McGees outline of the book of Phillipians. It certainly makes Philippians much easier to comprehend.
Chapter 1-The Philosophy of Christian Living.
Chapter 2- The Pattern of Christian Living .
Chapter 3- The Prize for Christian living, and
Chapter 4 The Power for Christian Living.
Instead of Prize in chapter 3 I prefer PURPOSE
Here is McGee’s expansion on this outline for chapters three and four
Chapter Ill. PRIZE for Christian Living (Key verses: 10-14)
1.Paul Changed His Bookkeeping System of the Past, vv. 1-9
2.Paul Changed His Purpose for the Present, vv. 10-19
3.Paul Changed His Hope for the Future, vv. 20,21
Chapter IV. POWER for Christian Living
1.Joy – the Source of Power, vv. 1-4
2.Prayer – the Secret of Power, vv. 5-7
3.Contemplation of Christ – the Sanctuary of Power, vv. 8,9
4.In Christ – the Satisfaction of Power, vv. 10-23
You might have noted, that in the 1000 plus post on the purpose of life, to which I contributed very little, that when I did, I quoted Philippians 9-15 or so as my PURPOSE for living.
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 2:29 PM
There has been much talk on the blog about the Bible being a book about the Jews. But if one understands what Jesus said in John 5:39, it is easy to see that this is not so.
Jesus said to the Jews themselves Search the scriptures: for I them ye think ye have eternal life: and or but they are they whivh testify of ME. The Bible is a CHRISTOCENTRIC book and not so much a book about the Jews. God could easily have chosen any other nation through which to illustrate his purposes.
This idea is corroborated in Luke 24:25-27 and verses 44-49, where Jesus was again speaking to Jews.
24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
24:44 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.
24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
Clearly to discuss the NT one must have a good knowledge of the OT, and vice versa. It is said the Old is in the New REVEALED, the New is in the Old CONCEALED.
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 8:18 PM
The dire consequence of man’s sin in the Garden of Eden is explained by Paul in Romans 5:12-19, where we get in Paul’s discussion an important New Testament analysis of Adam’s act of sin, and another important contrast between Adam and Christ with respect to their actions.
The nature of the act: Adam brought sin and death into the world, but Christ brought righteousness and life (Romans 3: 22, 24-25).
The place of the act: Adam’s act occurred in the garden (Genesis 3); Christ’s occurred on the cross (John19).
The reason of the act: Adam acted in disobedience (Genesis 3:6); Christ acted in obedience (Luke 22:42). Romans 5:19 teaches that “As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
The results of the act: In the case of Adam, there was condemnation; in the case of Christ it was justification. For Adam there was immediate judgment upon himself, imputed judgment on his posterity and eternal judgment upon all the unsaved. In the case of Christ there was immediate justification, imputed righteousness and eternal life available to all who would come to God by Him.
The relationship of the act to law and grace: In the case of Adam, the law served to demonstrate the seriousness of his act; in the case of Christ, grace served to demonstrate the much more of his act (Romans 5: 9,10,15,17,20.)
The scope of the act: In the case of Adam it abounded, in the case of Christ it abounded much more. Christ’s act had a greater effect than Adam’s. It could atone for sin. It could reddem mankind
To complete this contrast we must note that 1 Corinthians 15:22 teaches that as a consequence of Adam’s sin, all men are appointed to die. But the consequence of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross has now given all men the potential to benefit from everlasting life.
Also in 1 Corinthians 15:45 Paul writes quoting Genesis 2:7, “The first man, Adam, was made a living soul; the last Adam (that is Christ) was made a life giving spirit.”
In commenting on these contrasts Scofield asserts that “Adam is a contrasting type of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:45-47; cp. Romans 5:14-19). (1) The first man Adam was made a living soul (Genesis 2:7), i.e. he derived life from another, God. “The last Adam was a life giving spirit.” Far above deriving life, He was Himself the fountain of life, and he gave that life to others (John 1:4; 5:21; 10:10; 12:24; 1 John 5:12).
(2) In origin “the first man [was] of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from Heaven” (1 Corinthians 15:47). And
(3) each is the head of a creation and these also are in contrast; “in Adam all die….in Christ shall all be made alive”; the Adamic creation is “flesh,” whereas the creation is “spirit” ( John 3:6).
God’s response to man’s fall was to seek out Adam and Eve in love and grace (Genesis 3:8-13; Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:9-11). When Adam and Eve heard the sound of God’s accustomed approach into the garden in the cool of the day, they realized that fellowship which had previously been a joy was broken, and the prospect of meeting God was now one of terror so they hid themselves.
In effect God asked Adam, “Why are you where you are hiding?” The estranged Adam answered that he was afraid, was naked, and had therefore hid himself from God because he sought to avoid contact with God. This was the natural result of spiritual death.
Rather than confess his sin, Adam blamed his wife and God for his predicament, by stating that it was the woman whom God had given him that was the cause of his plight. Eve quickly learned the trick of fallen nature-“passing the buck” and blamed the serpent for their sordid state.
The tragedy of the failure of the fall and Adam’s disobedience occasioned the immediate institution of the Adamic Covenant. In this atmosphere of gloom, defeat and rebuke, God in his mercy, tempered punishment with hope, and in His grace he pronounced the divine blessing of the first promise of a universal Savior in Genesis 3:15, as he simultaneously imposed and pronounced the following sentences (or promises) upon (a) the serpent (Genesis 3:14-15), (b) Woman (Genesis 3:16), (c) Adam (Genesis 3:17-19), and (d) the ground (Genesis 3:14 19).
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:18 PM
“The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice.”
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:19 PM
“As to the book called the bible, it is blasphemy to call it the Word of God. It is a book of lies and contradictions and a history of bad times and bad men.”
[Thomas Paine, writing to Andrew Dean August 15, 1806]
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:21 PM
“The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion. It has been the most destructive to the peace of man since man began to exist. Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses, who gave an order to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and then rape the daughters. One of the most horrible atrocities found in the literature of any nation. I would not dishonor my Creator’s name by attaching it to this filthy book. ”
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:25 PM
“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church. ”
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:26 PM
“Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistant that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.”
[Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
Georgie Porgie // March 3, 2009 at 9:30 PM
When God breathed the breath of life into Adam he was created with a qualitative difference in existence from the animals, because he was given the ability to commune and interact with God.
However, when man fell as a result of sin this relationship was marred. Man died spiritually and was separted from God. Later, he would die physically.
God then had to institute a way whereby He could give man back the life God intended-the qualitative existence of life in a right relationship with The Giver of Life which he had initially.
God thus promised him a solution in the Savior, and clothed him (symbolically with Christ’s righteousness), before removing him from the garden for his protection.
The Adamic Covenant or promise is perhaps the second major promise in the Word of God, in addition to being a prophetic word of judgment and deliverance. This answer to man’s sin “conditions the life of fallen man, conditions which must remain till, in the kingdom age, “the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:21).
The elements of the covenant are:
(1) The serpent, Satan’s tool is cursed (v 14; Romans 16:20; 2 Corinthians11:3,14; Revelation 12:9) and becomes God’s graphic warning in nature of the effects of sin-from the most beautiful and subtle of creatures to a loathsome reptile.
The deepest mystery of the cross of Christ is strikingly pictured by the serpent of bronze, a type of Christ “made sin for us” in bearing the judgment we deserved (Numbers 21:5-9; John 3:14-15; 2 Corinthians 5:21).
(2) The first promise of a Redeemer (v.15)
(3) The changed state of the woman (v.16), in three particulars: (a) multiplied conception; (b) sorrow (pain) in motherhood; (c) the headship of the man (cp. Genesis 1:26-27). Sin’s disorder makes necessary a headship; it is vested in man (Ephesians 5:22-25; 1 Corinthians 11:7-9; 1Timothy 2:11-14).
(4) The light occupation of Eden (Genesis 2:15) changed to burdensome labor (3:18-19), because of the earth’s being cursed (3:17).
(5) The inevitable sorrow of life (v.17).
(6) The brevity of life and the tragic certainty of physical death to Adam and all his descendants (v.19; Romans 5:12-21).
More on this later.
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 9:34 PM
“The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion.”
[Thomas Paine]
Chris Halsall // March 3, 2009 at 9:39 PM
@BU Family… Please forgive me for this. But…
@GP, with relation to your six (so far) messages today (2009.03.03.1213 (785 words), 2009.03.03.1244 (586 words), 2009.03.03.1305 (384 words), 2009.03.03.1429 (340 words), 2009.03.03.2018 (737 words) and 2009.03.03.2130 (375 words)… (Wow!!! 3207 words. Who would dare claim to be so worthy?)
The only bit of your immediate above language I resonated with is simply this:
@GP: “The night before I took finals in my first degree in Chemistry, during a study break in the library at Cave Hill I noticed a book on one of the shelves that I had never seen before.
GP… With all due respect, this is what is known as serendipitous discovery.
This is what /can/ happen when people are given the freedom to think for themselves. To discover for themselves…
No study guide required, although the euphoria of understanding quantum uncertainty truly cannot be stated in words…
@BU Family: Please do note that it is a common technique of those trying to deceive to overwhelm an information channel containing knowledge with noise.
It could reasonably be concluded that our “friend” GP is practising this technique, here and now….
Observer of Observer // March 3, 2009 at 10:41 PM
Observer
We have a saying as you know that “the more the monkey climb the tree, the more he shows his tail.” You set out first to try to discredit GP. When you get no support you post a lot of stuff from your mentor Thomas Paine.
How did this Paine die? When did he die? How many people have heard of him? How many have been saved by the grace of God despite Paine’s drivel?
Can you rebut anything that GP has said from you own knowledge, or experience or personal study.?
Do you have anything else to contribute to the issues raised? Anything?.
Observer are you Chris Hassall?
Chris Hassall
Do you think that your silly pleas will stop GP from presenting the Word of God on this blog in season and out of season?
Does seeing the Word expounded like this hurt you so much, that you are objecting and protesting so much?
Does the devil in you hurt when you see the Word expounded like this?
If nothing GP writes resonates with you, why do you read what he writes?
With all due respect Your comment about serendipitous discovery and no study guide required is bare bull shit as you know well. When we used text books and work books at school are these not study guides?
With all due respect I have been using study guides in my Sunday school right here in Barbados from primary school days right up to Adult Sunday School. Have you heard about Henrietta Meyers or Jensen’s study guides?
With all due respect Observer/you have posted your remarks about Thomas Paine’s writings. In other words, Observer/you have been given the opportunity to present another view, Thomas Paine’s views and people can then exercise their God given right or freedom to think for themselves and discover for themselves if they want to listen to this stuff.
Similarly GP has presented what he believes, and people can then exercise their God given right or freedom to think for themselves and discover for themselves if they want to listen to what he has said.
With all due respect Are you afraid that others might like what he says, or even be converted?
With all due respect When Rok was spewing his stuff on this forum several times daily for weeks, you didn’t complain, because you knew that he was talking junk. You didn’t think that was noise then did you? Was Rok not overwhelming an information channel containing knowledge with noise, when for two weeks he ran amuk on the purpose of life? Where were you then?
.
You guys apparently ran Dictionary and Carlos from the forum, and now you seek to run GP too?
With all due respect likkle runt white boy from abroad, shut up and sit down, unless you can contribute something of substance to what going on here, besides your looking down the nose remarks.
Who made you a judge and ruler of anyone here?
Chris Halsall // March 3, 2009 at 10:52 PM
@Observer of Observer…
1. My name is spelt “Christopher Halsall”. It is not difficult to get right. (So why do so many get it wrong?)
2. I take great pride in saying exactly what I mean. Saying what I have to say using my own name. And, separately, never posting any language under any other alias.
3. Observer of Observer et al. I *dare* you to do the same.
Observer of Observer // March 3, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Yes your pride is evident
pride pride pride thats what has been coming through
a lot of pride for a likkle runt
Pride goeth before a fall!
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 11:02 PM
GP discredits himself by posting under many names and praising his own writings !
LOL
Wonder why he thought I was Chris Halsall?
Could it be he thought only computer savy Halsall could have found out his pathetic tricks?
No prizes for guessing who is “observer of observer”
LOL
Anyway, sounds like some cages have been rattled.
Chris Halsall // March 3, 2009 at 11:03 PM
@Observer of Observer: “With all due respect likkle runt white boy from abroad, shut up and sit down…
Sorry, but you would have to kill me for this to happen….
Observer // March 3, 2009 at 11:49 PM
posts take time here…
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Today’s notes are some details on what is perhaps the major promise in the Bible and the second major promise.
The Adamic Covenant presents the nucleus of a Savior. For when God cursed the results of the broken Covenant of Beginnings, He immediately gave the next covenant, that of redemption. It is noteworthy that, as usual, God takes the initiative in this covenant. For the glory of God has been assaulted. Satan has, as it were, declared war on God. Therefore, God not only will vindicate His glory through this promise but also redeem mankind. (Revelation 5:9). It cannot be at all denied that all of the promises made in this covenant continue to be kept by God. As we discuss the stipulations of this important covenant in greater detail, we find in Genesis 3:1-14 the three-fold reason that occasioned its inception. According to Kaiser “Satan beguiled the woman, the woman listened to the serpent, and the man listened to the woman-but no one listened to God.” (21)
God spoke first to the serpent, then to the woman, then to the man, as this was the order of disloyalty. The curse on the serpent (Genesis 3:14-15) who was possessed by Satan, was that the serpent was cursed above all animals, was to travel by slithering on his belly and he would eat dust all his days. The serpent thus went from the most beautiful and subtle of creatures to become a loathsome reptile. A divinely instigated hostility between the person of the serpent and the woman, and between the serpent’s seed and the woman’s seed would ensue. This will climax with the triumph of a male representative of the woman’s seed delivering a lethal blow to the head of the serpent Satan, while the best the serpent would be able to do would be to nip the heel of this male descendant. Thus, Satan will always be humiliated no matter what he does, and will one day as we say “ Bite the dust!” The serpent faces the disgrace of certain defeat.
Contained in the sentence on the serpent woman was the “PROTO EVANGELIUM”, or first gospel of Genesis 3:15. It is the first Biblical promise concerning the coming and victory of the Redeemer. It is the hope of a Savior and redeemer from the curse inflicted by sin and the fall of man. It looks forward to the time when Satan will be completely crushed beneath the feet of the woman’s triumphant Seed. At Calvary Jesus triumphed over Satan by paying sin’s wages incurred by Adam’s sin (and subsequently every one’s sins- I John 2:1-2). One day at the close of the millennium Satan will eventually be cast into the lake of fire prepared for he and his angels. The beauty of the verse, as is discussed later, is the fact that God was already prepared from the foundation of the world to deal with such a crisis by offering this hope.
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 11:12 AM
When God promised in Genesis 3:15, to put enmity between the serpent and the woman, between his seed or offspring and her seed or offspring, He specifically promised that among her progeny, that there would come a male representative who would one day be the Deliverer from sin by delivering a lethal blow to the head of Satan, thereby effecting a complete reversal of the serpent’s temporary coup in the garden. The serpent, however, would never be able or permitted to do more in retaliation, than nip the heel of this male descendant of Eve.
The enmity between Satan and mankind is fascinating, because God is here stating that Satan’s ally in the Garden (Eve) will, in the future, become his adversary. Satan’s defeat will come from Eve, the one Satan deceived. We must recognize that the enmity is specifically related to Eve, rather than Adam, because she was beguiled and deceived. She was guilty, even though she was beguiled. Adam knew exactly what he was doing. (1Timothy 2:14) Thus she will produce the Christ-child. No physical father is mentioned in this statement for this is the first intimation of the Virgin birth-a promise ultimately fulfilled as described in Matthew 1:18,21; Luke 1: 27ff .
It is noteworthy that the word “seed” does not mean the whole human race or Eve’s children per se, because Cain, Eves first child, is defined, in I John 3:12, as “of the evil one.” This is because by natural birth mankind is on the devil’s side (John 8:44; 1 John 3:8a; 10). But God places a supernatural “enmity” against Satan through regeneration or salvation, so that now, the seed are those that have faith in Christ, faith in the promise of Christ as given in the precious promise of this verse. We will learn later that the seed are those that have faith in Christ, and in the promise of Christ, first enunciated in Genesis 3:15.
The phrase “he will crush (bruise) your head” narrows down to One who will destroy Satan- the “seed of the woman”. This is revealed to be Jesus in Hebrews 2:14 which states, “Since the children have flesh and blood, He too shared in their humanity so that by His death he might destroy him who holds the power of death- that is, the devil.” “Crushing the head” signifies total defeat (Cp. Joshua 10:24). The “striking of the heel” refers to the Cross, as the nail was pounded through the overlapped feet of our Lord.
One aspect of the fulfillment of the promise about the enmity between the serpent’s seed and that of the woman’s seed is the general conflict of the ages, in which all those who are of the devil hate and seek to destroy those who have the spiritual genotype or seed of Christ. (1 John 3:9,12-
13). This is seen in the conflict endured by Abel, Noah prior to the flood, Isaac and the Philistines, Moses with Pharoah, Mordecai and Haman, Daniel and the three Hebrew boys and their fellow courtiers. The fulfillment of this conflict in New Testament times was seen in the hostility which Jesus endured from his countrymen, which culminated on his death on the cross. The fulfillment of this conflict in New Testament times has been seen too, in the trail of blood shed from the establishment of the early church till today.
Jesus predicted that believers would also have to endure this intense enmity in passages such as John 15: 18-21; 16:1-3; 17:14, and prayed for us in John 17, and sent the Holy Spirit as a comforter to help us to endure this enmity. The apostle John also discusses this enmity in 1 John 3:1b; 8-13; 4:5-6. Because the fulfillment of this conflict in New Testament times is so very real, believers ought to get busy really loving each other. This is one of the significant roles this aspect of this promise should have for God’s children today.
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 11:12 AM
The curse on the woman (Genesis3:16) included multiplied conception, the fact that childbearing would be accompanied by intense pain and sorrow, and the headship of the man. The woman’s turning to her husband would result in the fact that he would rule over her. One translation of Genesis 3:16 states that, “your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” The Hebrew term for “desire” teshuqah, which is also used in Genesis 4:7, may be rendered “dominate” or “overcome.” The question is whether this desire is intellectual, psychological, spiritual or sexual desire. Most scholars assert that it refers to the female longing for, or needing the man. Both may indeed be true; she desires her husband, but also, when the flesh commands, she desires to dominate him. It ought to be accepted that God placed man in control. Many reasons are propounded, yet none suffice or may be confirmed. God Himself must be interrogated for the answer, and His command of 1Timothy 2:11-15 obeyed. What is very clear, however, is that much of the mess in the world today is due to the fact that women want to rule rather than be in subjection to their own husbands as taught in Ephesians 6:22-24; 1 Peter 3:1-7. What is most interesting in Genesis 3:16 is that God, acting in grace even while announcing the punishment for Eve gave her the blessing of having children, and the special privilege as the mother of all living, of being the one through whom the Savior would come.
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 11:13 AM
The curse on Adam was the curse on the ground resulting in his light occupation in the garden being changed to burdensome labor. Although man would have adequate food, he would have to fight the ground for it. The inevitable sorrow of life, the brevity of life and the tragic certainty of death to Adam and his descendants was also added. The ground would now bring forth thorns and thistles and as man tilled it, he would have to sweat when he works. From that time onwards, work became debilitating. All who garden know about this curse very well. The curse of toil was also for man’s sake, primarily in terms of maintaining his respiratory and cardiovascular systems in top shape. Life for most people is nothing more than work, getting enough to eat, having and raising children, bearing pain, and facing death. But, more than just this is available. Because God has kept His promise of Genesis 3:15, mankind has hope!
The phrase “to dust shall you return” means separation from God as well as physical death. Man’s spiritual separation from God results in physical death, and probably explains mankind’s fear of death, and perhaps clarifies the pious rage that rises up inside mankind when he views the death of his kind. Man’s fear of death is not an unreasonable fear since it seems that man, as originally created, was not designed to die physically, but to pass from time to eternity without physical death in the same manner as Enoch and Elijah did. This is very evident to those who have attended or performed post mortems on several elderly persons. It is very common to find perfect structures at such examinations of several organs of the body, with no degenerative signs in the major organs to explain death by so called “natural causes”. This is implied too, in my view, by the phrase “pass from death unto life” as used by John in John 5:24, and 1 John 3:14. That physical death only entered because of sin after the fall is very clear to me.
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 11:13 AM
The thorns and thistles were the result of sin by God withdrawing that extension of his power which had maintained a steady state of life and order. Since then thorns are associated with the curse of mankind and nature, and man’s failure at the time of the fall. Since then man has to contend with thorns in his work and in his spiritual life. Throughout the Bible we see that thorns has been a symbol of man’s negative will toward God, and used to designate divine chastisement (Numbers 33:55; Judges 2:3). In 2 Corinthians 12:7-9, Paul’s thorn in the flesh was something aggravating enough to bother him, although it was suffering designed for blessing. The thorn is a sign of Satan’s power; but even Satan’s evil designs result in good when God’s power is employed. Thorns are used to designate the administration of discipline to a nation. Thorns are related to economic depression and recession under an agricultural economy. Depression is brought on by man’s bad decisions or sins in the field of economy (Jeremiah 12:13). The unconquered Canaanites in the promised Land were thorns to the nation of Israel. (Numbers. 33:55 Joshua 23:13 Judges 2:2,3). God had ordered Israel to destroy all the Canaanites. But the Jews did not obey that mandate, so God permitted certain Canaanite groups to live as thorns to the nation Israel.
Thorns are also used to describe the results of not accepting Bible truth. (Proverbs 22:5; 26:9), and to describe the distractions to positive volition toward Bible truth. For example, in Matthew, “thorns” refer to the man who hears the Word, but the worries of this life (e.g. peer pressure) and the deceitfulness of riches choke out the Word. (Matthew. 13:7,22). Thorns are also used to describe the results of being involved in Satan’s domain cosmic and negative volition toward the plan of God. (Hebrews. 6:8)
It is interesting to note that not only was the emblem of the curse pronounced upon sin in Genesis 3:18, but that when Jesus Christ wore the crown of thorns on the cross, this signified the fact that He was made a curse for us (Matthew 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2; Galatians. 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24). It is most significant that Jesus bore this same emblem on his brow when in keeping the promise of Genesis 3:15, he was made a curse for us. In the millennial reign of Christ, nature will be delivered from the curse of the fall. This is expressed by the removal of thorns in Isaiah 55:13 and Ezekiel 28:24.
Chris Halsall // March 4, 2009 at 5:05 PM
@Georgie Porgie… This is an attempt at a serious question:
Are you able to sleep at night?
Georgie Porgie // March 4, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Yes. I sleep very well actually. From about 10 pm until 8:30 am.
Thats one of the blessings God has bestowed on me- to be able to sleep well despite everything that might go wrong.
Observer // March 4, 2009 at 6:32 PM
The gentlemanly GP returns…
When needing to call ROK a fool or CH or “a likkle runt” a change of handle will suffice.
No ad hominem from gentle GP !
What next? will “memries” turn up to tell what an amazing doc you are?
Will “bobbie” tell us what a fool ROK is?
Sorry GP the jig is up, your ruse is exposed !
You sure this is “christian” behaviour?
Observer // March 4, 2009 at 7:00 PM
“It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Book of Revelation], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherencies of our own nightly dreams … I cannot so far respect them as to consider them as an allegorical narrative of events, past or subsequent. There is not enough coherence in them to countenance any suite of rational ideas…. What has no meaning admits no explanation. And pardon me if I say, with the candor of friendship, that I think your time too valuable, and your understanding of too high an order, to be wasted on these paralogisms. You will perceive, I hope, also that I do not consider them as reveladons of the supreme being, whom I would not so far blaspheme as to impute to him a pretension of revelation, couched at the same time in terms which, he would know, were never to be understood by those to whom they were addressed.”
[Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, January 17, 1825]
Observer // March 4, 2009 at 7:54 PM
I suppose Paine and Jefferson, 2 of the greatest minds of their time, I guess they just did not “understand”
rohan // March 4, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Just saw your post laughing at my disdain. Why not refute anything I said? I posted a list of murders that your loving God commited against innocent men,women,and children. I didn’t even include all the incidences of sanctioned rape and slavery.
You’re laughing at me for scoffing at this? If you were capable of a second of independent thought you would realize that no loving father or mother acts this way.
And if you were capable of TWO seconds of critical thought you would ask yourself what it says about you that you embrace this death cult that is christianity.
Anyhow, run along. If I needed someone to back me up, I wouldn’t look in your direction. Either refute the evidence I’ve posted with some of your own, or go back to praying to your fairy God-father magic sky lord.
Peace
rohan // March 4, 2009 at 10:05 PM
That was for Bush Tea by the way…
JC // March 4, 2009 at 10:16 PM
Where is ROK hi GP how r u I see you still have immense faith!
I admire this ….. when we getting married in Christ Church!
Just love your faith!
JC // March 4, 2009 at 10:18 PM
I just told my son that I am going to be married to you GP and he here laughing
How does Mrs. Georgie Porgie sound ……
He laughing reall baddd!
Observer // March 4, 2009 at 11:27 PM
“No falsehood is so fatal as that which is made an article of faith”
[Thomas Paine]
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 11:15 AM
I enjoy television programs like Matlock & Perry Mason and others involving court cases. Let me share one that seems to naturally arise from Paul’s arguments in Romans 3, 4 & 5. It is based on an idea from a chart on the opening chapters of Romans from Wilmington’s Visualized Bible , which I have modified, expanded and embellished considerably
Romans 3 concludes the argument of chapters Romans 1-3 with the summary statement “for all have sinned! ALL GUILTY!” It corroborates the state and sin’s sequelae which was introduced at the fall.
The scene is that of a courthouse, where the Honorable Jesus Christ is the presiding Judge (John 5: 22; Acts17-31).
The jury is composed of the conscience, and deeds of man, and the creative works and the law of God, and the Crosswork of Christ.
The charge is “Coming short of the Glory of God”- missing the mark set by God.
The defendants are:
1) Pagan man (Romans 1:18-32) who utters ignorance as the excuse for his sin, but this plea is refuted because he had the witness of nature and conscience.
2) Moral man (Romans 2:1-16) who utters comparative morality as the excuse for his sin (he is better than most). But this plea is rejected because he has just sinned in a refined way or in more sophisticated circumstances.
3) Religious man (Romans 2:17-3:8) who posits religion as his right to escape the sentence for his sin (at least he had a form of godliness and followed the “church”).
His plea is disallowed because he denied the power of the godliness he professed, and did not practice what he preached.
The religious sinners of 1 John 1: 6,8, 10 are of course to be included with this sub group of defendants. So too are those mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 25:41-46.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 11:16 AM
The Detailed Indictment of the general charge is that Mankind:
• Held down the truth- he actually received and grasped it, but did nothing with it (1:18).
• Knew God through the creation but did not honor Him (1:21).
• Were unthankful (1:21).
• Began foolish speculations (1:21).
• Allowed their hearts to become darkened (1:21).
• Became fools-probably by saying that there is no God as in Psalm 14 and 1:22.
• Preferred idols to God (1:23).
• Were given over to sexual perversions, as is associated with idolatry of all sorts even up until today (1:26-27).
• Were filled with unrighteous acts (1:29-31).
• Encouraged others to do all the above, along with practicing them themselves (1:32).
• Are contentious, disobedient to the truth, and obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath. (2:8).
• Are all unrighteous and under sin (3:9-10).
• Do not understand, or seek after God (3:11).
• Have all gone out of the way and have become unprofitable, and do not do good. (3:12).
• Are guilty of a diversity of oral sins (3:13-14; see also James 3: 2-14; Jude 15).
• Are swift to murder, and do not know the way of peace-especially today! (3:15,17).
• Are condemned to destruction and misery (3:16).
• Have no fear of God whatsoever. (3:18).
To these can be added the list in Galatians 5:19-21 and Colossians 3:5-9, in addition to all the perversions mentioned in Colossians 2 by which the Serpent entices modern men to follow “the rudiments of the world” rather than embracing Christ as Lord and Savior. These are:
• Enticing words
• Philosophy
• Vain deceit
• Tradition
• Legalism
• Self-abasement
• Angel worship
• Visions
• Man-made rules
These lists are not at all exhaustive. The reader is urged to complete the above by collating all the similar lists which occur in the Bible, for such is man’s inescapable indictment.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 11:17 AM
The defense. It is noteworthy that no serious defense can be offered either here or at the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15).
The reason for this is that it is quite clear that all the indictments above are in contravention to the embodiment of the law against God as enunciated in 1 John 2:16, which classified all sins under the categories 1) lust of the flesh, 2) lust of the eyes and 3) the pride of life.
Since when all of these rules were broken in Genesis 3:6, the verdict was guilty, and the sentence which was immediately imposed and executed was spiritual death, it is reasonable to expect both the same verdict here (and at the great white throne judgment). So no attempt is made at a defense.
The teaching of Colossians 3:25, also renders a defense pointless. This scripture states that “he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons”. The first part of the verse is a reiteration of Galatians 6:7.
The verdict in this case is as expected -guilty on all counts! (Romans 3:9,19,23).
The sentence is physical death and spiritual death (Genesis 2:17; 3:23; Ezekiel 18:4,20; Romans 6:23a;Hebrews 9:27).
Certainly the story presented here, which mirrors and amplifies the scene in Genesis 3 at the fall, suggests that man is, as we say today, in serious trouble! He needs a miracle in order to escape this sentence, for the evidence is really stacked against him!
And it is miracle that he gets, for just as the Good Shepherd of John10 became the Lamb of God of John 1:29,36 and died for the sheep, the Judge steps down immediately after giving the awful death sentence, and becomes our Advocate to enter a most efficacious appeal.
Just as in Genesis 3 God proposed and promised a path to peace and escape from the penalty for our sins, immediately the sentence of guilty is handed down in Romans 3:23, the result of the “Appeal court” is given in Romans 3:24-26,28. The crystal clear conclusion of the “Appeal court” is simple, salvific, and self explanatory. It is:
“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. …..Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”
Verse 29-30 teaches in addition, that God is the God of the Gentiles also, and that He is the one God, who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. In case one would ask how Jesus the Judge qualifies to be Jesus the Advocate the following scriptures may readily be cited: John 7:18; 8:46; 14:30b; 18:38; 19:4,6; Luke 23:4,14,47; Mark 14:55-59, 15:14; Hebrews 7:26-27; 1John 3:5. In 2 Corinthians 5:21, we are told that Jesus “knew no sin”; in 1 Peter 2:22, it is said that Jesus “did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth”; Hebrews 4:15b teaches that He was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin; Hebrews 5:9 teaches that Jesus’ perfection qualified and entitled him to be “the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him”, and both 1 Peter 1:19; Hebrews 9:14 teach that Jesus was the perfect, unblemished sacrifice for sin.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 11:19 AM
In Romans 4:1-8, Paul suggests that as is the common practice in law today, the “Appeal court” cited two cases for this decision.
These were the case of the Court of God vs. Abraham, in which the decision was that Abraham was justified by faith in God apart from circumcision; and the case of the Court of God vs. David, in which it was determined that David was justified by faith in God apart from the law.
The reason for these decisions by the “Appeal court Judge” is given in Romans chapter 4. Let us highlight some of the main points of this argument.
• Abraham discovered that he was justified because God counted him as righteousness because he believed God by faith (4:1-3).
• Those who work for salvation are rewarded by debt rather than grace. This is because we cannot work hard enough to pay for our salvation. Thus we will always be in debt. We are therefore better off under a grace situation. (4:4).
• In contrast, those who give up working for their salvation, but decide to believe on him that justifies the ungodly. Such exhibition of faith is rewarded by God’s righteousness through grace (4:5).
• David discovered that God imputes righteousness to those who confess their sins and ask for forgiveness, and that it unnecessary to work in order to have one’s iniquities forgiven, or one’s sins covered (4:6-8).
• Both of these cases revealed that God’s decision to save has nothing to do with whether the defendant is Jew or Gentile (whether they were circumcised or not), because the basis of salvation has always been faith, and faith alone! It has always had to do with believing God’s promises, and taking Him at His word. (4:9-11)
• The court ascertained by referring to Genesis 15:6, that when Abraham received the sign of circumcision (a seal of the righteousness of the faith) he was already saved!
He had already exhibited faith in God and was already walking thereby. As a result, he was appointed as the representative (or father) of all them that believe, irregardless of whether they ever got circumcised, or not. For the imputation of righteousness, faith by believing God is the issue-not the outward sign of circumcision.
Rather the requirement is to emulate Abraham and walk in his steps, by exhibiting the type of faith that Abraham did even prior to his circumcision as recorded in Genesis 17 at one of the occasions of the re-affirmation of the Abrahamic covenant (4:12)
• On examination the sacred record, the court found that the promise given in the first enunciation of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12, that Abraham would be the heir of the world and his seed was always predicated through the righteousness of faith.
It always had to do with what he believed, rather than what he did. Of course James points out correctly that when he acted, that he did so based on his faith, and that his faith was the root and vehicle of his actions- his actions was merely the fruit. (4:13-25)
• The conclusion then, was that faith and grace go together, and that this has always been so. And that the promise will be assured only to those who exhibit the sort of faith demonstrated by Abraham.
We need to explain how this argument relates to both Genesis 3 and contemporary man. It is simply that in Abraham’s case, faith in God and his provision for salvation, and the escape from sin’s penalty was rewarded or exchanged for the righteousness that only God can give through faith in the work that Christ did on the cross. We must believe the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:3-4).
It is important to see that Abraham exhibited this faith as mentioned in Genesis 15:6 before he was circumcised (Genesis 17). Thus he was justified by faith in God apart from circumcision. The advice to us is therefore “Go thou and do likewise, and accept as Savior, Christ-God’s remedy for sin without any additional paraphernalia. Avail yourself of God’s super abounding grace (Romans 5:20). It is grace through faith plus nothing!”
In David’s case, this king recognized that the salvation offered in the promise of Genesis 3:15 could be accessed by confessing his sin (Psalm 51) rather than blaming his partners in crime as Adam and Eve did. Having fallen like Adam did, instead of trying to cover his sin, he sought the efficacious covering that only God Himself could offer.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 11:22 AM
The final review of the court is given in Romans chapter 5 as the blessing of justification, and the summary of condemnation.
We will quote directly from the review summary which records the following facts under the blessing of justification.
Romans 5:1-2 states “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.”
We are taught that the benefits of justification by faith include the ability to glory in tribulations, and develop patience, experience, and hope that makes us confident because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us (5:3-5).
The reason given for the above, and the basis by which we obtain such benefits is declared to be that “when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly (Romans 5:6)”.
In addition we are told that “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8)”. As a result, now that we are justified by his blood, we shall be saved from (the sentence of) wrath through him.
Since God went to the trouble when we were enemies to reconcile us to Himself, by the death of his Son, it is logical that now that we have been reconciled, we shall be saved by the fact that Christ lives for ever. In addition, we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement (Romans 5:8-11).
With respect to the summary of condemnation we read in Romans 5:12 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
In verse 14 we read that “death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.”
In verse 15 we understand that in the same way that all men were punished by the sentence of death because of the sin or offence of one person, Adam; in like manner, the free gift of the grace of God has been bestowed in abundance unto many by grace through Christ.
Verse 16 continues by pointing out that in the same way that sentence of condemnation was passed because one person sinned, similarly the gift is bestowed because one person, Christ, obeyed.
Although the judgment of condemnation was the result of one man’s error, the free gift of justification will atone for the many offences of its recipients.
In the same way that death reigned because of one man’s (Adam’s) offence, much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one (Jesus Christ.)
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
The conclusion is that where sin abounded, grace did much more abound. Romans 5:20 is thus a very short summary of the import of Genesis 3:15. With this strong conclusion, and on the terms cited, we have been released from the penalty of sin, to live a life free from sin as taught in Romans chapter six. Aint that great!
Chris Halsall // March 5, 2009 at 11:45 AM
@Georgie Porgie… Sigh…
Is it reasonable for me to conclude that you are attempting to honour your promise to me by sending me your 400 page dissertation by way of this blog, a few hundred words at a time?
You are aware that almost no one is reading your language, right? That you’re actually hurting your own cause with this dishonourable behaviour?
@BU Family… If I may please share…
This is a good example of why I personally rejected Christianity at a very early age. Straight answers to simple questions seem to be impossible to receive.
Contrast this with the study of the sciences, where hard questions are /encouraged/. Hell, hard questions are the very *methodology*!
No (real) scientist will ever refuse to answer a question of their work or what they *believe* to be the truth.
And, even more importantly, they’re always prepared to be proven wrong. IMHO, a far more honest position to hold….
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Mr Halsall
Sigh.
Your counter is not working today right?
I am sure that most are not reading my posts. Most folk are not interested in the Word of God. It doesn’t “resonate” with them. Some have even rejected Christianity and Christ, as you have. BUT there are the few that are reading don’t worry. If only one reads.
Guess what? I only read the threads on BU or the Nation that appeal to me. And I can understand that others do not read the threads that don’t appeal to them either. I expect that some wont read my posts either. And I wont get” my knickers in a twist” about that either.
Why are you so militant about my posts on the Word of God? If you don’t like the Word, then don’t read my posts.
I cannot see how presenting the Word of God could be dishonorable in Barbados. Unpleasant to some, maybe…….but dishonorable?
I appreciate your opinions and philosophies, why cant you respect my right to express mine in my own way. I speak what I know.
Have I cursed anyone? Have I incited to treason, or riot? Have I used indecent language? Have I disobeyed the terms and conditions of posting on BU as set by David?
Can you refute my attempt at a correct division of the Word of Truth?
Hebrews 4 :12 reads For the word of God is quick (or alive), and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart..
God’s Word is alive! This means it is eternal, always current, always essential, always true, pure, and refined. Other writings fail when measured against these qualities, and they pass into oblivion. The Word of God is a discerner, a critic, of the heart’s inner workings. It is penetrating, scrutinizing our desires, and we should test our thinking against what Scripture says is good.
Weren’t you the one that asked David to start this thread?
Chris Halsall // March 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM
@Georgie Porgie… You are being disingenuous here. And I suspect that you know it…
@GP: “Weren’t you the one that asked David to start this thread?
Yes, because I truly was interested in your top most post, and the questions raised therein.
@GP: “If you send me an email address I can send [my dissertation] to you online.
For the record of this court of public opinion, you have still not done so. I would *really* like to understand why.
Please explain.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Chris
Last I checked you are not God, and so I do not have to explain anything to you, my friend.
I dont think that my work will “RESONATE” with you. LOL. After all you admit that you have rejected Christianity. You are not genuinely interested in my work or the Word of God.
*with due respect*
Chris Halsall // March 5, 2009 at 12:44 PM
@BU Family…
I would like to observe that GP is empirically a hostile and dishonest “witness”.
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM
As they say in court; As your worship pleaseth. LOL
But when I stand at the “bema” i.e the Judgement seat of Christ, none of the BU family will NOT be the judge.
Aint that great Chris? I think so.
Chris Halsall // March 5, 2009 at 12:57 PM
And this is perhaps my fundamentally point…
You and yours seem to be mostly concerned about where you’ll go when you die.
I and my are instead concerned about what *we* can do *here* and *now*. While we’re alive “on this bloody ball of wax”.
We have people to feed, cloth, shelter, educate, further and advance…
What happens when we die will be realized by each of us, individually, when that event happens.
Until that time, I would argue, we all have a great deal of work to do, *together*….
Georgie Porgie // March 5, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Re
I and my are instead concerned about what *we* can do *here* and *now*. While we’re alive “on this bloody ball of wax”.
We have people to feed, cloth, shelter, educate, further and advance…
———————————————
Oh I have seen many thousand patients in my lifetime, and worked for the State at every available opportunity.I guess I have paid my dues in Barbados.
Now I teach a number of medical students whenever I get the chance.
I can only do more when the opportunity presents itself.
I have definitely not been “so heavenly minded” that I have been of “no earthly good.”
Queenam // March 7, 2009 at 12:56 PM
Anonymous // February 28, 2009 at 10:02 am
People try to put christianity in the same box as other religions. I do not see it as a religion. I see christianity as
a way of life. In one of the books, we are directed to ‘work out our own salvation’. i take this to mean that God takes into account personalities – not withstanding the fact that we still have to be covered in the blood of Christ and fight being controlled by some sin.
Anonymous // March 10, 2009 at 5:59 PM
The following article “The coming evangelical collapse” makes for interesting reading.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0310/p09s01-coop.html
Margaret // March 25, 2009 at 10:32 AM
BU Family
I am new here. I like what I see.
I was challenged by the words of one of the commenters that God has made promises to men. So I started to read my New Testament to see if this was so or not.
Here are the promises I found in the first five chapters of the book of The Acts. Let me share what I found with you. I would be happy if anyone can guide me as to if I am on the right tract. As I go on I will share my findings with you. Peace.
PROMISES IN THE ACTS
Promise of the Holy Spirit
Chapter 1: verse 4-5 and verse 8
V 4. And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
5. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
8. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
Promise of the Lord’s physical visible return
Chapter 1: verses 10-11
10. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11. Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Promises of salvation
Chapter 2:v 21. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Promise resulting from repentance
Chapter 2:v 38-39
38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.
Chapter 3: 19. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
Promise of Destruction for not receiving Christ
Chapter 3: 20-23
20. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21. Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
22. For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Promise that Jesus is the only source of salvation ( see also John 14:6)
Acts 4:12
11. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
These below may not be true promises, but it seems that this is what happens when anyone teaches the Word of God anywhere.
Acts Chapter 4: 1-4
Some will be grieved and try to stop it; but some will believe! Still happening today. Isnt it?
1. And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, 2. Being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead.
3. And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide.
4. Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.
It seems from Acts Chapter 4:17-18 that attempts are always made to restrain the spread of Christianity (not religion) that is teaching about, and following the teachings of Jesus
17. But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name.
18. And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
See what happens in chapter 5 when the apostles disobeyed the Jewish leadership
Acts Chapter 5: 17
17. Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and were filled with indignation, 18. And laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison.
I wonder what will happen here on BU when folk read this post.
Margaret // April 1, 2009 at 1:25 PM
BU Family
As I said before I was challenged by the words of one of the commenters that God has made promises to men. So I started to read my New Testament to see if this was so or not.
Here are the promises I found in Acts chapters 6-15 . As I said before I would be happy if anyone can guide me as to if I am on the right tract, as I have never read the Bible like this before actively looking for something specific.
Peace.
Promise concerning Paul’s future service soon after his conversion
Chapter 9 vs 15
15. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: 16. For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.
Promise of God to accept all of any nation who fear him and work righteousness
Chapter 10; vs 35
35. But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
Promise that Jesus was ordained to be the Judge of both the living or quick and the dead Acts 10:42
42. And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
Promise that remission of sins (salvation) is received by believing in Jesus name Acts 10:43
43. To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
Promise that God would raise up Jesus as Savior via the seed of David the son of Jesse
Acts 13:22-23
22. And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave their testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.
23. Of this man’s seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus
Promise that forgiveness of sins and justification comes through Jesus.
Acts 13: 38-39
38. Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: 39. And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Promise that God will restore Israel after he takes a people for his name from among the Gentiles
Acts 15: 13- 17
13. And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: 14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Promise that salvation comes through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ
Acts 15:11
But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
The following are not promises but
I learned in chapter 13 that some will seek to turn others from the faith when the Word of God is presented
Acts 13 vs 8. But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith.
I learned in chapter 14 that some will believe God’s Word but some wont.
Acts 14:1-4
1. And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.
2. But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.
3. Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands.
4. But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles.
Look what may happen to such: Acts 13:9-10. They are blinded spiritually!
9. Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him.
10. And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? 11. And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.