John UK wrote: As George Whitefield says in most all his sermons: "Ye must be born again." But prideful unbelieving sinners are not able to do this. They may flap about, being religious, and uttering pious sounding words, but for the new birth they ought to know their dependency on the sovereign Lord God, who "quickeneth whom he will".
Right you are Saint John of UK
Then they said to him, ‚ÄúWhat must we do, to be doing the works of God?‚ÄĚ Jesus answered them, ‚ÄúThis is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.‚ÄĚ
SteveR wrote: Consider it a compliment, because it was meant as such. I just wish to point out the fate of prophets that didnt fulfill their duties 1 Kings 13:26 And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard thereof, he said, It is the man of God, who was disobedient unto the word of the LORD: therefore the LORD hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake unto him.
Even if it is to only hit him....He only had one opportunity to "punch the prophet"...whereas Jonah had more than one opportunity. Thing is, God is the one who decides whether His duties are fulfilled...not us. God had a purpose for allowing the first rejection of Jonah whereas the other....He had a purpose for only providing the one chance.
Strike me, please.‚ÄĚ But the man refused to strike him. Then he said to him, ‚ÄúBecause you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, behold, as soon as you have gone from me, a lion shall strike you down.‚ÄĚ And as soon as he had departed from him, a lion met him and struck him down. 1 Kings 20:35-36
SteveR wrote: That is an answer I expected from Lurker, but does it really answer the questions? Most prophets receive instructions from Angelic messengers, others by dreams. Jonah has the enormous Blessing of speaking to the LORD directly. And unlike Moses, didnt have this encounter Exodus 4:24
I take that as a compliment on the first part.
I understand Jonah did not have the experience that Moses did. I would say ignore the method of how and look at the Messenger. His Word holds true no matter what it is or who its through....look at Balaam. He can and does use who He wants, When He wants, How He wants.
Look at Noah.....If He were a preacher today....He would be fired for lack of numbers. "You had 125 years and you only have 8 sitting in the church?" Look at Jonah.....If he were a preacher today....He would be opening his own seminary on how to give the 10 second sermon that saves thousands in one hearing....no pizazz necessary.
Because the focus is on the presenter and not what is presented. God has been trying for years to teach us this...even using a donkey.
it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 1 Corinthians 1:21
Jonah was commanded by God to preach to a "people" who were not of Israel. The Ninevites were enemies of Israel and yet the prophet is asked to preach to the enemy? The national pride of Israel is what was at the heart of Jonah's problem. I see God's affectionate tone, not aimed at Jonah, but through him to the intended target of the people of Ninevah. With God telling him to do something, Jonah knows He will bring it to pass and does what he can to reject it...(which results in a boat full of heathen saved Romans8:28)...and ultimately fulfills what God has asked him to do...though reluctantly. That was probably the most uninspiring message preached but yet the most effective.....and no alter call...no sinners prayer. The idea of the God of Israel saving a non Israel "people"? At that time....unthinkable. Now? For sure. All by design.
PursuitofTruth wrote: And btw, shouldn't you be going to the infalible word of God for your theology rather than the Merriam Webster Dictionary?
This is the portion of the post from Lurker you didn't include that explains your question.
"The secular definition of freewill, as I explained in my post which you conveniently cherry picked, does not stand opposed to biblical election. They are two entirely different things. If you don't have freewill then you're animated by instinct or conditioning like an animal. That does not automatically mean that freewill can overcome a sinful nature and choose God."
Thank you for what you have provided here in the forum. I now do have a greater understanding of how to look at the historical due to this very exercise. I had began seeing the story of redemption in the OT books in this very lens maybe 8-9 months ago and this just has begun to shed light on the NT Scriptures that I had never seen and is mostly ignored. I was just not utilizing that through this in the beginning....as you properly identified.(which is good) I have not read through the OT as I am up to 1 kings 21 with this lens except during this time and I see that I have much to look forward to. I understand and agree with the PM(just don't know how to do that) and going forward. I do love the idea of bouncing thoughts as a test just to keep myself grounded in truth.
I looked it up. Here is what I found. The Gospel. Good news!
to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.‚Äô Acts 26:18
from the power of Satan to God
Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? Romans 6:16
Adam and Eve became slaves when they "chose" to ****believe Satan and his word**** over God and His Word. As Romans 6:16 says they became obedient slaves to whom they obeyed. Satan gained ownership...and as a sign of ownership was able to apply his mark of ownership....sin. All born of slaves become property of who owns the slaves.
Do you see the parallel? How did Satan get Adam and Eve? Belief in what he said.
So do you believe God? God is just and the justifier so he pays the ransom for you....with His Son. A Holy Son for so many unholy ones.
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:21
Michael Hranek wrote: James Glass If I might suggest. It might be better for the sake of peace on these forums to kindly step aside aside from interferring in a hurtful disagreement that is moving by the grace of God towards a peacable (agree to disagree respectfully in the future) than to stir things up with PoT You and Lurker seem to enjoy your post to each other...go for it, if others choose to post their disagreements with your views on prophecy kindly respect our right to our own conscience and right to speak up if we choose to (you certainly are under no obligation to have to agree with us, or even to listen to us, as we are likewise free to disagree with you all as wll) I trust Lurker is able to respond to either PoT or myself quite well on his own, and although I think it is safe to say he likely appreciates having a friend committed to his side, I tend to think he is more comfortable without any ongoing strife
Your post to James Glass seems to be geared toward me, James Thomas. Different person. James Glass is simply pointing out his (pot) lack of respect toward brother Lurker.
Yourself and Lurker have come to peace which is great. Why stir the "pot"?
Lurker wrote: Does it shed more light on the 70 weeks?
Thank you for the analogy.
This hermeneutic that you are presenting is precisely the one that "not by choice", but "by default" I have been reading the OT. Its as if God is telling the same story over and over with different names but yet all connected in a way in which only God could have done. And the different circumstances just serve to reveal Himself to us and who He is. His attributes. Its no longer a study of historical events (which it is) but a list of all that our Father in heaven has been doing with His creation and learning who He is by how He has interacted with those in the past. And He does not change so who He was is who He is and who He will always be. So with that I have been reading the verses you have presented for the first time through these hermeneutical glasses....and enjoying the newness of what is revealed each time.
Permit me some time to read more on these specifics.
"Yet she was not cast into the lake of fire. I'll let you ponder what happened to her." What happened to her was ......Hosea 2:16. If my pondering is off please correct me.
When refreshed, continue on.. Will pray for your need.
I am reserving the thoughts generated in reading the Daniel passages in an attempt to not detract from your presentation. So please do not take my silence on the topic as not following you but simply a desire not to distract from where you are going.
Mike wrote: Anyone feel free to answer. What was God's motive in saving sinners?
‚ÄúI, I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins. (Isaiah 43:25 ESV)
For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for how should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another. (Isaiah 48:11 ESV)
But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (1 Peter 2:9 ESV)
QUOTE][AUTHOR]Lurker[/AUTHOR]1) Objectively.... always, and let the chips fall where they may and deal with them.
I have been following this topic with interest in regard to hermeneutics. How each individual arrives at the understanding they have.
Does not our presuppositions dictate what we read to some extent for some and to the fullest extent for some?
Then we have a verse that says "lean NOT on our own understanding" but yet most do.
I can freely admit this has been a challenge for me, but being aware of it has helped me understand more of the mind of God and His Word... Understanding that a humble mind is a necessary ingredient to understand a spiritual message(Being Holy) from a spiritual being(The Holy God) to a fallible creature like me.
"Do you see the parallel between the he-goat horns and Daniel 11? Do you see the parallel between the horns and the historical kings which ruled over Jerusalem concluding with Antiochus IV Epiphanes? Do you see the abomination of desolation about the time of the Maccabean revolt?"
1. The first one, yes, it seems as Ch 11 is just expanding with more detail on what was mentioned in ch 8. Kind of Like ch. 2 was for Ch7. 2. Yes 3. Daniel 11:31 Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate.