# These few things I know.



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 19, 2021)

The Bible is God's word and is the embodiment of His truth.  The depths of it is beyond my comprehension and as such are speculative.    I have a hard enough time living in the shallows, and by that I mean applying his simple truths to my life.  Maybe I'm an outlier, but I wake every day seeking to do one thing: live in the center of his will and every day I fail miserably.  That said, these are the basic simple truths I understand.

God loves me unconditionally and always has: so much so that he Himself suffered and died for me.

I am to love and forgive unconditionally.  

Whatever happens God is in complete control and it's exactly the way he wants it to be.  (That's a toughie to apply.)

That's pretty much it.  Very simple to understand.  Impossible for me to apply on a continual basis.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 19, 2021)

Amen, with a 'lil side note if you'd entertain it ...

Get to know that part of you which is at rest, you'd be surprised how your liberty could be met with holy laughter and the grace to help against the flesh. And no, there's no suggestion to present yourself as a giddy fool, but present yourself to the Lord as one alive from the dead, consecrated for relational works that you'll discover with joy in the Spirit. It just may take the "try hard - fail - rededicate self effort" mantra and replace it with blood bought peace - that passes all earthly understanding.    

And that is my wish for you and everyone who has believed it IS finished.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 19, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> Amen, with a 'lil side note if you'd entertain it ...
> 
> Get to know that part of you which is at rest, you'd be surprised how your liberty could be met with holy laughter and the grace to help against the flesh. And no, there's no suggestion to present yourself as a giddy fool, but present yourself to the Lord as one alive from the dead, consecrated for relational works that you'll discover with joy in the Spirit. It just may take the "try hard - fail - rededicate self effort" mantra and replace it with blood bought peace - that passes all earthly understanding.
> 
> And that is my wish for you and everyone who has believed it IS finished.



Love it.  Just gotta live it.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 19, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Maybe I'm an outlier, but I wake every day seeking to do one thing: live in the center of his will and every day I fail miserably.


"For he performeth _the thing that is_ appointed for me: and many such _things are_ with him." Job 23:14


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 19, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> The Bible is God's word and is the embodiment of His truth.  The depths of it is beyond my comprehension and as such are speculative.    I have a hard enough time living in the shallows, and by that I mean applying his simple truths to my life.  Maybe I'm an outlier, but I wake every day seeking to do one thing: live in the center of his will and every day I fail miserably.  That said, these are the basic simple truths I understand.
> 
> God loves me unconditionally and always has: so much so that he Himself suffered and died for me.
> 
> ...


God is in complete control but does not control everything.


----------



## Israel (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> God is in complete control but does not control everything.


What is not under His control?


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> What is not under His control?


This could get interesting.
But I'll bow out of my musings, LOL, to stay from anyone's torn robes and dust tossed into the air.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> What is not under His control?




   "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose."

and


"So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth."

---------------


++++++++++++++Seems the power and authority of God is pretty much cut and dry as to point to total control.

Nevertheless is God in control such as  to make some person or a people to be lukewarm?

------------------
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

------------------

++++++++++++ Seems that some have the power to thwart God's purpose. Though we can say He has control over the response, hot, cold or lukewarm, nevertheless some are not willing and willing to respond according to his purpose.

Therefore man can chose to control his own response to God's purpose -- a response that is NOT controlled by God, yet God remains in control due to His remedy regardless of what the response might be.


*Ephesians 1:11*, NLT: "Furthermore, because we are united with Christ, we have received an inheritance from God, for he chose us in advance, and he makes everything work out according to his plan."

Did he chose us in advance, that due his promise that people like us would receive an inheritance  and we receive such--- OR did he chose the very people and the individual who would receive the promised inheritance?

He chose to free the Hebrews out of Egypt, yet did they all receive according to His will and purpose? He willed freedom. And those who did not receive for they did not keep it or that they returned to slavery was it according to His purpose for them who received not? Or those who returned or sold their inheritance and so to not receive according to his purpose?

Are we controlled to believe and not to believe within a will that so loved the world....?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> What is not under His control?


Are you a Calvinist? Will dictate which way I answer the question.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> Are you a Calvinist? Will dictate which way I answer the question.



 Typical situationist ... doesn't know what his truth is until he has determined his situation.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Typical situationist ... doesn't know what his truth is until he has determined his situation.


 I'm still stuck on his unintelligible statement in post #5.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 20, 2021)

Now, Now!  ad hominemism guys! This is not typical situation for you or is it?

Ray so you never have to ask your question again which I would say is a good question, if you are going to ask if fundamentalists if they are Calvinists, you might as well ask if a zebra has stripes.

The question is a good question because: 1. It can indicated if the question-statement has origin in fellowship with a genuine eye to faith and to bible study. 2. It can indicate if the question-statement has its origin in doctrinal stance and that of a coat dyed in the wool.

Christ seems to unite all our dirty linen, however. Praise the Lord.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Typical situationist ... doesn't know what his truth is until he has determined his situation.


I know the Truth. Simply looking at which way it needs to be presented to avoid long needless exchanges that could be easily bypassed by determining at what point out disagreement starts.
Simple question: You a Calvinist or Non Calvinist? Which of the 5 Doctrines of Grace you adhere to? Which ones you reject? 
If you reject just one point of the Doctrines, then I just answered your question for you with your choice. Discussion will be done. If you are a 5 point Calvinist, then we "circle back" to another statement in your O.P. which will have then been knocked off the rails.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> I know the Truth. Simply looking at which way it needs to be presented to avoid long needless exchanges that could be easily bypassed by determining at what point out disagreement starts.
> Simple question: You a Calvinist or Non Calvinist? Which of the 5 Doctrines of Grace you adhere to? Which ones you reject?
> If you reject just one point of the Doctrines, then I just answered your question for you with your choice. Discussion will be done. If you are a 5 point Calvinist, then we "circle back" to another statement in your O.P. which will have then been knocked off the rails.


I take it then that you were not making a declarative statement in post #5, but rather pointing out the inconsistency in the O.P.

Probably the same inconsistency that I addressed with post #4.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Just for the record, it was Bro. Israel who jumped in with both feet.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> God is in complete control but does not control everything.


Give me the 4 point Calvinist definition!


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 20, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Now, Now!  ad hominemism guys! This is not typical situation for you or is it?


You are right, of course; I responded the the pejorative "Calvinist"* with the pejorative "Situationist".

*See my many posts over the years explaining the initiation of the 5-points, and the corollary term Calvinist, by the Remonstrates (1610 A.D. I think)



> Ray so you never have to ask your question again which I would say is a good question, if you are going to ask if fundamentalists if they are Calvinists, you might as well ask if a zebra has stripes.




Labeling always azz-u-me s.  Without individual doctrinal assent or rejection (with reasoning) understanding is not possible.  But hey, who wants to go to all that trouble; ad hominem is so much easier.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> You are right, of course; I responded the the pejorative "Calvinist"* with the pejorative "Situationist".
> 
> *See my many posts over the years explaining the initiation of the 5-points, and the corollary term Calvinist, by the Remonstrates (1610 A.D. I think)
> 
> ...


If you are not a 5 pointer, you are not a Calvinist. 4 pointers or three pointers, which most Fundamental Baptists are, are not Calvinists.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> I take it then that you were not making a declarative statement in post #5, but rather pointing out the inconsistency in the O.P.
> 
> Probably the same inconsistency that I addressed with post #4.


Pretty much. Though myself being a Reformation Arminian (aka Classical Arminian) do not believe The Sovereign God chooses to control everything. His choice to give man freedom to choose does not diminish His Sovereignty.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> God is in complete control but does not control everything.


I don't really even know how to explain this but if I had to I'd say maybe God changes his plans according to ours? If man had not followed plan A and crucified His son then God would go to plan B?

At the same time though is he controlling my daily bodily functions? Does he steer hurricane? The ice storm in Texas?

I have also noticed that people are quick to give God credit for the good things like when we overcome the trials he gives us but not the trials themselves. Like Job and his trials. I don't see it as a test. If not a test then why did God give him those trials?

I'm still a bit lost by the meaning of your response about God's total control. If God saw before time that I was going to choose my red shirt over my blue shirt today, could I do differently that what God has already seen? I mean even if God is not in total control, he has already seen my free will choices so it really doesn't matter one way or the other.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't really even know how to explain this but if I had to I'd say maybe God changes his plans according to ours? If man had not followed plan A and crucified His son then God would go to plan B?
> 
> At the same time though is he controlling my daily bodily functions? Does he steer hurricane? The ice storm in Texas?
> 
> ...


I know exactly how the movie "God's and Generals" ended. I know everything that happened in it.  Does my end knowledge control the events? Foreknowledge does not logically equate to causation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

Arminianism view;
"That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will", and unaided by the Holy Spirit, no person is able to respond to God's will;

This sounds like man has no free will to seek God unaided by the Holy Spirit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> I know exactly how the movie "God's and Generals" ended. I know everything that happened in it.  Does my end knowledge control the events? Foreknowledge does not logically equate to causation.


I understand that but the foreknowledge would keep you from doing anything different that what God has already seen you do.

In the movie "God's and Generals" can they change the story as it's being told from how it was filmed?  Let's say God didn't give us his only son for salvation by the actions of the Romans and Jews. He did fore see how it would happen.
The Word was with God from all Eternity. The story was already written, they lamb was already slain.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I understand that but the foreknowledge would keep you from doing anything different that what God has already seen you do.


It can't keep you from doing anything. What you are saying is God, because He is Omniscient, is incapable of granting a free choice. You are saying His Omniscience limits His Omnipotence. See a problem with that?


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 20, 2021)

What is the economic and social benefit for " free will" suppression? Is it a worldly benefit or a heavenly one?

Personally I think Adam and Eve had free will outside of God's control and continue with it-- in that they can and do disregard or fall in with His authority.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> It can't keep you from doing anything. What you are saying is God, because He is Omniscient, is incapable of granting a free choice. You are saying His Omniscience limits His Omnipotence. See a problem with that?


I can see that, please explain your sentence "God is in total control but does not control everything."

The one thing I'd really love for everyone to have free will to do is seek God's salvation but most Arminians don't even see that as happening.

If God controls who receives salvation by sending us to the Son, what good is free will to choose a Ford or Chevy? Yet I don't see God choosing one of those trucks for me.
I sure don't understand it all. I'm never in the yeah or nay group. I can see both as being true.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 20, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> What is the economic and social benefit for " free will" suppression? Is it a worldly benefit or a heavenly one?
> 
> Personally I think Adam and Eve had free will outside of God's control and continue with it-- in that they can and do disregard or fall in with His authority.


Yet if they had not fell, the Word would of had to stay in Heaven. We wouldn't really have needed salvation from eternal death. If this be the case, why was the Son already slain before creation?
It's like the old Chicken and Egg argument.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I can see that, please explain your sentence "God is in total control but does not control everything."
> 
> The one thing I'd really love for everyone to have free will to do is seek God's salvation but most Arminians don't even see that as happening.
> 
> ...


God is Omnipotent. If He were not in complete control, that would mean He is not all powerful. There would have to be things outside His power to control. There are things He chooses not to control. They are within His control because He can control them, but they are not being controlled by Him because He chooses not to.

It's kind of like a King who has 100,000 elite troops. 25 subjects in his kingdom decide not to pay their tax. King says, leave them alone, they not worth messing with. The king is in control, but chose not to exert that control.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> If you are not a 5 pointer, you are not a Calvinist. 4 pointers or three pointers, which most Fundamental Baptists are, are not Calvinists.


Indeed; it was the Arminians who pinned the label Calvinist on those with whom thy disagreed but refused the label Arminian and chose to call themselves Remonstrant.  Most here have heard my definition of a Calvinist before: One who has tired of explaining what he actually believes (as opposed to what others say he believes).


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Indeed; it was the Arminians who pinned the label Calvinist on those with whom thy disagreed but refused the label Arminian and chose to call themselves Remonstrant.  Most here have heard my definition of a Calvinist before: One who has tired of explaining what he actually believes (as opposed to what others say he believes).


I have never really seen your explanations. 
We all know there are varying degrees of Calvinism. I personally admire and respect the position of High Calvinism. In its lower or more compromising forms, Calvinism comes off the rails.  Same can be said about Arminianism. Most "Arminians' that don't accept the label do so because they are not Arminians.Most Classical Arminians, like myself, won't accept being labeled Arminian either due to the fact I hold the views of the Remonstrance, but not the views of modern Arminianism.  Most people hold a totally non-logical and non-Scriptural, blended theology that I call Mutt theory, or mutt Soteriology to be most correct.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet if they had not fell, the Word would of had to stay in Heaven. We wouldn't really have needed salvation from eternal death. If this be the case, why was the Son already slain before creation?
> It's like the old Chicken and Egg argument.




"All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Here is a possible reading:


And all* will adore him, all the inhabitants of the earth who's names  is not found written ever since the origin of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was Slain ( Jesus).

I take the noun "all"  as meaning those who are worldly who don't belong to the faith and therefore are not in the book of life. Therefore it is not a comment that Jesus was slain before the the origin of the world, rather it is a statement that the worldly who have been around since the fall, or the origin of the world due to the fall as opposed to the earth which was around before the world, and therefore not in the book of life, fall for and adore the Beast because they are carnal. They will root for the wrong team.

In other words perhaps people will follow ideologies of power instead of God's authority and power. Those who know the faith will not worship the beast-- they will not be deceived by lies.

Or in other words again, as Eve fell for the power of the snake at the origin of the world ( the worldly ) those who are without faith or who's faith is weak on this the earth now fall easy for the snake or the beast  again just as she ( Eve) did and perhaps easier in some cases. Those without faith worship, but they worship  counter to God's purpose. They are in it for themselves  and their kind alone.


----------



## Israel (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> God is Omnipotent. If He were not in complete control, that would mean He is not all powerful. There would have to be things outside His power to control. There are things He chooses not to control. They are within His control because He can control them, but they are not being controlled by Him because He chooses not to.
> 
> It's kind of like a King who has 100,000 elite troops. 25 subjects in his kingdom decide not to pay their tax. King says, leave them alone, they not worth messing with. The king is in control, but chose not to exert that control.





> It's kind of like a King who...



Except...it's really not at all, is it?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> Except...it's really not at all, is it?


It's most akin to the King with the invincible military that tells his servants, "you can grow corn, wheat, or barley." King is in control,but servants have a limited FREE choice.


----------



## Israel (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> It's most akin to the King with the invincible military that tells his servants, "you can grow corn, wheat, or barley." King is in control,but servants have a limited FREE choice.


Your example is akin...but is God akin to your example?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> Your example is akin...but is God akin to your example?


Yes.


----------



## Israel (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> Yes.


In what way?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> In what way?


He is The Sovereign King.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> He is The Sovereign King.


He foreordained all things? If so, even their choices are under this category.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> He foreordained all things? If so, even their choices are under this category.


It would depend on what scope you extend all things to. Even most Calvinists concede all things really means all classes of things.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> It would depend on what scope you extend all things to.


Everything


Ray357 said:


> Even most Calvinists concede all things really means all classes of things.


I am not interested in what an inconsistent Calvinist concedes.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Everything
> 
> I am not interested in what an inconsistent Calvinist concedes.


What do you believe? The full extent of "everything" makes man a mere mindless puppet. You believe that ?


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> What do you believe? The full extent of "everything" makes man a mere mindless puppet. You believe that ?


That doesn't help you. God controls the mindless puppet as well.


----------



## Israel (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> He is The Sovereign King.


I don't disagree, and have only been asking questions.
And I don't disagree with the usefulness of examples.


But do you think the example may break down a bit (not denying any usefulness) by bringing God to the equivalence of a king...himself, in and "of" the creation?

Even to His reliance upon strength or power of others..."in and _of the creation"? _(Soldiers like himself..."of the creation")
_(And I do not deny angelic spirit's being nor power)_

I cannot help but reiterate the original question in light of being persuaded that as the God of all creation who being not only "above" (superior in any way it might be applied as being separate in nature _from a created thing_)...but responsible for, not only all the things that are (such as to the extent my understanding of what is, is) but even those things which I am persuaded "be not".

You have, if I understand you (and in a way I would say has been helpful to me) only told  (again, do I understand you?) _how_ God chooses to act toward His creation, but the question,

"What is not under His control"

since you posit



> but does not control everything


 remains.

What is it? that? they? thing? (that is or even "be's not") that could be part of, included in, of any "_of everything_" that He does not control?


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

"Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?"


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

"I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things." 

"The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise."

Do all Arminians think so poorly of Christ as to see Him as a mindless puppet? Or only the Classical ones?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> That doesn't help you. God controls the mindless puppet as well.


What do you believe? I am in no mood for riddles.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

Israel said:


> I don't disagree, and have only been asking questions.
> And I don't disagree with the usefulness of examples.
> 
> 
> ...


Apply the same to the Parables. If you analyze them to death.....
God created gravity, trees, leaves, and wind resistance. Does He actively place every leaf on the ground. One extreme is deism. The other,hyper Calvinism. The truth, somewhere in between.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> What do you believe? I am in no mood for riddles.


I believe that God controls your mood.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> I believe that God controls your mood.


You believe God makes man sin?


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> You believe God makes man sin?


Are you saying that your mood is sinful?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Are you saying that your mood is sinful?


No. Any sin committed by any person in general.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> No. Any sin committed by any person in general.


That would fall under the category of "everything"(see post #40).


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> That would fall under the category of "everything"(see post #40).


You hold a position that puts you on a theological Island  with a miniscule few for company. You might want to research the difference between Cause and Ordain. I honestly don't really care, because I am sure discussion will be unfruitful. 
James 1:13


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> You hold a position that puts you on a theological Island  with a miniscule few for company.


And few there are that find it.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> And few there are that find it.


Good thing that FEW get lost in the weeds. You can't find anything, so that line of argument is pointless. God debating God. He controls your keystrokes. He controlls my keystrokes. He debates with Himself. That's past odd. That's insanity.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 20, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> Good thing that FEW get lost in the weeds. You can't find anything, so that line of argument is pointless. God debating God. He controls your keystrokes. He controlls my keystrokes. He debates with Himself. That's past odd. That's insanity.


Are you still honestly not really caring?


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 20, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Are you still honestly not really caring?


Nope. Don't care. Just having fun.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 21, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> God debating God. He controls your keystrokes. He controlls my keystrokes. He debates with Himself. That's past odd. That's insanity.


God causing one created being to communicate with another created being is not God debating God. Are you a Pantheist?

When God causes a donkey to talk, is the donkey God?


----------



## Israel (Feb 21, 2021)

I am persuaded the sense of this is lost upon ( i.e. must appear as "lostness" to an observer) what does not yet see it, and is so painfully obvious to what does; that having no choice in the matter of appearance, the one speaking of its sense by that compulsion to speak of it can only be seen as either insane or Captain Obvious. A man might like to think he can choose to be wise, but that too is out of his hands.

As to the relationship of lostness to insanity (and seeing the insanity card has been played as trump), and no less mention of an island with weeds that few venture to, (or find) the parable of the movie "Cast Away" could be useful. 

Chuck Nolan suffers a crash. Lone survivor. He finds himself on an island. (Or does an island provided find him?) This place where we get to watch the working out of his isolation to the point of both failed suicide and imbuing a volley ball with selfness to a relationship. 

Did he "go crazy" or was the already resident crazy only manifest by particular circumstance? Or, did he not go crazy at all, just survive by whatever means (even if to us it appears crazy) till recovery? 

What gave him that thing (was it a form of hope?) in the seeming loss of everything (as Wilson floated away) and of such losing that he even lets go (for a time) of his life line? We watch as the lifeline sinks, understanding. There could be a point at which it comes to rest out of his reach despite his will.

In that moment, that particular moment of all...did he "make a choice?" Or quite conversely...was that the moment of all where choice was particularly denied him...having none? 

Life simply...took over? 

Even saving him from death by delusion?

Could he describe it later? Would he say "I chose to let Wilson go" and "opted for the raft?" Or would he say something other, "my delusion almost (all but) killed me?" And caused me to let go of everything...and in that something else took over that allows me to stand here today...speaking of it? 

Even all _my trying_ to cling to delusion...worked?

When I was past hope...(or is it only past "my hopes"?) that a man discovers...

The man even sillier than I am will read "he is recommending clinging to delusion..."
I am saying a man has no choice, he already does that. The_ first inclination_ is _always to it._

The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

(Only the believer _is made_ to believe this) 

He knows of inclinations...and the vast superiority of salvation...too vast to describe.
An intervention. Always being made upon the first man to dissuade from...that he might be persuaded to.

I thought to say, at the first "I would prefer", but that was taken from me.

It is not at all that "I would prefer" to see the self control of God rather than admit to something being not under His complete control.

I have no choice.





_



_


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 21, 2021)

It is a far, far good thing that bros. SemperFiDawg is no man to worry that his tread is derailed or not derailed.

From a topic avowing that the depths of scripture are mystery and speculative to him but nevertheless truth and yet  sure that God is in full control which " That's pretty much it. Very simple to understand."   and on to the posts in response by the lumberjacks on planks sure and steady at various heights of the bible tree with saws chewing in-- sawing to agree and disagree.

Yet there is something else in the OP... something about "Jesus loves me." which no saws have cut into regardless of which plank and height  we are on.  It is a kind of like the love of God is ecumenical which splits and saw tracts for bible study does not afford.


There is something about the way we study the bible that makes lovers fools.

Salvation is conditional and salvation is not conditional the bible tells me so---but God's love is fussier about what it tells me precisely about salvation. Maybe.

The bible tells me the hot and cold have a good chance at salvation and the lukewarm are out.  The cross and Christ on it tells me that the possiblity at salvation is for all,  the hot,  the  cold and  the lukewarm.  Conservatives, liberals and wingnuts at both ends all can look on it... and perhaps knock at the door that is not a real door at the gate which is not a real gate but is Christ and so receive eternal life. Otherwise the Great Commission is not real.

That's pretty much it. Very simple to understand. Those who have hearts permit such to feel. Those who have eyes permit them to see. Those who have ears make hearing aids less expensive something like glasses are for the eyes... and as less then perfect neighbors find it in their hearts to be neighborly.


----------



## Israel (Feb 21, 2021)

> There is something about the way we study the bible that makes lovers fools.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 21, 2021)

And remember God's natural garden is without weeds, but man's garden is full of suckers and weeds. Remember this this coming Spring when you shop the catalogue to lovingly cultivate your own little bit of paradise.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 22, 2021)

Calvinist, Situationalist, Armenian, Fundamentalist, Mutt theory, or mutt Soteriology.



> For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.



Ole Paul was a wise man.  He would have played the dickens in here.  So many people bowing at the altar of theology convinced their knowledge is gonna save them.  SMH


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 22, 2021)

Somethin occurred in my little brain last night as I was thinking of why some people might " see" and organize their spiritual understanding differently than others and yet still be in the way. We all know and learn differently because?

The set of mind for people of faith is different for all individuals as it is in the population in general. We all have different personalities. With regards to spiritual knowledge the knowledge we absorb comes to us mainly for our personalities' ability to process knowledge, express it and question it from information given by individuals with different personalities.

Jesus and the apostles all had different personalities. As individuals Peter has a different personality from Jesus and Paul and so does Paul have a different personality from Peter or Jesus yet  all of them have in common an engagement with life in the present through Christ.

John has a different personality than all of them. Luke is different in personality than all of them. Matthew, Mark.... etc... What seems to be plain to all of them is the content of their minds. The way of their minds as to thinking about their subjects, they all "think" and communicate differently for their personalities, but  we can think that the content of what they think is somehow similar.

Paul declares the old bromide that all he knows is Christ crucified. Peter says all I can give you is what I have and what I have is not money. John starts his Gospel with a description of Christ as if it was his purpose for it. Matthews gospel is basically a description of Jesus present within his social context. etc...

Get the "picture"? All these different personalities despite obvious and sometimes very different personalities put forward Christ present, or God present in the now, in their lives and the lives of people in their times, in their past,  but also in the times to come.

When Christ is locked up to only one kind of personality, especially one's own which is vastly different then Christ's, we might have a problem when we study scripture.

What is the mind of Christ? What kind of personality is his? Is he philosophical in communication? Is he poetic? Is he political and calculating? Does Jesus give the impression he paused to weigh his words. Is he quick witted and snaps back answers when questioned? When he is teaching is he direct without an available supply  of information with examples from life?

When Jesus uses scripture is it to describe men or God? When Jesus describes the Father in relationship with himself is ever the Father not present to him and therefore not engaged in the events of living?

Now what is  my problem with Calvin's Sovereignty doctrine? and with those who parrot that God is in control totally? It is to be honest that  I think it is my personality and Calvin's personality are at odds. It is not so much what he says, but it is the personality that permits to stay what he says that I mistrust.  I mistrust his personality to such a degree that I would never follow his voice to be as the voice of Christ which I could follow in other men or women. This is not  a judgement of John Calvin, it is a judgement I have for myself.

Simply put if this Calvin's declaration was the voice of Christ issued from Christ's personality I would not follow it.... ( from this I can suppose all kinds of things from my and Calvin's perspective regards about myself and salvation.)


"By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal ****ation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death."

So yea... there is something impaired in the capture of the Divine for me in Calvin's declaration... I admit a discomfort with it. It is too concrete for my personality and the personality I understand Christ to have.

If Calvin was to walk into my house with all his personality intact, I would respect him. Even though he darkens any room for me by sucking out the air needed to my personality which is the personality I met Christ with. It is hard for me to see Christ present in Calvin's declarations. I just don't see the personality of Christ in it to the extent that it is a conclusion one can claim as final  and as fixed in concreate.

Also perhaps more than this I worry who "we" is in the statement..." By predestination "we" mean..."  Who is "we"?   Who is Calvin in agreement with? Is "we" the item of himself with Christ? a few friends? a gathering of a few learned scholars or clergy who have submitted papers on such and such theological topics? etc...

So I respect Calvin. I respect his personality. But I respect mine also. I hope that when and where Jesus calls we both go.  But I must admit that my problem is just that my problem... that with Calvin I have discomfort. His personality seems to have done what mine can't... is seems to me that Calvin has God locked up to a place where God has a personality indifferent to life, rigid, stiff necked, humped backed and in pain from some tightened muscle.

The Christ I know was like this in personality:

"As they were walking along the road, someone said to Jesus, “I will follow You wherever You go.” 58 Jesus replied, “ Foxes have dens and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head.” 59Then He said to another man, “Follow Me.”

Now that is the kind of personality I'm attracted to. One who can say to one man " Can you follow me?" and to another "Just do it." in the same breath. A man like that I can trust... I'm not sure why. But my personality lets me. Perhaps it is because there is not declaration of " Don't bother  to try following me, you just can't. and " Don't bother some of y'all are in. Some are not. I got the wheel on that."

Now my personality lets me know from scripture the occasions when God is present in the lives of people and it is this presence that I can latch onto for I can make a claim in common that as they broke their bread I do so still. When I read Calvin I simply find little bread on the table for which it would be comfortable to live in the present and with all of Christ in mind and with Christ present and  with many the other personalities at the table.


When I read scripture I must admit that Christ read it also.  I try my best to align myself to  his personality when I read it... because the Holy Spirit told me to do it.  The Holy Spirit says " It don't matter what So and So said, follow me."  and "Y'all know my voice, so follow it."


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 22, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Ole Paul was a wise man.  He would have played the dickens in here. So many people bowing at the altar of theology convinced their knowledge is gonna save them.  SMH


Without theology, you would not know that Paul was a wise man or that bowing at an altar will not save you.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 22, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Without theology, you would not know that Paul was a wise man or that bowing at an altar will not save you.



*Definition of theology*

1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience especially  : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Funny.  I can't recall one instance of Christ saying "Hit the books, and study hard."  We are called to know Him, not dissect him.  His teachings are so easy a child can understand and apply them, yet a simplistic little post has turned into a theological debate of competing egos in an battle of who can display the most high-mindedness.  This place is full of self-appreciating intellect.  There's no doubt about that, but it's about as useful and uplifting as a rotting corpse.  Odd, that given the Title Spiritual Discussion and Study, there's only obscure doctrinal debate/showmanship.


----------



## Israel (Feb 22, 2021)

Calvin got introduced into this discussion some time back. For what reason I can only surmise, but I would guess it has more to do with "whose water are you carrying" than anything else. "Tell me whose water you are carrying and I will tailor my response to you accordingly" seemed pretty much the way of it.

As I recall Hummer (whom I have never seen treat anyone with less than an almost painful respect...suffering to _an almost exasperation_) both saw it, and saw through it. I know others did too, just preferred not to comment upon it. Probably (in my estimation) seeing it was being handled.

Call this a theological prescription or not, call it whatever one cares to, it matters not. Those that know it, live in it, those that don't...simply don't...yet. But I am also quite convinced none of does not find the extreme of benefit of reminder to it, if even we have let it slip in our consciousness. There's not a one of us who need "try and be transparent". We just are. Trying to hide transparency by "trying to be" is as silly an effort as _trying to be_ like Christ to the convincing of others. 

(Does one need _that equation_ explained?) That folly?

But, why would any of us need to be reminded of its truth...and benefit? Probably because none of us _like to be_ seen through...generally it's not pleasant to have one's motives exposed to a greater degree than one understands them themselves. To have it made so plain that a man does not even know himself to the measure he imagines he does. And...made too plain...that if a man does not even know himself very well, (if at all) everything else is so skewed and screwed up according to that misinformation as to be mostly...spuriously spewed data.

Do you hear spirits?

Do you know what answer doesn't matter at all to that question?

Any.

Do you know God?

Ditto.

Yet...even as God _needs no one_ to explain either Himself nor His motives, unless one has been carried away to dumb idols thinking it (them) is/are God, there's gonna be a whole lot of "why do you gotta be that way?" veiled in as much dumbness a man can muster to hide his own self...from himself. Serving a dumb idol.

No doubt we all like to assume we know what love "feels like".

Till someone _we think we love_ comes along and we offer our best effort to let them know we do...and they respond..."get thee behind me Satan"

Do you hear spirits?


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 22, 2021)

In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Concerning him we have much to say, and _it is_ hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes _only_ of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.

Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. And this we will do, if God permits.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 22, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> *Definition of theology*
> 
> 1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experienceespecially  : the study of God and of God's relation to the world
> 
> Funny.  I can't recall one instance of Christ saying "Hit the books, and study hard."  We are called to know Him, not dissect him.  His teachings are so easy a child can understand and apply them, yet a simplistic little post has turned into a theological debate of competing egos in an battle of who can display the most high-mindedness.  This place is full of self-appreciating intellect.  There's no doubt about that, but it's about as useful and uplifting as a rotting corpse.  Odd, that given the Title Spiritual Discussion and Study, there's only obscure doctrinal debate/showmanship.


You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 22, 2021)

But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I _am_ the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these _things_ I delight, saith the LORD. 

*That he understandeth and knoweth me.*

Theology is the knowledge of God and His revelation, but I am under no delusion that theology is for everybody.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 22, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I _am_ the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these _things_ I delight, saith the LORD.
> 
> *That he understandeth and knoweth me.*
> 
> Theology is the knowledge of God and His revelation, but I am under no delusion that theology is for everybody.



I'm under no delusion that all the high-mindedness and intellectual puffery that goes on here benefits a soul other than the pride of the ones who engage in it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 22, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.



Yes he was, yet what did he count it as?  Did he say "Y'all all study to become like me so you can argue high and obscure theological doctrines in lofty circles???  Paul didn't go about planting seminary schools.  He planted churches.  And he taught essentials.  That's what lost people need to know....essentials and how to apply them to their daily life.  How to find God, find forgiveness, find peace, find that relationship with God.  That's where the spiritual life is, not in all these other squabbles over the ologies and the isms.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 22, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I'm under no delusion that all the high-mindedness and intellectual puffery that goes on here benefits a soul other than the pride of the ones who engage in it.


If I was anti-knowledge, I'm sure that I would feel the same way.


----------



## Israel (Feb 22, 2021)

Makes me think of Gordon's recent post about persons, personalities, spiritual conclusions...and even to (specifically) all the differences that might be found along the way of those...even in "the way"

Think of Christ, having them (as many as are)...inside...and we may begin to understand the Lord's suffering and death. Learn the cost of casting none aside, and one begins to see the cost of themselves being "kept"...quite joyfully.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 22, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes he was, yet what did he count it as?  Did he say "Y'all all study to become like me so you can argue high and obscure theological doctrines in lofty circles???  Paul didn't go about planting seminary schools.  He planted churches.  And he taught essentials.  That's what lost people need to know....essentials and how to apply them to their daily life.  How to find God, find forgiveness, find peace, find that relationship with God.  That's where the spiritual life is, not in all these other squabbles over the ologies and the isms.


Actually Paul went around doing quite a bit of debating with both saved and lost. 
There is a definite order in which a convert needs to be discipled. You act like they can only be taught a few things and then education must stop. If you read closely, you will immediately see the apostles disputed among themselves. 
Christians need to have a basic knowledge of systematic theology. They also need to know why they believe what they believe about soteriology and eschatological thinking.


----------



## Israel (Feb 23, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.




Is there a recommendation here?

What is it you are saying?



> I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology



while that many(?) are also those who



> use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.



Is that what you are saying...that "the many" (too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology) are also those who use (are full of?) excuse?

Is that it?

Lotsa folks on here have been accused of being "crytpic", vague...not plain enough...maybe even too high falutin'...and this ain't no new experience. Many here have been "on" over a decade.

So, help a brother out...cause generally to me, when I hear a man say another is lazy it's not only far from an admirable observation, but usually a form of accusation of inferior motive...and no less if or when one says someone relies on excuses.

So here's your opportunity to correct me if my thinking inclines toward your voicing a recommendation against being "like" the many and I hear you wrongly.

But you may then want to reconsider this post:



> You hold a position that puts you on a theological Island with a miniscule few for company.



How _unlike the many_..._should a man be_?

It's almost funny how peculiarly common man can be, thinking he's unique.

Man..._is that cryptic_?

Man...where are you?

Is hope found in being among the many...or few?

Or _with_ only One?

Do you mind if I chuckle that you felt it needful to tell Gem his estate of being rare in being held by a rare view? That he might even endure at times the (mere) feeling of being alone?

It's quite amazing how much "feeling" our Lord endured in conquering the lie that God has left man alone and hopeless and helpless. (One could ask for the vision of that conquering and where it led, and, as Hummer was led to mention as reminder...it did not exclude "loud cries and tears")

Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

Do you have an "eye out"?

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into **** fire:

An eye out for the one willing to appear alone...who isn't?

And PS.
I was less than clear when mentioning Hummer's patience in respect to others to _an almost exasperation_...the _almost exasperation_ is mine, not his.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 23, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> You act like they can only be taught a few things and then education must stop



Nope.  Neither said nor implied.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 23, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Nope.  Neither said nor implied.


Yep, said and implied.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 23, 2021)

Israel said:


> Is there a recommendation here?
> 
> What is it you are saying?
> 
> ...


You got the cart leading the horse. My statements were in response to being criticized for studying and valuing systematic theology and soteriology.  I did not come out of the blue and accuse anyone of anything. I replied to a criticism leveled against me for the value I place on Biblical scholarship. I fully stand by what I said.


----------



## Israel (Feb 23, 2021)

Your first statement was a correction...or do I misread?



> God is in complete control but does not control everything.



And I listen for acoustics when I hear Paul played or "taught".



And I am not the only.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 23, 2021)

Israel said:


> Calvin got introduced into this discussion some time back. For what reason I can only surmise, but I would guess it has more to do with "whose water are you carrying" than anything else. "Tell me whose water you are carrying and I will tailor my response to you accordingly" seemed pretty much the way of it.
> 
> As I recall Hummer (whom I have never seen treat anyone with less than an almost painful respect...suffering to _an almost exasperation_) both saw it, and saw through it. I know others did too, just preferred not to comment upon it. Probably (in my estimation) seeing it was being handled.
> 
> ...



When I told Sweetie, who may know me better than I know myself, what you had said of me, she suggest that I should respond that she was ROFL..."what's that?" ... "rolling on floor laughing".

Although it is sorely tempting to sit back and enjoy the  complementary  things you have said about me; because of my superior perspective (being closer to the subject), it would be less that honest of me not to set the record straight.

If I see God in everything (animate or inanimate, simple or elaborate, voluntary or involuntary, natural or supernatural, temporal or eternal),  it is not me that sees, but God that reveals to me.  Therefore, I do not then respect any thing but God who has revealed for His Purpose and Glory.  Neither have I created this perspective; to the degree that I have it, it has been graciously given, nor do I suggest that all things are made easy by this way; I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 23, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> If I was anti-knowledge, I'm sure that I would feel the same way.



Anti-knowledge?  Funny, but I'll  wear that and wear it with pride if that's YOUR label for me.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 23, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> Yep, said and implied.



SMH.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 23, 2021)

SFD, I can't help but think that you are "short selling" yourself; and possibly God in the process.  Short selling grows from a pessimistic outlook.  Consistent long-term pessimism is difficult for a believer.

As I read scripture, we are instructed that we are to grow in faith and knowledge under the hand of the immanent God.  Just one example is 2 Peter which  starts and ends with knowledge (1:2,3,5,6; 3:18).

No, not every disciple has been gifted, or called, as an apologist, prophet, or evangelist.  But we are instructed to "Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. ..." (1 Cor. 14).  As believers we must desire to be "in the center of God's will", to use your words, but that does no negate our desiring that we grow in our knowledge of God, as we are amply instructed in His Word.


----------



## Israel (Feb 23, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> When I told Sweetie, who may know me better than I know myself, what you had said of me, she suggest that I should respond that she was ROFL..."what's that?" ... "rolling on floor laughing".
> 
> Although it is sorely tempting to sit back and enjoy the  complementary  things you have said about me; because of my superior perspective (being closer to the subject), it would be less that honest of me not to set the record straight.
> 
> If I see God in everything (animate or inanimate, simple or elaborate, voluntary or involuntary, natural or supernatural, temporal or eternal),  it is not me that sees, but God that reveals to me.  Therefore, I do not then respect any thing but God who has revealed for His Purpose and Glory.  Neither have I created this perspective; to the degree that I have it, it has been graciously given, nor do I suggest that all things are made easy by this way; I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.




It's funny...right?
I may have the smallest sense (of all men) who might not be harmed by my note, having some convincing that if or when said...they are also in receipt of that knowing (and surely not by me, or my note of it) that their estate, being noted...is all of gift.

But the funnier part is particularly what you mention. The small matter of being known...and sometimes far better than we know ourselves...that transparency of which we must be convinced if we are to continue...(maybe even start?) is easily manifest if a man marries a woman of God. Even if a man is doubtful of his ability to be seen plainly (not all men _need wives_, of course) but if one has been gifted to receive one (a woman of God)...he comes to learn how precious that gift is...in a directing toward truth. That is, if a created being as myself can see through all my attempts to hide too exquisitely and painfully well...how much more the Lord!?

It might be one of the most glorious revelations the Lord can _use a wife for..._to help bring a man to know

_"Hey...I am being both known...and loved!"_

For...till then...he is quite convinced they must remain separate things.
(If I would "have love" I must not let anyone see...)

And then the man might, as you have well written, understand



> I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.



And never was.

I am persuaded that when Mary heard herself being commended for having "chosen the better part" of sitting enraptured at the Lord's feet to hear what He had to say, she would not exchange that rapture for a pride in what appeared her choice...or take her commendation above any and everything else the Lord was saying to her.

Or, if she did, in patience the Lord reminded her of those many other things He has to say.

I really don't see the Lord settling for less than His fullness of joy being found considering into _what He had to go into _to come out on the other side to deliver it.

"And they were in disbelief for joy" at His appearing...and He surely knew they would be.

Hey, you guys got anything here to eat?


LOL...(or ROFL) as if He didn't know!


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 23, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> SMH.


Whatever! (Since we gonna use 16 year old school girl phrases)

This is an example of what's wrong with the Church today. Sing loud. Clap a lot. Be happy. Be a better you.  Whatever you do, don't worry about sound doctrine. Definitely don't worry about doctrines that might knock the happy off the clappy. Let's have another sociology lesson with a scripture verse thrown in it somewhere.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 23, 2021)

Ray357 said:


> Whatever! (Since we gonna use 16 year old school girl phrases)
> 
> This is an example of what's wrong with the Church today. Sing loud. Clap a lot. Be happy. Be a better you.  Whatever you do, don't worry about sound doctrine. Definitely don't worry about doctrines that might knock the happy off the clappy. Let's have another sociology lesson with a scripture verse thrown in it somewhere.



I don’t have enough bumper for all them stickers.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 23, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> SFD, I can't help but think that you are "short selling" yourself; and possibly God in the process.  Short selling grows from a pessimistic outlook.  Consistent long-term pessimism is difficult for a believer.
> 
> As I read scripture, we are instructed that we are to grow in faith and knowledge under the hand of the immanent God.  Just one example is 2 Peter which  starts and ends with knowledge (1:2,3,5,6; 3:18).
> 
> No, not every disciple has been gifted, or called, as an apologist, prophet, or evangelist.  But we are instructed to "Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. ..." (1 Cor. 14).  As believers we must desire to be "in the center of God's will", to use your words, but that does no negate our desiring that we grow in our knowledge of God, as we are amply instructed in His Word.



I’m not.  I’ve read the Bible probably 6-10 times cover to cover and have studied it in depth for years.  Did it increase my knowledge?  Absolutely.  Did it create a relationship with God?  No.  Did it save me?  No.  The Gospel, the Life, all the Blessings of God is in the application, not the consumption and regurgitation.  I’m not anti-knowledge, but it only takes the mind of a child to enter into the Kingdom with all its wondrous miracles, but we don’t talk about that here.  Strange given the membership.  What is talked about here?  Doctrinal debate ad nausea.  One would think a group of actual believers could do nothing more than share their testimonies every day about what God has done for or showed them the last 24 hours.  Yet that is the ONE thing that doesn’t happen.  You have to ask  yourself why.  If God IS in our life, working in our life, is debating unimportant views of doctrine the best we have to offer.  I suggest that happens because no one can relate what God has done for them.  May want to look into why.


----------



## Ray357 (Feb 23, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I’m not.  I’ve read the Bible probably 6-10 times cover to cover and have studied it in depth for years.  Did it increase my knowledge?  Absolutely.  Did it create a relationship with God?  No.  Did it save me?  No.  The Gospel, the Life, all the Blessings of God is in the application, not the consumption and regurgitation.  I’m not anti-knowledge, but it only takes the mind of a child to enter into the Kingdom with all its wondrous miracles, but we don’t talk about that here.  Strange given the membership.  What is talked about here?  Doctrinal debate ad nausea.  One would think a group of actual believers could do nothing more than share their testimonies every day about what God has done for or showed them the last 24 hours.  Yet that is the ONE thing that doesn’t happen.  You have to ask  yourself why.  If God IS in our life, working in our life, is debating unimportant views of doctrine the best we have to offer.  I suggest that happens because no one can relate what God has done for them.  May want to look into why.


So, just perhaps, we don't discuss the above because we agree on it. 
You did bring up application. I agree, application is of utmost importance. How can one apply what they do not know?  
2Tim 2:15-22


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 23, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I’m not.  I’ve read the Bible probably 6-10 times cover to cover and have studied it in depth for years.  Did it increase my knowledge?  Absolutely.  Did it create a relationship with God?  No.  Did it save me?  No.  The Gospel, the Life, all the Blessings of God is in the application, not the consumption and regurgitation.  I’m not anti-knowledge, but it only takes the mind of a child to enter into the Kingdom with all its wondrous miracles, but we don’t talk about that here.  Strange given the membership.  What is talked about here?  Doctrinal debate ad nausea.  One would think a group of actual believers could do nothing more than share their testimonies every day about what God has done for or showed them the last 24 hours.  Yet that is the ONE thing that doesn’t happen.  You have to ask  yourself why.  If God IS in our life, working in our life, is debating unimportant views of doctrine the best we have to offer.  I suggest that happens because no one can relate what God has done for them.  May want to look into why.



I seem to have failed to convey the desired message by citing scripture so I guess I might as well try Theologians, at least two of which (both scripturally sound), I know you don't care who, and  that I can paraphrase, have concluded that "we do not understand in order to believe, we believe in order to understand"; from which I infer that belief from understanding is worthless and that it is the understanding from belief which facilitates the living of our faith.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 23, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> I seem to have failed to convey the desired message by citing scripture so I guess I might as well try Theologians, at least two of which (both scripturally sound), I know you don't care who, and  that I can paraphrase, have concluded that "we do not understand in order to believe, we believe in order to understand"; from which I infer that *belief from understanding is worthless* and that it is the understanding from belief which facilitates the living of our faith.


Theology is worthless as well, when it doesn't have God in His Rightful place from the start.

All men have naturalistic theology(innate)and are without excuse. Some have Biblical theology(God revealed).


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 23, 2021)

Knowledge is a two edged sword. You get to know what is good as against what is not so good.

I recall when I was a child and I did not know good or evil in alot of people. All I knew is that there were in people's eyes what I would call an honest and loving spark. I remember that.

And as I got older I got to know more and well my uncle walked on my toy airplane one day and the propeller and the wheels got out of time when I pushed it on the floor and one wing ended all wrong. It was a cool plane all made of metal. But now it was ruined! Imagine something made of metal that was supposed to fly in the grown up world could no longer fly in my imagination!

I complained to my mom that uncle had walked on my plane. She said, "Well don't leave your toys on the floor!"

Things changed after that.

After that when I saw car wrecks I knew my uncle must of been in on it.

And much latter when I got to be a man, I found out that my uncle was a WW2 vet. He drank a bit. Had PTSD from fighting Italy, Holland and Belgium. When he got back from the war he had to stay in a hospital for 2 yrs with TB.

Recently I found out from my brother that Grand Ma said the war ruined my uncle. She said he was so loving and caring of others before... but ended up a bitter person after.

I sort of know what she meant. I wish I could go back to before he walked on my toy plane and I did not have much knowledge of much other than people like him had love in their eyes if you looked at them before you knew too much.

Wouldn't it be nice if one day we could all be like children can be and the whole world was in love and  our toy plane propellers and wheel gears were in sync.

O and I recently found out that my uncle might of been in on the shooting down of three planes that were hammering his line ( Italy). The planes were friendlies... who had mistaken them for the enemy.

 Sometimes people might just walk on planes, even toy ones and not give a ____.  Some things you just can't forget when you know stuff.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 23, 2021)

Israel said:


> I'm not sure everyone hears a testimony as a testimony...even when one is given.
> And some, hearing an understanding that another is living in are amazed at the goodness of God to give such to men, knowing the man didn't come by it "of himself".
> 
> I hear a lot of testimonies. And often things providing visions of God at work upon hearts and minds through Jesus Christ upon the several who frequent here. Even daily. And sometimes...there's a grace to catch that vision of the one always at work, doing His always work.
> ...




There! There!


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 23, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> There! There!



Unless you are being sarcastic,

could it also be that you would subject to vanity that one who's name be written in heaven, when in fact the name is naturally subject to charity and inseparable of the substance of charity.

The joy is leavened that love is inseparable of the self perhaps. There would not be a vanity to it. There would be no trophy name to put out there to prance one's vanity --pride there fully missing. Nevertheless there would still be a there from somewhere that once was into vanity. All in on charity seems to rule out even a hint of arrogance.

Maybe. Sorta. Kinda. "Filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ".

"God is my witness how I long for all of you with the affection of Christ Jesus. 9And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, 10so that you may be able to test and prove what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ,…"


----------



## Israel (Feb 24, 2021)

Who wants to hear a testimony?


----------



## Israel (Feb 24, 2021)

This showed up (today!) on a page I check daily...should I try to get it? As years advance so often do skills and what once appeared irreparable...may not be.

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/427439678532926

looks like this if link disappears:


----------



## Israel (Feb 24, 2021)

Or is it enough to know nothing entrusted to the Lord can be lost?


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 24, 2021)

What does entrusted mean in the context here?

Some have a personal witness and some don't. Why? I have suggested before that greater faith might have those who have no personal witness. Yet, I recall my bishop writing that ideally to be ministers ( teachers) one should have the personal witness of Jesus.

What is the purpose of personal witness to those who have it not themselves? Other than to say the Holy Spirit was here at this time and this place? It is not a witness of the self , nor an item of the marketplace, but a witness of God's power to pierce the temporal in today's generation perhaps in a way that scripture can't.

Most believers know that some individuals have "seen" and that there is no rhyme or reason why it was them and not some others--except that Jesus asked all kinds to follow and many who did saw.

The toy plane is a pretty bird. Imagine the possibilities?

Now on the other hand what was the witness of the Scribes...that their imaginations were framed-in by what scripture says --- by what scripture reveals?

Very few things I know, but I know where Paul scratched his head to make a saint out of a sow's ear and for some reason he found it useful to recount his testimony. So I suppose you can give yours. Go for it. It might not convince a scribe but it might provide a pause for latter conviction. God knows.


----------



## Israel (Feb 25, 2021)

Perhaps before I testify (if I am allowed) in "a" testimony (for in the sense I took Semper's exhortation it is to a "them" and not merely an it...as a one time event) the matter of sarcasm having been raised, should probably be addressed.

I can believe a man could be sarcastic without his even knowing, in some form of imagining that he speak or act of a sincerity that God waits only to reveal as less than sincere in some way. Two scriptures come to mind:

These _things_ hast thou done, and I kept silence; thou thoughtest that I was altogether _such an one_ as thyself: _but_ I will reprove thee, and set _them_ in order before thine eyes.

Do we understand this? Is there a "testimony" amongst us of some experience? And rather than say anything more about it...is there any other man here (here I am entreating for a testimony of truth to it) who has had what they receive as a particular light shone upon it? Am I allowed to ask, allowed to enquire "in the temple"? Or is that presumption? Even a sarcasm? God knows.

The other is of Paul's writing:

For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

Other translations (to me) simplify it, "My conscience is clear...but that does not make me innocent..."

Again...is there understanding? No man need accept mine or even need to hear it, but does any man (other man?) believe they hear what Paul is saying?

Yes, I believe a conscience can be seared to the extent that what passes (to him) for clarity or being clear "in" it, is only a scarred dullness of sensation unknown to the man. A man can (and does) easily presume himself innocent, thinking his motives always pure. In fact...presumption always leads there.

And I am not only sure _I could be that man_...but can also surely testify I have been.
But even that testimony does not now "clear me".

So, as to the possibility I may be being sarcastic (which has been raised) would it be _wiser_ to make answer according to, or provoked by, some desire to "clear myself"...or even apply another of Paul's exhortations...to "judge nothing before the time" but wait for the Lord's appearing in it? To find I have been, and am made free of even having to judge myself...in some trust, due to an experience of that first bit of scripture...God always wills to show up to _set the record straight? _To set in order _before thine eyes._

But, I am not wise, only fearful. And I believe the wise understand my fear.

Let us talk about two edged swords.
How that a thing wielded works two ways.

Since we so often brush up against...or even frankly confront the matter of handling the scriptures rightly, (are they for a _parrot's repetition_...or coming from some conviction?) we engage in a digging...is the man speaking casually of a truth, or is that truth making the man...true? God knows the answer, but dare we deny such measuring/judgments...take place among us? Am I being presumptuous believing I seek to...and hear spirits...and actually cannot avoid it...? Even if I (or any man) hear all wrongly in regards to source?

Did Jesus not make clear all men _are being led_ of something? Or, was Jesus actually saying Peter was himself Satan?

Do we all eagerly accept one another at our word...or does _some acoustic come into play_? Is Jesus Christ of well tuned ear...and therefore _only well spoken_ word? Each man reading already makes his answer to God...how, or what _he answers to men_ is not even secondary.

Yet, we are exhorted by that same spirit to "speak truth to one another" (unless one believes Paul of a different spirit)

Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.

(And it could be curious here...Paul does not even use the word "brother"...but neighbor...but is it_ curious_? Shall a man be "more truthful" in the assembly? Pious faced, deferential, and all? What might be another word for a man who believes truth...malleable to situation or audience in determining the consistency of his deportment and speech? Yet, I think Hummer addressed that well enough.)

Was Pilate lying "Do you not know I have authority to kill you or let you go?"
We could speculate as to the many things that might have been said, but there's enough in His response to destroy all speculations. It might be enough for each man to simply review what he himself has said (needing no speculation) when any authority is exerted toward himself. Did he speak truth? And if he did...could he bear its speaking? Did he "meet" his word? Was he equal to it? Could he bear it?

Do each of us "have authority" to judge the speaking of any? Even to the testing of those who say they are apostles...but are not?

So, two men speak "a" truth.

Each says "only God is able to judge me"... or "God is my judge" as Paul said.

It is surely true, yet remains two edged. For the casual man (is he the parrot?) it is meant as comfort to escape the judgment of man and assume to himself a superior estate by claiming superiority of Judge.

The other man cannot deny the truth of it, and will not, but he knows how much is less in the judgment of man than to be troubled, for to the one he gives authority to "trouble him" is his lord over him, becoming subject then to man for both reproval and/or recommendation. And ultimately...he will have disclosed what "that man" is.
Approving of himself.

But the two edged-ness does not go away for the second or "other" man has learned that self approval, in that place he cannot deny before God as judge, (and cannot but confess) _seems all but less than tenderly treated_. When things are "set in order before his eyes".
Yet, he knows there is (again Hummer, am I fawning?) no other way...even knowing as Hummer has said:



> Neither have I created this perspective; to the degree that I have it, it has been graciously given, nor do I suggest that all things are made easy by this way; I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.





> nor do I suggest that all things are made easy by this way





> I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.



Therefore lastly a repetition of Paul's words (that I either parrot for my own advantage) or am persuaded I speak before the wiser and truer than myself

"Knowing the terror of the Lord, we persuade men"

If I am a liar it is of no use (except for a time to myself) to say to another "I was not being sarcastic" and only compounding a lie for if being already suspect I would only prove the accusation by entering into that burden of proof before men.

But the testimony before God i_n that undertaking_ would be far more grievous than I believe I could bear, that I am not already made transparent, and easily seen and seen through, and that, by those of God.

It is not only a matter of preference that I cannot care whether I be seen fool, liar, manipulator, heretic or even blasphemer...



> I'm saying that nothing is possible by any other way.



When I weigh those words and listen for the acoustics I hear also a man who has been to the dungeon of men's placing, himself submitting to that placing as "outside the gate" where all of men's scorn and accusation are heaped...not because of his own preference, nor because he suggests things are made easy by this way.

Who has the _almost_ embarrassing matter of having to deal with, negotiate, wend his way through some honor being given...making sure it is not a snare to capture by flattery?

Make no mistake as to my selfishness...see through me and therefore, past all deceit. But really don't stop till you see through a man of all vanity, all presumption, all devious intent and twisted motive. All ignorance and blindness and self exaltation. See through and assign his place.

You cannot only do this...you cannot avoid it.

Spectacles are only useful to be seen through.


See through _all that can be seen wrong of "a" man_...and find what's on the other side.

Then...get back to me.

But, many of you are already doing this, spectacles yourselves.

Your prayers of deliverance are made mighty through Whom you have found...even believing the chiefest of sinners can be saved.

And:

And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

Honor is the easiest thing on the soul to give when we see who gave it first, and to whom. And chose you, formed you, initiated you, to be included.

I'm saying nothing is possible any other way.

But, maybe, I am giving a testimony.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 25, 2021)

So this is the knowledge I have gained from this  fellowship tread so far. Theology is a system to gain knowledge.  Some say it is a more matured system compared natural theology.

Not all systems of theology are the same. Some have their departure from the witness of scripture first and some have other system from more equal sources and unequal sources, say scripture, tradition and the witness of individuals other than those within scripture.

Some saints can consent to the witness of scripture alone others can consent to the witness of the Church and other saints. Some can't consent to scripture alone and some can't consent to the Church that is not bible based.

Where theses systems get "sticky" for me is when to ideas on the Christian experience we glue our consent as opposed to the experience itself. In other words as the flesh is weak to properly assess and provide remedy, the renewed mind has no such weakness, is generally fearless and the source of genuine ministry.

Now the mind, renewed a powerful force for leaning and with an appointed system it, can be disciplined. And bent on the study of real elements, it can slip into error that ideas of this or that are the last word regards the reality of some tangible element-subject to which the system was subjected to. There are no outcomes possible other than what the system provides.

Did the gentile in Paul's day have a theological system available to drive them in the way?  To mature them did they have such a system? They had the witness of the saints of what God was up to with explanation as to purpose. They had the witness of Christ from experience first and that experience could be mature because the experience was ongoing in the lives of individual and so the Church.

So what is the problem with a system of theology that has its source "the bible first" as a means to explore subjects such as tradition, the Church, salvation and God's makeup? It is that the witness of experience is compromised by a system with inherent bias and that ideas creep in and as in all systems become realities of their own which would not come about without the system and these creations of the mind become interpreted as elements of reality that no one outside of the system would consider as sound. In other words systems that organize the mind can promote themselves as systems and systems for the mature and become cults.

The system can defeat the purpose of God's designs to inform from experience ( from the eternal life experience)  and yet claim it provides God's greatest purpose of informing a saint.

Systems are not perfect. I'm not certain but I don't think Jesus said it would be good to get one or two in order to follow him as we would need wear special garments to understand where God is "headed". I suspect that it was the experience that Jesus needed to beat them off  his followers--systems, hats and coats. Though the mind was to be renewed, God was headed for the hearts of the babes and the mature. And therefore if knowledge is to be gained of exceptional importance to Christians it is from their willingness to reasonable dialogue in Christ with focus on love.

I have no conclusions. I have only more questions such as these ones. Is system theology an attempt to filter out weak flesh and vanity? Is it sucessful if the case.?


( It is not on purpose that no scripture was quoted.)

All praises to the Lord and thanks for a good hearted tread to all.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 25, 2021)

And Israel thanks for the rebuke. Much appreciated.  For real. I shall pray.

Christianity is a call out to the multitudes and the nations if I have understood Revelations and I now realize that my manners regards questionings defeat the way. And defeating the way is my bugbear in others.

Thanks again and you are a true friend in Christ to me, of it I have never doubted.

 ( I'm not being sarcastic.)


----------



## Israel (Feb 25, 2021)

While I wholeheartedly agree with your proposition(?), vision, persuasion declaration(?)...that God's purpose is first experiential in His revealing, or to be made experiential through His revealing (?)...what seems hard to understand for me is how that the greater faith may come apart from some form of testimony. I don't deny it, just don't understand.

But maybe I don't understand what is meant by testimony in that context...as though a man has to be knocked to the ground, hear a voice, or in some way have some (what would probably be called) miraculous encounter...

If God's life is imparted in however the man receives it. understands it, even...experiences it...wouldn't that be a (his) testimony? Or, at least "a" testimony? And even if...let's say the "moment" he identified as his reception of new life seemed to lack some note...wouldn't there have to be some subsequent moment at which he would say "Hey, this is the experience of eternal life!"...and that be a moment of testimony?

Or...do you mean something more along the lines of "blessed is he who believes but has not seen?"


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 25, 2021)

Yes the latter. "But has not seen." Also the examples in which God declares people have great faith, it is not that I can see they have such for having had an "Ah Ha!" moment due the Glory but simply they believed the prophets and their witness. They see wisdom and truth in God's promises through the prophets.


----------



## Israel (Feb 25, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes the latter. "But has not seen." Also the examples in which God declares people have great faith, it is not that I can see they have such for having had an "Ah Ha!" moment due the Glory but simply they believed the prophets and their witness. They see wisdom and truth in God's promises through the prophets.


OK...thanks, that makes it way more clear.
Cause Jesus talked about the guys who wouldn't believe (if having Moses and the prophets were not enough) even if one came back from the dead to tell them.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 25, 2021)

God is all knowledge(Omniscient). That means nothing else has any of it's own.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> Perhaps before I testify (if I am allowed) in "a" testimony (for in the sense I took Semper's exhortation it is to a "them" and not merely an it...as a one time event) the matter of sarcasm having been raised, should probably be addressed.
> 
> I can believe a man could be sarcastic without his even knowing, in some form of imagining that he speak or act of a sincerity that God waits only to reveal as less than sincere in some way. Two scriptures come to mind:
> 
> ...



I am awestruck by the interesting and beautiful tapestry you have woven from so few threads.

Thank you Brother for sharing with us the product of the Artisan's gift.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 26, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> God is all knowledge(Omniscient). That means nothing else has any of it's own.


When I first saw your post I thought you were going to make me do some hard work to think it throught, but in a mater of seconds I realized that was not the case at all.  It's just a case of placing things in there proper order.


----------



## Israel (Feb 26, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> I am awestruck by the interesting and beautiful tapestry you have woven from so few threads.
> 
> Thank you Brother for sharing with us the product of the Artisan's gift.


It's my turn. 

But I may have to wait a few days or weeks before my wife could render an ROFL after last night's exchange.

If she were to see the word artisan in any reference to me she'd probably say "You mean that ham fisted rusty sledge hammer slinging horse pucky artist?" (But even then I may be being to generous)

And of course, she has every right to.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 26, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> I am awestruck by the interesting and beautiful tapestry you have woven from so few threads.
> 
> Thank you Brother for sharing with us the product of the Artisan's gift.




Agree. Israel is good at weaving threads and indeed an Artisan at it. I wish I had that talent. I have my full to try to weave the posts of a single tread and it is so very hard to get post-it- notes and plasti-tack sentences and ideas to look beautiful. Israel's ideas and his way of reasoning is always interesting. 


My comment about sarcasm was gleaned from another tread however.


----------



## Israel (Feb 26, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Agree. Israel is good at weaving threads and indeed an Artisan at it. I wish I had that talent. I have my full to try to weave the posts of a single tread and it is so very hard to get post-it- notes and plasti-tack sentences and ideas to look beautiful. Israel's ideas and his way of reasoning is always interesting.
> 
> 
> My comment about sarcasm was gleaned from another tread however.


Sorry if I misunderstood.
I should have been more considerate.
^^^^And I think I should put that on a loop^^^^^
(Though I speak, or write, with the tongues of angels...)


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 26, 2021)

You are  and were more than considerate. All is well that ends well. This tread has thought me so much, I'm sad that it will go...into the sunset. The things I know now were not known before this tread-- by myself that is. I'm still studying trying to get up to speed on the subjects brought to light... I'm not exhausted by them yet. Nevertheless...


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 26, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> When I first saw your post I thought you were going to make me do some hard work to think it throught, but in a mater of seconds I realized that was not the case at all.  It's just a case of placing things in there proper order.


I recently had a conversation with a dear brother about this forum. Your name came up and I told him just how much I've enjoyed your posts through the years. I said, "I really love that guy. I probably ought to tell him sometime".

But I'm not comfortable saying it publicly.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 27, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> I recently had a conversation with a dear brother about this forum. Your name came up and I told him just how much I've enjoyed your posts through the years. I said, "I really love that guy. I probably ought to tell him sometime".
> 
> But I'm not comfortable saying it publicly.



While "I really love that guy" is an expression that we share (not to suggest exclusivity), I must say that, it seems to me, the emoticon could never be more appropriately used than when applied to the idea of your being hesitant of sharing what is in your heart.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 27, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> While "I really love that guy" is an expression that we share (not to suggest exclusivity), I must say that, it seems to me, the emoticon could never be more appropriately used than when applied to the idea of your being hesitant of sharing what is in your heart.



Ah yes the hesitancy and the nervous laugh. 


"The human heart has so many crannies where vanity hides, so many holes where falsehood works, is so decked out with deceiving hypocrisy, that it often dupes itself."


and


"My heart I give you, Lord, eagerly and entirely." Johan Cauvin

You two are so cool.


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 27, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Ah yes the hesitancy and the nervous laugh.
> 
> 
> "The human heart has so many crannies where vanity hides, so many holes where falsehood works, is so decked out with deceiving hypocrisy, that it often dupes itself."
> ...


Would you care to explain the yoking of those two quotes, and the attribution of one and lack of attribution of the other.  Just curious.


----------

