The God Grab Bag

[Oscar]

PART II


 

No need?  People who don't know their great need and depravity, as my friend shared, aren't desperate to see the Lord and therefore, they are cold and shut up in their own intellects....they keep learning, but never arriving at the truth. 

Are you going to say that I have judged you?  I have.  Based upon your own words in this post (and others) I have a couple things revealed to me.  No revelation of one's need.  No revelation of one's Savior is possible.  No revelation of the Savior "for MY SOUL" - no salvation.  Painful but true.

There are a lot of people who know a lot more than I do and you are one of them, but I am concerned that you might not know the Lord.  Could that be possible?  It is for you to search your heart.  I read your post where you said you wanted to serve the Lord for the rest of your days...that that would be a joy for you.  But is that service about what you can do through your intellect and education or is the thought of serving the Lord about seeing Him and learning through fresh revelation so that you can have a freshly revealed, living Word to share, Tom?  Will you have fresh revelation so that you may be a part of the great orchestration of God in the lives of the hurting and give them a word in season. 

Spoken like a true daughter of George and Betty, as you have described yourself.  This is the same stuff we used to hear from him when he took off on what he called "dead fundamentalism".  What he never told anyone was that he had flunked out of a Ph.D program in philosophy. His thesis was rejected so he turned to Deeper Life mysticism and spent the next 40 years railing at the academic community he had wanted to join, but lacked what it took to do so.

All his messages were "fresh baked in the kitchen of heaven".  This actually seems to mean something like "plagarized from other folk's books".  But, since he was delusional, he probably believed what he said.

Sondra, what your posts say to me is that you suffer from some of the same problems your mentor did.

How's that for a crumb? 

frank   

Actually, not too hot.  I was talking about something actually revealed.  You seem to be confusing
"revealed" with "understood".  You have done nothing but to repeat the sort of Deeper Life nonsense that you can buy at your local Christian bookstore.

This "crumb" is nothing but warmed up leftovers mixed in with a portion of self-justification, and a dash of delusion.

Thomas

[vernecarty]

Verne,

In our former discussion I maintained that truth was communicated through the scriptures by word meaning, grammatical construction, and sound principles of interpretation. 

No one ever denies this Tom. Clearly anyone can read and understand the statement:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

That statement comunicates "truth", that is to say, facts.

The fallacy of your argument lies in your contention that word meaning, grammatical contruction, and sound principles of interpreation are the sole means by which the Scriptures communicate truth, and that the only truth that the Scripture communucates is in the form of statements of fact.
There are many passages of Scripture which contained truth that went beyond the merely grammatical, such as the many prophetic passages referring to Jesus Christ. It was only after their fulfillment that the full significance became clear. The same is true of passages yet to be fullfilled in my opinion.

Two people can read the same passage of Scripture, be in possession of the same information, yet make radically different decision based on what they read.
Your position completely fails to recognize the part the Spirit of God plays in communicating truth to a person.

 

The natural man, (which means the unregenerate man, not the spiritually immature man) does not receive God's truth.  It doesn't mean he cannot understand it. he rejects it.

What do you mean by "understand"? Again if you are referring to the perception of factual statements, that is self evident if a person can read. Hear what the Scriptures say about this:

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Assume the "things of the Spirit of God" are truth as revealed in His written word Tom. Please get out your Greek lexicon and explain to me the grammatical significance of the word "know" in this passage of Scripture.

You kept saying that truth is revealed directly.  I challenged you to give an example of such truth...and you failed to do so.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

What I keep saying is that there is truth that cannot be acquired soley by "word meaning, grammatical construction, and sound principles of interpretation".  I never cease to be astonished that anyone who actually reads and believes  what Scripture says about itself could take that position.

[Marty]

Verne,


You kept saying that truth is revealed directly.  I challenged you to give an example of such truth...and you failed to do so.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Acts 8:26-36

1. Why did Philip go down the Jerusalem/Gaza road?
2. Why did Philip chase down the Ethiopian?
3. How did Philip overtake a chariot?
4. In the scripture the Ethiopian was reading where does it refer to Jesus?
5. Where did Philip get the idea he could/should preach Jesus from Isaiah?
6. Why did the Ethiopian request to be baptized?



Something must have been revealed to someone by someone at some time.

Can't really see your argument here Tom. Reveletion of truth is a foundation of the Christian faith. "Once I was blind but now I see."

To intellectualize what God does spiritually causes the skeptism you show.

We can go back to the age old question, How do you know God exists? Prove it!

These things require regeneration of the heart and in doing so opens the door for God to reveal truth and to give understanding of it.

btw, please don't call people names just because you don't agree with them. You probably don't agree with me here either but just to set the record straight before hand, I am not George, I am not a clone of George, I am not a prospective LB, etc. I am a sinner saved by grace. Lets identify with one another on that level.

[fuloboloney]

btw, please don't call people names just because you don't agree with them. You probably don't agree with me here either but just to set the record straight before hand, I am not George, I am not a clone of George, I am not a prospective LB, etc. I am a sinner saved by grace. Lets identify with one another on that level.

Yeah, So much for the new rules of this board.   

fob

[frank]

Acts 8:26-36

1. Why did Philip go down the Jerusalem/Gaza road?
2. Why did Philip chase down the Ethiopian?
3. How did Philip overtake a chariot?
4. In the scripture the Ethiopian was reading where does it refer to Jesus?
5. Where did Philip get the idea he could/should preach Jesus from Isaiah?
6. Why did the Ethiopian request to be baptized?



Something must have been revealed to someone by someone at some time.

Can't really see your argument here Tom. Reveletion of truth is a foundation of the Christian faith. "Once I was blind but now I see."

To intellectualize what God does spiritually causes the skeptism you show.

We can go back to the age old question, How do you know God exists? Prove it!

These things require regeneration of the heart and in doing so opens the door for God to reveal truth and to give understanding of it.

btw, please don't call people names just because you don't agree with them. You probably don't agree with me here either but just to set the record straight before hand, I am not George, I am not a clone of George, I am not a prospective LB, etc. I am a sinner saved by grace. Lets identify with one another on that level.

Marty,

Thanks so much for your post. One would hope that Tom would be thirsting for revelation to himself rather than thirsting for the revelation that other people have received. Tom's posturing for academic superority is going to amount to very little simply because a good knowledge of what other people think about God isn't going to help him much in his own spiritual life or his capacity to help others spiritually. Tom has been reprimanded for this on several occasions (e.g. pompous, prideful, smarmy) but has proved himself unentreatable on this point.  Perhaps as a leading brother, he was held in awe as unquestionable by the masses - and unfortunately he still maintains that mindset!

frank

[outdeep]

Throughout the Bible, many have indeed received extra-Biblical, direct revelations from God.  David sought God’s direction through the priestly stones.  God told Abraham some things rather directly.   Apostles were directed by a dream to go to Macedonia and directed different ways not to go other places.  God told a prayer meeting to separate Paul and Barnabus for the work.

I don’t know how some of these things happened.  Did they hear an audible voice?  Did thoughts just leap into their brains?  Did an overbearing Greek with curly hair stand up and make a glorious announcement?  I don’t know.

So, people received revelation.  But, what does that mean to us today?  Is it typical today?  Should we expect it?  Seek it?  And how do we know that we have got it?  These are the issues we wrestle with.

In the Old Testament, one who claimed to be a prophet and wasn’t was then stoned.  People had to be sure that they had the voice of God before they opened their mouth.  Today, anyone who claims to have a word from God is generally accepted as having one.  Because of this misuse (and certainly because of what I saw in the Assembly) I have developed a healthy skepticism (hopefully not cynicism) in this regard.

For example, I have had the following experience many times:
1.   I start in a new prayer group and the group is given direction on how to pray.
2.   Someone suggests:  We don’t have to be bound by the direction we are given.  After all, we want to be led by the Spirit in what we do so we should all feel free to pray and do as the Spirit leads and directs us.  Everyone concurs.
3.   After a few meetings, the person who brought up about being led by the Spirit says something like, “I just feel led to say that we ought to pray this way” or “I think when we worship, it should be a celebration and we should stand up and lift our hands to the Lord”, etc.
4.   I’m not trying to be mean but in most cases the “I feel led by the Spirit to pray for this” means “I happened to think of something and I would like to open my mouth and say it”.  (They often develop an interesting theology when they see every thing they don’t like as “Satanic strongholds”.  I once had someone pray against the “Satanic stronghold” of something I prayed because she didn’t agree with the way I prayed.  Being “led by the Spirit” often leads to interesting ideas.)

(continued next post)

[outdeep]

(continued from last post)

In other words, I have found that the person who is most into “being led by the Spirit” is often the one who subtly wants to abandoned the stated authority and take over the group themselves and persuade others of his or her ideas.  They may not be good at discussion or debating or mediating differences but putting God on their side gives them a distinct advantage.  Fortunately, unlike the Assembly, it usually doesn’t amount to that much control.

So I don’t think the issue is so much “does God lead us outside of the Bible text or doesn’t he?”  I think the issue is that when one does claim to have a revelation from God or a subjective directive, we should not be so quick to affirm it.  Rather, we should test the spirit to see if it is from God or if it is just a means that someone found in the church to get attention.

I have a friend named Rick Samuel who did campus ministry with me at Orange Coast College in 1978.  He is sympathetic to the Charismatic movement and believes the Spirit is dynamic and active.  If he were to come to me and say that God had directly spoke to him, I would probably give him greater heed because I have known him for years as one who is very thoughtful, through and careful about his words.  He would just say, “God revealed this to me” off the cuff.

On the other hand, when someone comes along with lots of God-talk using flowery spiritual claims that sound awesome but convey little cognitive meaning, I am prone to withhold judgment and my skepticism runs very high.  I have learned how spiritual talking people operate.  I have learned in the Assembly that uncritically believing someone’s revelation can do much damage.

-Dave

[vernecarty]

Acts 8:26-36

1. Why did Philip go down the Jerusalem/Gaza road?
2. Why did Philip chase down the Ethiopian?
3. How did Philip overtake a chariot?
4. In the scripture the Ethiopian was reading where does it refer to Jesus?
5. Where did Philip get the idea he could/should preach Jesus from Isaiah?
6. Why did the Ethiopian request to be baptized?



Something must have been revealed to someone by someone at some time.

Can't really see your argument here Tom. Reveletion of truth is a foundation of the Christian faith. "Once I was blind but now I see."

To intellectualize what God does spiritually causes the skeptism you show.

We can go back to the age old question, How do you know God exists? Prove it!

These things require regeneration of the heart and in doing so opens the door for God to reveal truth and to give understanding of it.

btw, please don't call people names just because you don't agree with them. You probably don't agree with me here either but just to set the record straight before hand, I am not George, I am not a clone of George, I am not a prospective LB, etc. I am a sinner saved by grace. Lets identify with one another on that level.

Tom's response will in all likelihood be that these sort of things may have happened in Biblical times, but they do not today. It is really incredible to hear someone who is saved reduce the power of God's written word to "word meaning, grammatical construction, and sound principles of interpretation."
There is not a person saved by the grace of God and reading this BB, that does not know and understand the truth of Hebrews 4:12, and that by pesonal experience.

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Tom, assume that I am a total ignoramus but truly interested in being correctly instructed.
Please explain what Hebrews 4: 12 is teaching in terms of your paradigm of  "word meaning, grammatical construction, and sound principles of interpretation."
My question is sincere, and I will await you exegesis.
I know your Master's is in Apologetics and not Homiletics. I trust that some training in the latter was a part of your academic preparation.
I would like an explanation of how the Word of God is quick.
I would like an explanation of how the word of God is powerful.
I would like an explanantion of what it means that it divides asunder soul and spirit.and joints and marrow.
I would like an explanation of how by "word meaning, grammatical construction and sound principles of interpretation" it achieves the effect of discerning thoughts and itents of the heart.
Please help me understand your position on this.
Verne

[Marty]

Tom's response will in all likelihood be that these sort of things may have happened in Biblical times, but they do not today.

Verne

"My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me."

Was Jesus speaking about four legged wooly creatures or was he speaking of Christians.

Was He saying that people would hear Him only while He was in human flesh or was He saying that His people would hear Him forever?

Was He speaking of followers as only those living during His earthly ministry or was He speaking for Christians today?

It is really inconceivable to think the church's teaching on this has been wrong throughout the ages. That Tom has some new revealtion that refutes this.

[Marty]

(continued from last post)

In other words, I have found that the person who is most into “being led by the Spirit” is often the one who subtly wants to abandoned the stated authority and take over the group themselves and persuade others of his or her ideas.  They may not be good at discussion or debating or mediating differences but putting God on their side gives them a distinct advantage.  Fortunately, unlike the Assembly, it usually doesn’t amount to that much control.

So I don’t think the issue is so much “does God lead us outside of the Bible text or doesn’t he?”  I think the issue is that when one does claim to have a revelation from God or a subjective directive, we should not be so quick to affirm it.  Rather, we should test the spirit to see if it is from God or if it is just a means that someone found in the church to get attention.

I have a friend named Rick Samuel who did campus ministry with me at Orange Coast College in 1978.  He is sympathetic to the Charismatic movement and believes the Spirit is dynamic and active.  If he were to come to me and say that God had directly spoke to him, I would probably give him greater heed because I have known him for years as one who is very thoughtful, through and careful about his words.  He would just say, “God revealed this to me” off the cuff.

On the other hand, when someone comes along with lots of God-talk using flowery spiritual claims that sound awesome but convey little cognitive meaning, I am prone to withhold judgment and my skepticism runs very high.  I have learned how spiritual talking people operate.  I have learned in the Assembly that uncritically believing someone’s revelation can do much damage.

-Dave

Dave, what I am hearing you say is that you believe God does reveal, does direct, does lead, does speak to His people.

Your issue seems to be with those that have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof. Of course there are those in the church. You seem to have the litmus test in place for identifying who is led by God and who follows their own lusts. That test would be history.

A complete stranger making proclamations of Gods direction would require caution. On the other hand another who has set an example to the Lords people of godliness is more readily accepted.

Can anyone say that Billy Graham’s ministry of over 50 years was not led and directed by God? I don’t think so. Yet would Billy say he never made any mistakes? Perhaps did something that in retrospect he would have done differently if given another chance. Probably. Yet in the whole scheme of things God leads, God reveals, God speaks. Bill will tell you that.

[outdeep]

"My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me."

Was Jesus speaking about four legged wooly creatures or was he speaking of Christians.

Was He saying that people would hear Him only while He was in human flesh or was He saying that His people would hear Him forever?

Was He speaking of followers as only those living during His earthly ministry or was He speaking for Christians today?

It is really inconceivable to think the church's teaching on this has been wrong throughout the ages. That Tom has some new revealtion that refutes this.

Actually, I'm not sure that I go along with the idea that this passage is teaching that Christians through the ages will receive information from God that only we will recognize.  Or, putting it another way, I don't think this is a proof text that says God will direct the decisions of our lives by directly telling us things.

I think John is dealing with the issue at hand in the context of the story - there were those who recognized Jesus as the Son of God and there were those who did not and were resistant against him.  Many "believed and had life through his name" (John's stated purpose for writing the gospel).  Others did not.  His sheep recognized and believed.  Those who were not his sheep didn't.

Christians being directed by God in their Christian walk may be argued from other passages.  I just don't think that is the thrust of this passage.

[Marty]

Actually, I'm not sure that I go along with the idea that this passage is teaching that Christians through the ages will receive information from God that only we will recognize.  Or, putting it another way, I don't think this is a proof text that says God will direct the decisions of our lives by directly telling us things.

I think John is dealing with the issue at hand in the context of the story - there were those who recognized Jesus as the Son of God and there were those who did not and were resistant against him.  Many "believed and had life through his name" (John's stated purpose for writing the gospel).  Others did not.  His sheep recognized and believed.  Those who were not his sheep didn't.

Christians being directed by God in their Christian walk may be argued from other passages.  I just don't think that is the thrust of this passage.

I guess I look at the Word of God as being eternal, as Peter speaks. “The promise is to you and your children and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord God will call.” Acts 2:39.

When He calls how do we hear?

Heb 5:14, “But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”

Where does this discernment come from and how are our senses affected?

When people give personal testimonies the skeptic asks how do you know that was from God? How do you know it wasn’t random thoughts or just coincidence?

I don’t have theological arguments to answer these things but the Scripture does tell us that something takes place. That God communicates to His people, individually.

When I heard and responded to the gospel was that from God or not? When I found my life partner was that luck? When my children individually over time each received the gift of salvation was that a fluke?

I think we intellectually limit God and what he does through our limited intellect. That doesn’t mean He is not doing what He says He does. It means we don’t see it or understand it.

Phil 2:12, “For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.”

God is doing things. He is directing His people, individually, who are available to respond.

[outdeep]

I guess I look at the Word of God as being eternal, as Peter speaks. “The promise is to you and your children and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord God will call.” Acts 2:39.

When He calls how do we hear?

Heb 5:14, “But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”

Where does this discernment come from and how are our senses affected?

When people give personal testimonies the skeptic asks how do you know that was from God? How do you know it wasn’t random thoughts or just coincidence?

I don’t have theological arguments to answer these things but the Scripture does tell us that something takes place. That God communicates to His people, individually.

When I heard and responded to the gospel was that from God or not? When I found my life partner was that luck? When my children individually over time each received the gift of salvation was that a fluke?

I think we intellectually limit God and what he does through our limited intellect. That doesn’t mean He is not doing what He says He does. It means we don’t see it or understand it.

Phil 2:12, “For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.”

God is doing things. He is directing His people, individually, who are available to respond.

I think we are on two wavelenghts here.  You are talking about what God is able to do.  I was talking about what can be supported by the context of the passage you cited in John.   I think the passage in John ("my sheep hear my voice") is speaking specifically about recognizing Jesus as the Son of God, not about God directing his people who walk with him.  You should base your arguments about God communicating to Christians on other passages in the Bible that deal with this topic directly.

[brian]

i want to underscore the comments about not identifying opposing spiritual perspectives or personalities as being assembly or george-like. even if you really think the other person is that way, in the end it really doen't help the discussion at all. its true that long ago sondra(frank) identified herself as a spiritual daughter of george and betty, making the point that what they taught her wasn't all bad. but i still think that bringing it up in the middle of a discussion like this lowers the level of the discussion to a "you are more assembly than me and thus wrong" level, which is really unhelpful, not to mention hurtful.

a few of you also tend to get quite passionate (ok, angry!) when discussing your spiritual views vs other people's. lets face it, no two people have the exact same interpretation of each passage of the bible, or the exact same conception of god, even two christians. so if you want to discuss your various views here and see where they are similar and different, compare notes so to speak, and maybe even sharpen up your personal position by arguing it through with someone, fine. but if you post on here thinking everyone has to be convinced you are right you are going to be terribly disappointed and frustrated, and the negativity will be contagious. so as we discuss volatile topics like this, lets keep it in perspective - which some of you do fantastically, and its very much appreciated.

[Oscar]

Marty,

You said,

Acts 8:26-36

1. Why did Philip go down the Jerusalem/Gaza road?

An angel appeared to him and told him to.  That is not the sort of thing we are talking about here.

2. Why did Philip chase down the Ethiopian?

Same as above

3. How did Philip overtake a chariot?

It says he ran.    Ever been around horses/donkeys?  They can only run for a while, and then must be walked or rested.

4. In the scripture the Ethiopian was reading where does it refer to Jesus?

Now that is a good question.  Fact is, any there was a lively debate going on among various groups of Jewish scholars at the time about the Messiah.  Philip has adopted the correct interpretation of the passage.

5. Where did Philip get the idea he could/should preach Jesus from Isaiah?

Same as number 4.

6. Why did the Ethiopian request to be baptized?

He was an envoy to Herod's court at Jerusalem.  Everyone in Jerusalem knew about the new "sect" of Jews that claimed Jesus was alive.  Baptism predates Christianity, btw, John the Baptist for example.

Good questions, but a careful reading of the passage answers most of them.

Thomas Maddux