Let Not Your Heart be Troubled

Let not your mind be troubled. These thoughts are soothing. It is such a comfort for me to know that the Lord is preparing a place for me and that He gives me such peace and security in the midst of the storm. Even when there is not a storm sometimes. Thank you Jesus.

Permalink

Let us all strive to feed the spirit man within us and so glorify Him who died for us by dying to the natural man and living to Him. For the time is short and the night cometh when no man may work, and so let us all work as unto the Lord.

Permalink

If you notice snack, Jesus never told us to believe in Him in order to be saved. The parts where Jesus speaks and teaches in the bible have nothing to do with the other sections about laws and rules.

Permalink

verily and forsooth dear sister in Christ. let us all sow to the spirit and so reap that precious water of life which only He can give.

Permalink

Truly He has the words of life, and where other could we turn than Him for that? Come all ye who are weary and heavy laden and He shall give you rest for your souls.

Permalink

snackstix wrote:

Attezo wrote:If you notice snack, Jesus never told us to believe in Him in order to be saved. The parts where Jesus speaks and teaches in the bible have nothing to do with the other sections about laws and rules.

JESUS CAME TO FULFILL THE LAW. AND HE DID. He died for me and he died for all who believe.

Sorry, I have to disagree with this...He died for everyone..not just for those who believe.

Permalink

the problem with scripture regurgitation is that...if one doesn't believe that the bible was written or inspired by god, one is under absolutely NO obligation to listen or believe the "thumper" who is speaking...it would be nice if we could discuss god without bringing up that silly over-sized, under-developed novel...but christians always say one cannot discuss the existence of god without calling/leaning heavily on the book...what's really funny to me is: non-christians (including me) have been doing it just fine for centuries now...what do you think, can we discuss faith and god without the bible?

Permalink

Verily so my sister in Christ Jojo. Let all who thirst come to Him, and their thirst shall be quenched, for to every man who seeketh, he shall find and to him who asketh it shall be given, pressed down, shaken down and running over.

Permalink

Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God brother Alluvius.

Permalink

Alluvius wrote:the problem with scripture regurgitation is that...if one doesn't believe that the bible was written or inspired by god, one is under absolutely NO obligation to listen or believe the "thumper" who is speaking...it would be nice if we could discuss god without bringing up that silly over-sized, under-developed novel...but christians always say one cannot discuss the existence of god without calling/leaning heavily on the book...what's really funny to me is: non-christians (including me) have been doing it just fine for centuries now...what do you think, can we discuss faith and god without the bible?

I've been trying to do that for years now. Good luck

Permalink

Well, there was a point in time when none of us believed...so....I'm sticking to ALL.

Snacks...I'm curious...did you create this thread and expect or want it to have no comments?

Edited on September 30, 2009 at 5:28 PM Permalink

was there a debate while i was gone?

Permalink

The Lord shall have the entire Bible tattooed on his leg. A wondrous site to behold!!!

Permalink

Well as far as Jesus dying for the whole world.. It depends on what one believes.. Although there is scipture that supports He did not die for the entire world but God's elect.. His chosen.

The whole world in the bible doesn't have the same meaning as we may think it does.

This is universalism which means that everybody will be saved. This view is obviously un-Biblical.

Permalink

Actually, the bible is pretty clear that all will believe so there is not a problem or a discrepancy in the least.

Jesus came to seek and to save that which is lost.

He did not come to condemn the world, but that the world through Him be saved.

He said if He be lifted up He will draw all men to himself.

And...

this is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.

'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.'

We will all believe.

Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:

This is universalism which means that everybody will be saved. This view is obviously un-Biblical.

No, it is obviously not.

Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:Well as far as Jesus dying for the whole world.. It depends on what one believes.. Although there is scipture that supports He did not die for the entire world but God's elect.. His chosen.

The whole world in the bible doesn't have the same meaning as we may think it does.

This is universalism which means that everybody will be saved. This view is obviously un-Biblical.

If you are going to claim there is scriptural evidence for something it would be more convincing if you provided it.

Permalink

I truly do believe in the wonders of His limitless mercy and grace and the boundless comfort He gives to us through the gift of the Holy Spirit. Oh wretched undeserving sinners that we are, how can we hope to repay His priceless gift?

Permalink

And tell me how it is not a total contradiction that Jesus only died for the elect but that God wills that all men be saved? It makes zero logical sense.

Permalink

Let us not quibble over the minutiae of doctrine brethren and cistern, but fellowship in the light of the Lord.

Permalink

The ways of the Lord are mysterious sister K and he worketh in mysterious ways his myriad wonders to performeth.

Permalink

Honestly? No...I get comfort when I'm still and I listen to God with my heart. You're right though...people DO need encouragement...let me ask you this...Do you think God would rather us..a. Hand people the bible? or b. Go out and do something about it?

My opinion....the latter

Permalink

snackstix wrote:

kwmma wrote:And tell me how it is not a total contradiction that Jesus only died for the elect but that God wills that all men be saved? It makes zero logical sense.

because the bible says so.

Where? And why do the verses I quote to you, which clearly and concisely say that Jesus died for ALL MEN, mean less to you?

Permalink

kwmma wrote:And tell me how it is not a total contradiction that Jesus only died for the elect but that God wills that all men be saved? It makes zero logical sense.

For whom did Jesus die?
The answer to this question is mostly a logical conclusion based on three other doctrines of Reformed Faith: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace.

From Total depravity we saw that man is radically corrupt; not able to choose God of his own desire. In Unconditional Election we saw that God has chosen those who comprise His church from all eternity according to His good pleasure. Finally, from Irresistible Grace we learned that although we all resist God, for those whom He has chosen, he works regeneration in them to change their desires to be toward Himself.

The phrase Limited Atonement does not mean that Christ’s atonement is limited in its sufficiency or value. Christ’s work is sufficient to pay for all of humanity’s debt to God. Instead, Limited Atonement (or more precisely, definite atonement) deals with the question of the design of Christ’s atonement: Why and for whom did God send Jesus to the cross? There are three options:

1. God sent Jesus to redeem everybody (this is universalism which means that everybody will be saved). This view is obviously un-Biblical.

2. God sent Jesus to redeem everyone who would believe (have faith) and take advantage of Christ’s work. This is the view of Arminians who believe that Christ’s death was potential atonement, not actual atonement.

3. God sent Jesus to redeem only the elect (the chosen church -- Unconditional Election). This is the reformed view whereby we believe that Christ’s death was an actual atonement.

There are a few verses that support this point:

Matthew 1:21
"And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (NKJ)

Romans 8:30
Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. (NKJ)

John 10:27-30
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. "I and My Father are one." (NKJ)

John 17:9-12
"I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. "And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them. "Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are. "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. (NKJ)

When discussing Limited Atonement, one verse is often mentioned as contradictory: 1 John 2:2:

I John 2:2
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (NKJ)

At first glance, this verse appears to contradict the idea of Limited Atonement, but upon closer inspection it does not. The word propitiation means, satisfaction of God’s demands. In view of this definition and if this verse is really talking about the whole world, then we are back to universalism, which is un-Biblical. The phrase “whole world” in the Bible often means just a larger group of people, not literally the whole world. So, this verse is likely speaking of the two different groups of believers: Jews and non-Jews. John may be saying that Christ is not only a propitiation for our sins (Jewish believers) but for the elect found also throughout the whole world.

Summary
1. Definite atonement refers to the scope of God’s design for redemption and the intent of the Cross.

2. All who are not universalists agree that Christ’s atonement is sufficient for all, but effective only for those who believe.

3. Christ’s atonement was an actual propitiation for sin, not a potential or conditional propitiation.

4. The atonement in a broad sense is offered to all; in a narrow sense, it is only offered to the elect.

Permalink

the Lord is not constrained by reason or logic my dear sister. only believe, trust, and obey and in His season he shall give you such light as you need to guide thy path.

Permalink

Well, my itty bitty comment got buried didn't it?

Permalink

i'm being ignored too JOJO so i wouldn't take it personally. my words of comfort and encouragement are not welcome in the house of faith it appears. i only wanted to fellowship with like minded believers in the spirit of love and truth, but i suppose some people just want to argue.

Edited on September 30, 2009 at 5:44 PM Permalink

Why does God choose some and not others? According to the reformed view He predestined some to salvation, correct? Yet we are all unworthy and grace is a gift not based on works, correct? Again, zero logical sense.

LadyDi821 wrote:

For whom did Jesus die?
The answer to this question is mostly a logical conclusion based on three other doctrines of Reformed Faith: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace.

From Total depravity we saw that man is radically corrupt; not able to choose God of his own desire. In Unconditional Election we saw that God has chosen those who comprise His church from all eternity according to His good pleasure. Finally, from Irresistible Grace we learned that although we all resist God, for those whom He has chosen, he works regeneration in them to change their desires to be toward Himself.

The phrase Limited Atonement does not mean that Christ’s atonement is limited in its sufficiency or value. Christ’s work is sufficient to pay for all of humanity’s debt to God. Instead, Limited Atonement (or more precisely, definite atonement) deals with the question of the design of Christ’s atonement: Why and for whom did God send Jesus to the cross? There are three options:

1. God sent Jesus to redeem everybody (this is universalism which means that everybody will be saved). This view is obviously un-Biblical.

2. God sent Jesus to redeem everyone who would believe (have faith) and take advantage of Christ’s work. This is the view of Arminians who believe that Christ’s death was potential atonement, not actual atonement.

3. God sent Jesus to redeem only the elect (the chosen church -- Unconditional Election). This is the reformed view whereby we believe that Christ’s death was an actual atonement.

There are a few verses that support this point:

Matthew 1:21
"And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (NKJ)

Romans 8:30
Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. (NKJ)

John 10:27-30
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. "I and My Father are one." (NKJ)

John 17:9-12
"I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. "And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them. "Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are. "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. (NKJ)

When discussing Limited Atonement, one verse is often mentioned as contradictory: 1 John 2:2:

I John 2:2
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (NKJ)

At first glance, this verse appears to contradict the idea of Limited Atonement, but upon closer inspection it does not. The word propitiation means, satisfaction of God’s demands. In view of this definition and if this verse is really talking about the whole world, then we are back to universalism, which is un-Biblical. The phrase “whole world” in the Bible often means just a larger group of people, not literally the whole world. So, this verse is likely speaking of the two different groups of believers: Jews and non-Jews. John may be saying that Christ is not only a propitiation for our sins (Jewish believers) but for the elect found also throughout the whole world.

Summary
1. Definite atonement refers to the scope of God’s design for redemption and the intent of the Cross.

2. All who are not universalists agree that Christ’s atonement is sufficient for all, but effective only for those who believe.

3. Christ’s atonement was an actual propitiation for sin, not a potential or conditional propitiation.

4. The atonement in a broad sense is offered to all; in a narrow sense, it is only offered to the elect.

Permalink

The thing here is that most of us are still on the bottle and have not moved onto solid food on scripture.. So we will all have a different view on what exactly the whole world means.. Googling does not make us scholars lol

Permalink

scripture spam is the meat of the word

Permalink

Mormonism For Dummies?

Permalink

scarlettohall wrote:Well, my itty bitty comment got buried didn't it?

I read it and agree. Unfortunately, for many Christians, the act of doing has become meaningless. They want faith without works. They love to quote that the most ungodly sinner is not past the boundless tender mercies of the loving God. Except when you mention universal atonement. Then it's, "What? So all those sinners just get to spend eternity in heaven?"

When what they are saying is that the most ungodly sinner can spend eternity in heaven, if they believe in Jesus.

Love in the bible is an action word.

Permalink

kwmma wrote:Why does God choose some and not others? According to the reformed view He predestined some to salvation, correct? Yet we are all unworthy and grace is a gift not based on works, correct? Again, zero logical sense.

LadyDi821 wrote:

For whom did Jesus die?
The answer to this question is mostly a logical conclusion based on three other doctrines of Reformed Faith: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace.

From Total depravity we saw that man is radically corrupt; not able to choose God of his own desire. In Unconditional Election we saw that God has chosen those who comprise His church from all eternity according to His good pleasure. Finally, from Irresistible Grace we learned that although we all resist God, for those whom He has chosen, he works regeneration in them to change their desires to be toward Himself.

The phrase Limited Atonement does not mean that Christ’s atonement is limited in its sufficiency or value. Christ’s work is sufficient to pay for all of humanity’s debt to God. Instead, Limited Atonement (or more precisely, definite atonement) deals with the question of the design of Christ’s atonement: Why and for whom did God send Jesus to the cross? There are three options:

1. God sent Jesus to redeem everybody (this is universalism which means that everybody will be saved). This view is obviously un-Biblical.

2. God sent Jesus to redeem everyone who would believe (have faith) and take advantage of Christ’s work. This is the view of Arminians who believe that Christ’s death was potential atonement, not actual atonement.

3. God sent Jesus to redeem only the elect (the chosen church -- Unconditional Election). This is the reformed view whereby we believe that Christ’s death was an actual atonement.

There are a few verses that support this point:

Matthew 1:21
"And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (NKJ)

Romans 8:30
Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. (NKJ)

John 10:27-30
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. "I and My Father are one." (NKJ)

John 17:9-12
"I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. "And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them. "Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are. "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. (NKJ)

When discussing Limited Atonement, one verse is often mentioned as contradictory: 1 John 2:2:

I John 2:2
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (NKJ)

At first glance, this verse appears to contradict the idea of Limited Atonement, but upon closer inspection it does not. The word propitiation means, satisfaction of God’s demands. In view of this definition and if this verse is really talking about the whole world, then we are back to universalism, which is un-Biblical. The phrase “whole world” in the Bible often means just a larger group of people, not literally the whole world. So, this verse is likely speaking of the two different groups of believers: Jews and non-Jews. John may be saying that Christ is not only a propitiation for our sins (Jewish believers) but for the elect found also throughout the whole world.

Summary
1. Definite atonement refers to the scope of God’s design for redemption and the intent of the Cross.

2. All who are not universalists agree that Christ’s atonement is sufficient for all, but effective only for those who believe.

3. Christ’s atonement was an actual propitiation for sin, not a potential or conditional propitiation.

4. The atonement in a broad sense is offered to all; in a narrow sense, it is only offered to the elect.

That is just the thing Karma.. It makes zero logical sense to you and maybe other people but not to everyone. We can't amongst believers IMO use the word logic when it comes to God.. This is not a science .

As I said I don't think one of us on these boards have been on solid food scripture wise.

We all may have a King James Bible. Know John 3:16 but that doesn't make us know it all's .. If we had a scholar amongst us it would be a different story...

We all believe Jesus is Lord. At least on the point we all agree. Not sure on some things everyone wil ever agree

Permalink

snackstix wrote:The Bible is a part of my life, its very hard not to discuss God's word when it clearly says in Revelation when Jesus appears, the Word of God is written on his thigh. He is the word.

and i'm fairly certain i clearly said i don't believe in that silly book...how can you possibly know what is "clearly" written in any book of the bible? after countless translations, countless revisions, and every religious leader in history changing content to suit his agenda...how can you claim to KNOW anything because the bible (a less reputable and less reliable source than the crack ho down the street) said so (that would be like taking the word of a blind man as witness to a murder...sure, he might know something about it, but i seriously doubt anyone could feel good about any conviction based on his "eye-witness" testimonial)

Edited on September 30, 2009 at 5:54 PM Permalink

snackstix wrote:No it's actually called Arguing with idiots. no offense juss sayin

Edited on September 30, 2009 at 5:54 PM Permalink