BASIC DOCTRINES

[Joe Sperling]

Verne----

Thanks for what you have been sharing on this thread. Your comments below reminded
me that often I have heard that verse resounding in my head "There is none righteous,
no, not one". Often, I've heard it after stating "I've tried so hard to overcome this sin" or
"I've tried so hard to be good"---which is in reality going about to establish my own right-
eousness---"If I could only be good enough, then God would accept me".

Thank God it is He who justifies the ungodly--He accepts us as we are, and justifies us through
what Jesus Christ has done on the cross. "If God be for us, who can be against us?"

--Joe

[al Hartman]

Verne, the points of your last post are right on, and I don't want to seem to dispute them, but I want to clarify for the sake of those who witness of our redemption before the unredeemed:

There are peolple who can look in the mirror and proclaim their own righteousness.  They cannot do so honestly, and their self-assessment is blatantly wrong, but they have hardened their hearts toward God and become dedicated liars and self-deceivers.  God allows this, granting them the desires of their hearts and, ultimately, surrendering them to their own reprobations.  This is the frightening reward earned by and granted to those who refuse to recognize God's holiness, His right to require righteousness of us, and His provision for our redemption through the broken body and shed blood of His Son.  It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God.

The initial realization that our justification before God was utterly beyond our means to obtain, that we were on a one-way express train to eternal damnation, but that God Himself has justified in Christ all who will accept Him by faith, can only be responded to with utter awe, amazement and gratitude with thanksgiving and praise.  If there seems to be a deadness about the church today, it is because we have let slip from our consciousness the incomprehensible wonder of God's gift.

al

[vernecarty]

There are peolple who can look in the mirror and proclaim their own righteousness. 
al

This is indeed an astonishing thing. Remarkably, some professing Christians go so far as to claim their "own annointing", which is heresy run amok. We are living in dangerous times.
It is a difficult thing for some people to accept that the proclamation of the gospel has a two-fold purpose - justification of the repentant, and judgment of the unrepentant.
This is true of the gospel as seen in God's general revelation:

 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;   Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up...!  Romans 1: 18-23

This is true of God's special revelation:

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Thessalonians 2:11

Some folk will strongly disagree with me on this point, but it seems to me that each person has a unique opportunity to receive God's truth. Knowing rejection of the truth seals one's fate....
Verne

p.s. I know I know...some of you are thinking that many people hear the gospel numerous times in their lives, so why the idea of a unique opportunity?
Think about it, the last time you hear the gospel and reject it before God hardens your heart in intransigence is the only one that counts...your fate is then irrevocably determined! Quite a risk to roll the dice doncha think..?

[vernecarty]

God the Father surveyed the utter ruin of humanity and of creation, both of which He had formed perfect. It is a reasonable presumption that the consequences of sin extended to the entire material realm. God cursed the ground because of Adam. The cosmos is a remarkably violent place. The earth is becoming increasingly so apparently.
What an enormity, for God to behold the creature created in His very image, now hopelessly despoiled and marred, no longer capable of fulfilling the very purpose for which he existed in the first place- fellowship with and reflection of the glory of God Himself. The Genesis text, beginning with the untold possibilities of  “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…”,  ends with the somber punctuation- “…in a coffin in Egypt”.
What is God’s perspective regarding the matter of those He justifies?
The doctrine of justification by faith alone, has got to be the most stupefying, irrational, incomprehensible, unfathomable, unfair, and unthinkable proposition to every reach the ears of human-kind. Just take a gander at some of the more powerful Scriptures that speak to this fact.:

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;  Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Romans 3:21-24


To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Romans 3:26-28


How is this possible? That indeed transgressors of the law, find declaration of righteousness at the hand of the Judge of all the earth?
 Does the Almighty excuse sin?
Will He by any means clear the guilty?
Romans tells us that the act of justifying the guilty declares His rightousness, id est. that He is both just AND the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. How can this be??!!
Next, the HOW of justification…
Verne

[al Hartman]

A familiar tale from Luke 18:  In Jesus' parable, two men stand in the temple, one proclaiming his own righteousness to anyone within earshot.  The second man, eyes cast downward in shame, beats upon his breast in agonized helplessness, pleading to God for mercy for his sinfulness (an act defined in Scripture as "repentance").

Jesus said that the second man was justified, while the first man was not.  In fact, Jesus said that man was, "justified rather than the other," demonstrating that God honors repentance, while rejecting attempted self-justification by "good" performance.

The key to understanding this illustration is the realization that justification does not come to the sinner by virtue of his repentance.  Instead, his repentance itself is the act of submissive admission that there is nothing he can do that is worthy of purchasing his justification.  His repentance is his confession that justification can come to him only by God's merciful redemption of him, as a gift given to him by grace (i.e., altogether undeservedly).

al

P.S.-- The means of redemption, and its cost (to God) are separate discussions, to be addressed soon.  Stay tuned...

Meanwhile, compare and contrast:

The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation. (Ex.34:6-7 ESV)

For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to Himself. (Ac.2:39 ESV)

[Oscar]

Verne,

You said

"Started by VerneCarty | Last post by VerneCarty 
God the Father surveyed the utter ruin of humanity and of creation, both of which He had formed perfect. It is a reasonable presumption that the consequences of sin extended to the entire material realm. 

Say what?

Presumption, yes.  But reasonable?

The Bible tells us that God cursed the ground for man's sake.  The result of the curse was that it would be more difficult to grow crops, and that there would be thorns and thistles.

Eve's consequences were increased fertiltiy and subjection to Adam.

So, what does all this have to do with quasars? 

It seems to me that such a conclusion as you have made is not warranted by the Biblical evidence.  I have asked a number of scholars about this.  It seems to be a widely believed idea.  But, it is clear that little thought has been given to it.

Romans 8 is usually brought up.  However, there is nothing in that passage to indicate that the creation's bondage to decay began as a result of the fall. Thermodynamics was clearly part of the original creation.

In addition, the Genesis text says the creation was "very good", not perfect.  There is a Hebrew word for perfect, but it does not appear in this text.

Very good can well mean well adjusted to God's purpose, not the best God is capable of.

Sorry for the "thread creep".

Blessings,


Thomas Maddux

[al Hartman]

Tom, your latest post is the kind of thing I was addressing in my post of Aug.29th:  interesting, informative, and completely off-topic for this thread.  Good material for which to begin another thread called, say, "Reasonable Presumptions?"

What do you have to say about justification?  I'd really like to know...

al

P.S.-- displaying my ignorance:  What is "thread creep?"

[vernecarty]

Verne,

You said
Say what?

Presumption, yes.  But reasonable?

The Bible tells us that God cursed the ground for man's sake.  The result of the curse was that it would be more difficult to grow crops, and that there would be thorns and thistles.

Eve's consequences were increased fertiltiy and subjection to Adam.

So, what does all this have to do with quasars? 

It seems to me that such a conclusion as you have made is not warranted by the Biblical evidence.  I have asked a number of scholars about this.  It seems to be a widely believed idea.  But, it is clear that little thought has been given to it.

Romans 8 is usually brought up.  However, there is nothing in that passage to indicate that the creation's bondage to decay began as a result of the fall. Thermodynamics was clearly part of the original creation.

In addition, the Genesis text says the creation was "very good", not perfect.  There is a Hebrew word for perfect, but it does not appear in this text.

Very good can well mean well adjusted to God's purpose, not the best God is capable of.

Sorry for the "thread creep".

Blessings,


Thomas Maddux

Hi Tom.
We have had this discussion before and have a bit of a different perspective.
As I have pointed out to you previously, your contention that the Bible does not describe a transition from cosmological order into chaos is not accurate. There are several verses in the Bible that hint strongly at this.
While the Genesis account is focused on man and the earth, the Bible also decribes a cosmic catastrophe occasioned by Lucifer's rebellion.
Don't just talk to shcolars Tom.
Also read your Bible carefully.
On general principles, your apparent idea that the conduct of God's created beings have no repercussive effect in the environment, both physical and spiritual, in which they exist, is very hard to fathom. Things that are seen, were not made by things apparent.
In fact I get the impression that the work of God in the physical creation being  a type of metaphor for the redemptive work in the soul is comething that is completely foreign to your thinking.
Perhaps we can take another look at this on a new thread sometime. You should check out some of the material about  chaos theory...your reference to thermodynamics is interesting. Did you kow that Peter tells us that God is going to dissolve the very building blocks  ( "melting the elements") of the cosmos and start over? I wonder why...?
Verne

[M2]

Brent, Verne, et al

If you are so inclined to post here, this is interesting because George taught that Christ went down to hell and preached the gospel to the souls who had not heard it preached to them because they had died before His time.

So there's actually 2 questions, the one about George's teaching, and the second about Meyer's teaching below.

Marcia

www.geftakysassembly.com/Reflections/Home.htm#whatsnew

November 6  We previously recommended Joyce Meyer's book on tape, Approval Addiction. However, as helpful as it might be, we can no longer recommend it because of serious doctrinal deviations. An excerpt from the Christian Research Institute statement [see www.equip.org/free/DM472.htm ] about Joyce Meyer says, "Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute...No orthodox believer ever held to the belief that Christ suffered and atoned for our sins in hell, rather than on the cross. Yet, Word of Faith teachers, including Joyce Meyer, teach the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels - a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture. The entirety of Christ’s atoning work (i.e., His suffering and death in our place) occurred on the cross (e.g., 1 Peter 2:24), ending with His proclamation, 'It is finished' (John 19:30)."

[al Hartman]

Brent, Verne, et al

If you are so inclined to post here, this is interesting because George taught that Christ went down to hell and preached the gospel to the souls who had not heard it preached to them because they had died before His time.

So there's actually 2 questions, the one about George's teaching, and the second about Meyer's teaching below.

Marcia

www.geftakysassembly.com/Reflections/Home.htm#whatsnew

November 6  We previously recommended Joyce Meyer's book on tape, Approval Addiction. However, as helpful as it might be, we can no longer recommend it because of serious doctrinal deviations. An excerpt from the Christian Research Institute statement [see www.equip.org/free/DM472.htm ] about Joyce Meyer says, "Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute...No orthodox believer ever held to the belief that Christ suffered and atoned for our sins in hell, rather than on the cross. Yet, Word of Faith teachers, including Joyce Meyer, teach the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels - a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture. The entirety of Christ’s atoning work (i.e., His suffering and death in our place) occurred on the cross (e.g., 1 Peter 2:24), ending with His proclamation, 'It is finished' (John 19:30)."

As the "al" in "et al" , let me get the ball rolling:

Inasmuch as this thread is for discussion of Basic Doctrines, we should consider that the debate among theologians about whether Jesus visited hell after His death and, if so, His purpose for so doing, is not over a basic doctrine.  An exception to this would be the acceptance of Meyers' alleged teaching, as explained below.  (George's teaching regarding this was not original, nor is it fundamental to the faith of believers today.)

The completion of the atonement for sins upon Christ's death on the cross, however, is a basic doctrine.  "Finished" means finished. The full payment for our redemption was concluded through the shedding of His blood when He died at Calvary, not through His subsequent torture.  Believing this is a fundamental of Christian faith.

If Meyer has indeed extended the act of atonement beyond the cross, there can be no question about her teaching-- it is false.

Respectfully,
al

[vernecarty]

Brent, Verne, et al

If you are so inclined to post here, this is interesting because George taught that Christ went down to hell and preached the gospel to the souls who had not heard it preached to them because they had died before His time.

So there's actually 2 questions, the one about George's teaching, and the second about Meyer's teaching below.

Marcia

www.geftakysassembly.com/Reflections/Home.htm#whatsnew

November 6  We previously recommended Joyce Meyer's book on tape, Approval Addiction. However, as helpful as it might be, we can no longer recommend it because of serious doctrinal deviations. An excerpt from the Christian Research Institute statement [see www.equip.org/free/DM472.htm ] about Joyce Meyer says, "Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute...No orthodox believer ever held to the belief that Christ suffered and atoned for our sins in hell, rather than on the cross. Yet, Word of Faith teachers, including Joyce Meyer, teach the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels - a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture. The entirety of Christ’s atoning work (i.e., His suffering and death in our place) occurred on the cross (e.g., 1 Peter 2:24), ending with His proclamation, 'It is finished' (John 19:30)."

A few quick points Marcia.
Matthew 25:41 tells us that hell has been prepared for the devil and his angels.
It is an unspeakable tragedy that any man should choose that as his fate.
The price that Christ paid for our sin was the unmitigated stroke of divine wrath - His Father's wrath.
What all that means, no human can ever begin to fathom.
To try and explain and define it is to tread on treacherous ground in my view...the reasons are obvious.
Verne

p.s. Hell has not yet been opened up for business so far as I know. Hell is the second death and that determination will be made at the great white throne adjudication. George's notion comes from a common misunderstanding of an O.T reference to Christ's post crucifixion ministry...

[M2]

A few quick points Marcia.
Matthew 25:41 tells us that hell has been prepared for the devil and his angels.
It is an unspeakable tragedy that any man should choose that as his fate.
The price that Christ paid for our sin was the unmitigated stroke of divine wrath - His Father's wrath.
What all that means, no human can ever begin to fathom.
To try and explain and define it is to tread on treacherous ground in my view...the reasons are obvious.
Verne

p.s. Hell has not yet been opened up for business so far as I know. Hell is the second death and that determination will be made at the great white throne ajudication. George's notion comes from a common misunderstanding of an O.T reference to Christ's post crucifixion ministry...

I searched the NT only, which would explain why I could not find the passage.  Which one is it??

Marcia

[Joe Sperling]

Donald Grey Barnhouse has the opinion that when Jesus was in the Garden of Gethsemane,
and prayed "Father, Let this cup pass from me, nevertheless not my will, but thy will be done",
he was not asking to avoid the cross. What he was asking is to not let his soul suffer the corruption
of the grave--in other words to avoid hell itself. This prayer was answered. "For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption"(Ps. 16:10)

According to the Bible there were two parts to Hades--Paradise and Hell. In the story of Lazarus and the rich man, the rich man looks across a gulf that is fixed between the two sections and sees Lazarus in paradise. Jesus said to the thief on the cross "Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise".

When Jesus descended into "Hades" and preached, he was preaching the good news to the souls of the redeemed in Paradise, whom he then led upwards into heaven, emptying that section of Hades forever. "He led captivity captive"---but Jesus never descended into hell for torment after the cross. He suffered all the torments of wrath and rejection of the Father while on the cross. To teach that Jesus suffered in hell, or preached to the damned, is not scriptural.

Barnhouse's opinion about Jesus' prayer is just an opinion of course, and wasn't something he held or taught as "doctrine".

--Joe

[moonflower2]

"For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption"(Ps. 16:10)

Wasn't it also a quote from the Psalmist (an OT person), who was referring to the possibility of being temporarily in a place of the dead, sheol, himself? So there are two of them, at least, referring to being left or not left in the place of the dead.

According to the Bible there were two parts to Hades--Paradise and Hell. In the story of Lazarus and the rich man, the rich man looks across a gulf that is fixed between the two sections and sees Lazarus in paradise. Jesus said to the thief on the cross "Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise".

It seems that the rich man, who gefjack said was a Christian (??), was already suffering in the place of the dead.  It is an interesting thing that immediately after death, this man was already in torment, so Verne's statement that hell (the permanent place) will not have it's permanent guests until after the GW Throne judgement seems to indicate that the permanent dwelling of this man will be suffering beyond our comprehension.

When Jesus descended into "Hades" and preached, he was preaching the good news to the souls of the redeemed in Paradise, whom he then led upwards into heaven, emptying that section of Hades forever. "He led captivity captive"---but Jesus never descended into hell for torment after the cross. He suffered all the torments of wrath and rejection of the Father while on the cross. To teach that Jesus suffered in hell, or preached to the damned, is not scriptural.

Yeah, I heard this too, that when Jesus rose, the gates of sheol, hell, the place of the dead, were opened, and the saved souls were released.

Imagine how Jesus presence (and preaching?) would have caused even more suffering to those on the horror side of the gulf, since they knew that it wouldn't include them!

Barnhouse's opinion about Jesus' prayer is just an opinion of course, and wasn't something he held or taught as "doctrine".

--Joe

[vernecarty]

When Jesus descended into "Hades" and preached, he was preaching the good news to the souls of the redeemed in Paradise,
--Joe

That's the way some interpret Peter's comments in 1 Peter 3

  For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit:
 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah,

The view that the preaching was actually done to those in the time of Noah is more suported by the text in my view.
The use of "hell" in Acts 2 in in the KJV with reference to David's statemenet in Psalm 16 is unfortunate...
Verne