 Posted Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:36 PM
|
|
|
|
| Do Go Be Man, I consider myself somewhat of a "maverick" or "backdoor" Calvinist- meaning I've found myself accepting each of the Five Points more as a consequence of indirect & independent Biblical exegesis than from a focused study of Calvinist logic. Calvinism is logical, but so are many other things, including James Arminius' contrary "Five Points of Arminianism." Reason & logic should never form the backbone of our doctrine; these can lead us astray, just as easily as men & tradition. This is why God has preserved His Word down through the ages. Inasmuch as I have this perspective, I sometimes find myself having views that may seem, on the surface, to be opposed to Calvinist logic. One of these views is my belief in man's free will- within the realm of God's will. You said: "Did I exchange my parent's will for my own? ... or did we each seek a common will?"
It would seem by this statement that you also ascribe to the notion that our free will operates within the umbrella of God's sovereign will. I differ from pure Calvinism, in that I believe that we do "choose" Him- though only after our eyes have been opened to receive faith in the reality of Heaven & Hell & the salvation of Jesus Christ alone. I formerly believed in CS because of the anecdotal evidence- principally the healings. But when God began to inundate me with contrary evidence, that CS was in fact not Scriptural, I lost my faith in it. The Gospels filled me with doubt concerning CS as I read them in exegetical fashion for the first time in my life. I remember the point that I left CS- when I read the explicit description of a real place called Hell detailed in Luke 16. God's Spirit had brought me to the place where I truly believed in the reality of Hell. Soon afterwards, He also caused me understand the salvation from this place that Jesus the Christ offers. After this, my "choice" was obvious. You said: "As time went on, I learned for myself the benefits of being careful around stoves and street crossings." You learned, & believed, in the true dangers of stoves & street crossings & thereafter acted accordingly. I'm sure after this point in your life you don't deliberate- "Should I touch the hot stove or not?" "Should I step in front of the speeding car or not?" Because of your newfound understanding your everyday choice is an obvious one; nevertheless it is still your choice. I believe our acceptance of Christ depends first & foremost on His choice of us. (His election, as Scripture puts it.) He sovereignly chooses us- and as your loving parents did, He imparts both understanding & faith in the realities of both life & death to us. After this, the "decision" is both instinctive & clear. zoarean
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:01 AM
|
|
|
|
| This doctrine further reinforces the Reformist view of salvation by faith, for we can only believe as God's Spirit enables us to believe: "For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith." Romans 12:3 So we see that our measure of faith is only ours by means of impartation from above. zoarean
|
|
|
Posted Friday, June 18, 2010 8:40 AM
|
|
|
|
the writer is confusing God's Will with his plan. He says:
1. Christians pray for a boy
2. The boy dies
3. Christians say he died because it was God's will
4. If God's will is going to happen anyway, why pray?
The problem with this argument is that God's plan can change, but His will can't. The Bible says if we pray for anything according to God's will and believe, we will receive it.
SO if it's God's will for the boy to be healed and we pray for it with faith, he will be healed. But my point is, it could be God's will for someone to live, but He'll die anyway. Whatever happens is God's PLAN not His Will. For example, its never God's WILL that we sin, but it still happens, because there's free will. So if its God's PLAN that the boy die but His WILL is that the boy live, then prayer can save the boy's life. God's plan is not what he wants to happen, but He allows it to happen because of sin or the actions of others.
Basically what I'm saying is:
1 - God's will is that the boy lives - His plan is that he dies - Faithful prayer can save the boy
2 - God's will is that the boy lives - God's plan is that he lives - then the boy will live either way
3 - God's will is that the boy dies - God's plan is that he lives - prayer for God's will might actually bring the boy to death. This happens sometimes when we pray for the Lord to take people who are really suffering from a disease in their old age.
4 - God's will and plan are that the boy dies - the boy will die either way.
So what I'm saying is, prayer offered in faith brings about God's will to some extent. He uses our prayers to do His will. And the reason we pray is a lot more than just for healing. We are commanded to pray for one another, to bring whatever is bothering us to the Lord - and he will bring healing to us maybe, not that boy. That we can accept the death. He might bring healing to the family too, by giving them peace about it, or by using the situation to bring them to Him.
In the end, the Bible says pray, bring your troubles and prayers to the Lord with thanksgiving, and the peace of God which cannot be understood will guard your heart and mind (Philippians 4:7)
|
|
|
Posted Sunday, June 20, 2010 3:17 PM
|
|
|
|
So I'm at a CS social function recently (believe it or not, there is one around here once per year, it's the only one I know of). I've been asked year after year to go so I obliged my spouse and in-laws. Yikes. The very old (most of the folks there) just SIT. SILENTLY. There's no talk or comadrie amongst them. Freaky. But now that I've thought about it, older folks in my family's social network talk about their health (ha ha), their families, the past, etc. It was eery. Is that normal?
Then I'm sitting at a table with my spouse and about 3 other couples. I'm introduced to the other folks and instantly I know who's not CS (they just don't have that weirdo aura). I feel an instant bound with the non CSers and am relieved to talk to them. I can tell these aren't the happiest of marriages. I'm so relieved I've wiggled my own loved one out of the craziness.
Is this typical of a CS gathering?
Helping One Out
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, December 22, 2010 11:11 AM
|
|
|
|
| Merry Christmas everybody!
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, December 22, 2010 1:37 PM
|
|
|
|
| Merry Christmas to you, too!
|
|
|
Posted Thursday, December 23, 2010 11:59 AM
|
|
|
|
Glad this topic came back up. Merry Christmas to all.
I also have some thoughts to share about the point of prayer.
If we go into a brilliantly lit room full of glorious music yet tightly shut our eyes and ears, we would not understand the light or the sound. Too often, we not only shut our eyes and ears to God's Glory, we also make noise and images of our own to try to drown out what God is showing us and telling us. We may hear muffled sounds and see faint glimmers that do not adequately represent the light or the music.
Prayer enables us to open ourselves to God and not shut Him out so much. If we look for explanations in every direction except Him, we are forced into seeking answers that require other answers. One of the great theological lessons I learned along the way was in Astronomy class. The Ancients believed that the universe revolved around the Earth (geocentrism). That sort of worked okay within the limits of their ability to measure and understand.
For the Moon, it was obvious and true that it revolved around the Earth. Stars also appeared to more or less revolve around the Earth. The really pesky critter was the planet Mars. The Ancients developed a theory that Mars periodically reversed its orbit. That accounted for what they observed as the Earth and Mars both revolved around the Sun.
Astronomers Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei made observations and published works that challenged the Ancient understanding. They did not attempt to redefine their observations with hypotheses of retrograde orbits. Rather than fit the facts to what they knew, they fit what they thought they knew to the facts.
Perhaps you see where I'm going with this? As a Christian Scientist, I observed and evaluated the world by trying to apply the "spiritual" perspective in much the same way the Ancients used retrograde orbits to explain what they observed. Once I let go of the need to explain the explanations by redefining the answers, the Bible became much more clear.
Understanding the modern theories of heliocentrism not only helped me pass my Astronomy exams. It also provided me perspectives on Christian Science and prayer.
I'm sure that there would be Christian Scientists out there that would say the analogy of light and music work to explain the "scientific" concept of Reality. Problem is they would be looking at the Reality through filters imposed by the Christian Science definitions of Biblical teaching.
I discussed prayer with my Sunday School class on Sunday. Sitting in a bright, comfortable room, I shined a small flashlight on the ceiling and drew the attention of the class to it. The light from the flashlight only blended in and did not stand out much. I had the lights turned out and the flashlight showed up brightly. If we just take God for granted amid all that He provides, we may or may not be in the light or recognize it. Prayer focuses our attention to God's work in us in good times and bad.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
|