OK, so I guess I did lapse into a bit of proof-texting in the last post, although that wasn’t my intention. That is, I wasn’t trying to say, “Here are these verses that trump your verses.” I was trying to show why one particular argument by Edward Fudge doesn’t hold water.
Oh, well… so be it. I didn’t express myself well. At least it gave Randall the opportunity to teach us all a bit about Calvinistic views.
Let’s take some particular examples, and see if that helps. Since I’ve been working so much with the letters in Revelation over the last few years, let’s start there. First, there’s the Ephesus church. Hard-working. Sound doctrine. But they’ve lost their first love. Because of it, Jesus says: “Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place.” (Revelation 2:5) Since the lampstands are the churches themselves, Jesus is saying the church can cease to be a church. (Just as he will later refer to synagogues that aren’t really synagogues) This would necessitate the removal of these Christians from the body. How else do I say it? They would no longer belong to Christ.
Let’s skip down to the letter to Sardis. Jesus tells them: “Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.” (Revelation 3:4-5) The minority in that church are ready for Jesus’ return; most need to wake from a spiritual slumber. The ones that overcome (remain faithful, not renouncing Christ during persecution) will not have their names blotted from the book of life. What does that say about the others? That they ran the risk of that very thing, of being removed from the book of life (I gave a fuller explanation of the Book of Life in an earlier post).
Next is the letter to Philadelphia. This is a healthy church, but Jesus warns them: “I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.” (Revelation 3:11) Take your crown? The word for crown is the word for the laurel wreath given to the victor in athletic events. The church in Smyrna was told that the crown was the crown of life, that is, life would be their crown for having endured. Jesus says that if Christians don’t hold on to what they have, they can lose that crown. (It’s not the image of the crown being snatched, but of failing to win. We talk of someone getting someone else’s gold medal when the original winner is disqualified. It’s that sort of idea.)
The last church in the group is Laodicea. Note that these Christians have gotten into such a state that Jesus is asking to be let back into their lives (“Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.” Revelation 3:20) If they do not change their ways, Jesus will vomit them out of his mouth.
The letters in Revelation were written to prepare the Christians in Asia Minor for a time of testing, a time of persecution. They had to guard their faith, for the risk of losing it was very real. They needed to be willing to lose their lives rather than lose their faith.
Tim: I applaud you in this attempt. For I will show you in any statement that I make I will show proof by comparing, contrasting only with scripture. Text upon text.
I doubt if you will budge from your stance after I show you many things but allow me to establish a road map if you will to defend my position.
I may include things not mentioned in the article, but I absolutely will include any scripture you include and digest it. My position is that this message is for the Jews looking at the tribulation, before the rapture and the presentation of the kingdom and the completion of prophetic program. Are you game?
Honestly, heavenbound, no. I’ve studied these letters enough, along with the culture and history of Asia Minor, that I’m not particularly interested in something that doesn’t take that context seriously. I’ve read enough about the genre of apocalyptic literature to know that that’s not how Revelation works.
If you’d like to post this display on a blog somewhere, I’d be happy to link to it.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim said “Oh, well… so be it. I didn’t express myself well. At least it gave Randall the opportunity to teach us all a bit about Calvinistic views.”
Tim, being the fair man I believe you to be, I see it as only fair to give the writer of Hebrews the same opportunity. If you don’t see it that way, as I have said “Just delete” please don’t edit.
Can we fall away?
Heb :2:1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let [them] slip.
Niv – Hbr 2:1 – We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.
Did Jesus die for everyone?
Heb. 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Niv – Hbr 2:9 – But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
This Calvinistic view has not been discussed here , but it is one of theirs. Jesus is the creator of all things, Jesus is God.
Heb 2:10 For it became him, for whom [are] all things, and by whom [are] all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
Niv – Hbr 2:10 – In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
NLT – Hbr 2:10 – And it was only right that God–who made everything and for whom everything was made–should bring his many children into glory. Through the suffering of Jesus, God made him a perfect leader, one fit to bring them into their salvation.
I know we will believe what we want to, some will say yeah but you don’t understand.
OK, Laymond, I’ll touch on this charge once more and then leave it alone. I edited one of your posts when you made a personal attack on someone who wasn’t even participating in the discussion at the time. It did not change the meaning of your post.
You then told me that you would rather I delete offensive posts, which I will do in the future.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Isn’t it cool that writers of Scripture can allude to the same OT passage to make two related, but different points? Compare what Laymond quoted above from Heb 2:10 with what Paul wrote to the Colossians:
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (Colossians 1:15-20 ESV)
Now look at what John wrote:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it… And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.'”) (John 1:1-5, 14-15 ESV)
Laymond, I’ve been waiting for a long time for you to quote that passage from Hebrews, because we have two or three writers (John, Paul, and the author of Hebrews) who all talk about where “all things” came from. I know I’m not going to change your mind, but I believe it would be worthwhile for you to consider these three passages together. Also, you might want to read Heb 2:10 in light of Heb 1:8-12
May God bless the reading of his word.
Nick; no less than ten times in Isaiah does God claim creation for himself.
Isa: 44:24: Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Isa: 45:12: I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
But you are right it is strange how one can read the same thing in two different places, and come out with a different meaning.
That said if you notice the only version that really interprets these two scriptures differently is NLT.
Col. 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
NLT – Col 1:16 – Christ is the one through whom God created everything in heaven and earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can’t see–kings, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities. Everything has been created through him and for him.
NIV – Col 1:16 – For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
Hbr. 2:10 For it became him, for whom [are] all things, and by whom [are] all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
NLT – Hbr 2:10 – And it was only right that God–who made everything and for whom everything was made–should bring his many children into glory. Through the suffering of Jesus, God made him a perfect leader, one fit to bring them into their salvation.
NIV – Hbr 2:10 – In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
context:
Col: 1:12: Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
( note: I am not adding to this scripture, just telling how I think it should be seen)
14: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
( vs 14,15 is a description of God’s son Jesus vs 16 continues with why we should give thanks to the Father)
16: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers:
17: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
I really don’t see any inconsistency in the two scriptures, except in the NLV I see the NLV as adding to this scripture, just a little.
context, context, context.
Nick, you recommended I take in to account Heb. 1: 8,12 .
lets look at one part of that scripture, and I will let you explain it to me.
Heb: 1:10: And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11: They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
12: And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
Now lets look at where this came from.
Ps:102:24: I said, O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days: thy years are throughout all generations.
25: Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.
26: They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed:
Nick do you actually believe this is God talking to Jesus. I don’t think so. Don’t ask me to explain what the Hebrew writer was talking about , because I have no Idea. we can go through the rest of the scripture you recommended if you wish.
Laymond, if you really don’t have any idea what the Hebrew writer is saying, why are you prejudiced against a Trinitarian reading of that passage? I believe the Hebrew writer is making the same point that Jesus makes in Mark 12:35-37. How can David’s son be David’s lord, if David’s son is merely David’s heir?
Simply put, yes: I believe the psalm is a poetic rendering of communication between the Father and the Son. This fits with the riddle Jesus poses, and with that interesting passage in Daniel about TWO thrones in the throne room.
And what’s good for the goose must be good for the gander: if those creation passages in Isaiah disprove the Son’s divinity and role in creation, then the salvation passages in Isaiah — the ones that say YHWH Himself will come to Zion, God himself will save — THOSE passages have to equally limit God’s scope of operation. Isaiah teaches that God alone creates and that God alone saves.
This is a problem for you, unless Jesus is not your savior.
“This is a problem for you, unless Jesus is not your savior.”
Not a problem at all Nick, why because God made Jesus who he was.
therefore God is the saving power. I do believe Jesus said that himself.
Niv – Hbr 2:10 – In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
I don’t see where Isaiah limits God in any way, just the opposite .
Isaiah gives all glory to God.
I don’t get just where people see Jesus as doing all the work, while the Father sits back sipping on iced tea.
PS Nick if Jesus did all the work, why would he be waiting to inherit from his Father. wouldn’t it already belong to him.
Then why quote Isaiah to show that God cannot have created through Jesus? That sounds like a limitation. You can’t have it both ways.
You’re trying to say that Isaiah says Jesus had nothing to do with creation, but only God.
But when the same kinds of quotes are referred to in Isaiah about God saying that He Himself will save Israel, you say that those don’t preclude Jesus from being the savior.
That might be the strangest thing you’ve ever said, Laymond. I believe (along with most Trinitarians I’ve met) that the Father and Jesus are one, working together in everything they do. YOU believe that they are separate — that Jesus was doing all the work of living and being spat on and crucified and all that, while the Father sat back and watched.
1) as I’ve already shown, Jesus didn’t do all the work alone. That’s your position, not mine.
2) While “all authority in heaven and earth has been given to” Jesus, you can clearly look around and see that he has yet to take possession of all heaven and earth. At his appearing he will be taking possession of everything that belongs to Him.
3) Could you point me toward the Scripture that inspired this question? I’d like a chance to examine the trap, now that I’ve stepped in it.
I’ve posted a new blog, a place where we can take the Trinitarian discussion so that Tim can get back to the POTS discussion.
http://fumblingtowardseternity.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/who-is-jesus-really-thinking-out-loud/
I’ll check it out Nick, but Sure a lot of human ancestry here to claim to be God. Jesus was a cousin to John whose birth was no less influenced by God than Jesus’.
Mt:1:1: The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
Mt:1:16: And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
17: So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.
Nick, Although some of Paul’s writings leaves some wiggle room for individual interpretation, the following, does not.
He could not have put the hierarchy in any simpler language.
1Cor:11:1: Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
2: Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
NLT – 1Cr 11:3 –
But there is one thing I want you to know: A man is responsible to Christ, a woman is responsible to her husband, and Christ is responsible to God.
I suppose in order to make the point of the trinity, we could just ignore the first 27 words of ve 3, and quote the last three.
“Christ is God”
I have said what I believe the bible teaches, that said, we will all believe what we will, I don’t see any need to discuss the subject farther. May God bless.
Laymond,
Nick has asked to take this discussion to his blog. Please do so.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer