Donations for the month of March


We have received a total of "0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 4,513
Joined: April 2001
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,776
Posts54,866
Members974
Most Online732
Jan 15th, 2023
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,445
Tom 4,513
chestnutmare 3,320
J_Edwards 2,615
John_C 1,864
Wes 1,856
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 2
John_C 1
Recent Posts
The When and How of Justification
by Pilgrim - Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:06 AM
Why a New Covenant Theology
by DiscipleEddie - Fri Mar 15, 2024 9:52 AM
Jordan Peterson ordered to take sensitivity training
by Anthony C. - Thu Mar 14, 2024 11:01 PM
Revisionist History vs. Conspiracy History by Gary North
by Anthony C. - Mon Mar 11, 2024 9:40 AM
the New Covenant
by Tom - Mon Mar 04, 2024 3:31 AM
"The Necessity of the Atonement" - Jonathan Edwards
by Pilgrim - Fri Mar 01, 2024 7:46 AM
Active Threads | Active Posts | Unanswered Today | Since Yesterday | This Week
Theology Discussion Forum Jump to new posts
Re: The When and How of Justification Pilgrim Fri Mar 15, 2024 2:06 PM
As you might expect, I disagree with your conclusion and which appears is your now adopted view: aka "Eternal Justification", and my disagreement could not be stronger.
1. The Scriptures are more than perspicuous on this matter in myriad places, e.g., one of the most salient: (cf. Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:6; James 2:23), all of which speak specifically on the subject of "justification", without any need of inference.

2. IF justification was "eternal", then nothing after the decree would be necessary, even including the incarnation, active obedience, passive obedience, resurrection of Christ, for the decree according to this view would have made it done. However, as with all these things, including EVERY SINGLE THOUGHT WORD AND DEED of every human being was necessary to bring the decree to pass for each and every one whom God had predestinated and elected to salvation in the Lord Christ. And that justification which is imputed to them is also made sure through sanctification and final justification (cf. Rom 8: 29,30).

Thus, as John Murray makes so clear based upon Scripture and reason in his marvelous book, Redemption Accomplished and Applied, The decrees of God and eternal and infallible AND in those decrees are included the MEANS to the end which bring them to pass. Faith in Christ is NOT simply the realization/apprehension of the assurance of justification, but rather but the means/instrument of being united to Christ and owning that justification which is imputed to those who are given true saving faith and repentance.
1 64 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum Jump to new posts
Why a New Covenant Theology DiscipleEddie Fri Mar 15, 2024 1:52 PM
Examples of God's law before Mosaic Law existed; before Moses existed:

Murder: Gen. 9:5,6
Adultery: Gen. 20:3
Idolatry: Gen. 35:2-4
Theft: Gen. 21:25

Nowhere in Scripture is the Law of Moses divided into "moral", "civil" and "ceremonial":

John Gill takes the words "my commandments, my statutes, and my laws" in Gen. 26:5 and seems to describe them as: "whether moral, ceremonial, or civil and judicial" but when following these Hebrew words through the OT, that will not hold up.

The Law of Moses had a specific starting "day", a Law given to no other nation:

"And what other great nation has statutes and ordinances as just as this entire law that I am setting before you today?" (Deut 4:8, NRSV)

"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them" (Rom 2:14-15, NRSV)
* I take it the law written on the heart came from the creation and is seen in Genesis.
** Only Israel was given the Old Covenant, with the Ten Commandments, and that was abolished at the cross.


Moses saw in the distant future when another prophet would succeed him:

"The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you shall heed such a prophet. This is what you requested of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said: “If I hear the voice of the LORD my God any more, or ever again see this great fire, I will die.” Then the LORD replied to me: “They are right in what they have said. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command. Anyone who does not heed the words that the prophet shall speak in my name, I myself will hold accountable." (Deut 18:15-19, NRSV)

Jesus Christ is the prophet of which Moses spoke:

"Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you from your own people a prophet like me. You must listen to whatever he tells you. And it will be that everyone who does not listen to that prophet will be utterly rooted out of the people.’" (Acts 3:22-23, NRSV)

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matt 28:19-20, NRSV)

"To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law) so that I might win those outside the law." (1Cor 9:21, NRSV)

When did the switch from Mosaic Law to Christ's Law take place?

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. (Matt 5:17-18, NRSV)

"fulfill" = REB "to complete"; Weymouth "give them their completion"

When was this all accomplished?

"When Jesus had received the wine, he said, “It is finished.” Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." (John 19:30, NRSV)

The entire Law of Moses has been abolished or annulled at the cross.

"He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it." (Eph 2:15-16, NRSV)

"And when you were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive together with him, when he forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the cross." (Col 2:13-14, NRSV)

"In speaking of “a new covenant,” he has made the first one obsolete. And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear." (Heb 8:13, NRSV)
*we know the first Covenant included the 10 Commandments (words)
"He was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the ten commandments." (Exod 34:28, NRSV)

"Now if the ministry of death, chiseled in letters on stone tablets, came in glory so that the people of Israel could not gaze at Moses’ face because of the glory of his face, a glory now set aside, how much more will the ministry of the Spirit come in glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, much more does the ministry of justification abound in glory! Indeed, what once had glory has lost its glory because of the greater glory; for if what was set aside came through glory, much more has the permanent come in glory!" (2Cor 3:7-11, NRSV)

The preceding Scriptures force me to embrace New Covenant Theology and also the First London Confession of Faith of 1646 which does not teach the "Ten Commandments" or any of the Mosaic Law, but only Christ's law in the New Covenant. This confession states in part, in its conclusion, the following statement:

"If any man shall impose upon us anything that we see not to be commanded by our Lord Jesus Christ, we should in His strength rather embrace all reproaches and tortures of men, to be stripped of all outward comforts, and if it were possible, to die a thousand deaths, rather than to do anything against the least tittle of the truth of God or against the light of our own consciences."
http://grace-gospel.org/bcf1646.htm
0 27 Read More
Open Forum Jump to new posts
Re: Jordan Peterson ordered to take sensitivity training Anthony C. Fri Mar 15, 2024 3:01 AM
Interesting find…


Jordan Peterson at the Trilateral Commission
A provocation: will democracy survive?
Jordan Peterson, Professor of Psychology, University of Toronto; Author of “Maps of Meaning”

13 5,305 Read More
Open Forum Jump to new posts
Re: Revisionist History Anthony C. Mon Mar 11, 2024 1:40 PM
The Significance of the Scopes Trial | Gary North

Although, I don’t agree with North’s political ideology, both him and Bryan were correct in the sense that Darwinism is a (faith-based) religion and a state-default one at that….
Quote
“Beginning with the publication of his book, In His Image in 1921, Bryan began calling for state laws against the teaching of Darwinism in tax-funded schools. What is not widely understood was his motivation. It was ethical, not academic. Bryan understood what Darwin had written and what his cousin Francis Galton had written. Galton developed the “science” of eugenics. Darwin in The Descent of Man (1871) referred to Galton’s book favorably. Also, Bryan could read the full title of Darwin’s original book: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. …

Bryan had read what Darwin had written, and he was appalled. He recognized that a ruthless hostility to charity was the dark side of Darwinism. Had Darwin’s theory been irrelevant, he said, it would have been harmless. Bryan wrote: “This hypothesis, however, does incalculable harm. It teaches that Christianity impairs the race physically. That was the first implication at which I revolted. It led me to review the doctrine and reject it entirely.” In Chapter 4, Bryan went on the attack. He cited the notorious passage in Darwin’s Descent of Man. …



Bryan had to be stopped.



…. The most famous reporter at the trial was H. L. Mencken. That Mencken was drawn to Dayton like a moth to a flame is not surprising. He hated fundamentalism. He also loved a good show, which the trial proved to be. But there was something else. He was a dedicated follower of Nietzsche. In 1920, Mencken’s translation of Nietzsche’s 1895 book, The Antichrist, was published. Bryan had specifically targeted Nietzsche in In His Image. “Darwinism leads to a denial of God. Nietzsche carried Darwinism to its logical conclusion.” Mencken was determined to get Bryan if he could.


https://www.garynorth.com/public/19223.cfm
5 540 Read More
Quotes Jump to new posts
Perfect Peace chestnutmare Mon Mar 04, 2024 2:05 PM
"You will keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on You; because he trusts in You."
Isaiah 26:3

And, amid the corroding cares of domestic life, the anxieties of business, the pressure of need, the forebodings of evil, the foreshadowing of calamity, the distant mutterings of some gathering storm, how peacefully God in Christ can keep you! And when the "strife of tongues," the envenomed tooth of malice, the whisperings of envy, the spirit of jealousness and all uncharitableness would wound your heart, destroy your peace, and rob you of comfort-assailing character, reputation, usefulness—God, your reconciled Father, will put you within the curtained pavilion of His love, in the secret place of His perfections, and keep you there, safe, calm, and even cheerful, until the calamity be passed.

~ Octavius Winslow
0 49 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum Jump to new posts
Re: the New Covenant Tom Mon Mar 04, 2024 7:31 AM
Pilgrim
Thanks for expanding on the answer I gave.

Tom
3 480 Read More
What's New on The Highway website? Jump to new posts
"The Necessity of the Atonement" - Jonathan Edwards Pilgrim Fri Mar 01, 2024 11:46 AM
March's 'Article of the Month' is a full course meal served on a small plate. giggle In short, it will require some 'chewing' to digest the food served but there isn't a lot of material on the plate. So, what is Edwards' subject that requires some exercise of mind? It is the necessity of the atonement of Jesus Christ. The late Prof. John Murray answered the question, "Why did Christ have to die?", with... It was "antecedently, absolutely necessary!" Put another way, For God to redeem a sinner of Adam's fallen race, there was no other possible way that could be accomplished other than God Himself becoming a man, living a perfectly righteous life and paying the infinite punishment due to fulfill the law and appease the God offended. So, Jonathan Edwards deals with this question in his own unique way addressing certain objections and questions on this subject. I hope some will come to appreciate what he wrote and thus increase your understanding of the immensity of God's love and grace in providing a Savior for us poor needy souls.

You can read this month's article now by clicking here: The Necessity of the Atonement.

For reading it at a more convenient time along with access to all past Article of the Month articles, go to: The Highway website, scroll down the main page and click on the "Article of the Month" logo.

In His service and grace,
0 197 Read More
Theology Discussion Forum Jump to new posts
Re: Why or how did Jesus not know the time of his 2nd coming? DiscipleEddie Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:20 PM
The doctrine of the impeccability of Christ is an important teaching of the church and it is the basis of the illustration I've used explaining the OP title, so it is relevant for what I wished to show from my own experience. For those not familiar with the teaching, I suggest reading in the Systematic Theology of Robert L. Dabney, which you can read online:
https://grace-ebooks.com/library/Robert%20Dabney/RLD_Systematic%20Theology.pdf

Do a 'Find on Page' for "impecc" and select the 4th occurence. Dabney's presentation on the impeccability of Christ is 4 pages starting on p886 and on page 890 he moves on to "Does Christ Medicate in Both Natures"?" which is important to read following the impeccability of Christ.

Over the years I began to notice that we as Calvinists, in our theology are averse to 'leaving the ends undone' and must understand and explain every difficult text. Lutherans I've found are willing to let a text mean what it says, even if it cannot be easily explained, and this is mentioned by the Lutheran David Kuske in his textbook on interpretation, "Biblical Interpretation, The Only Right Way" -
"John Calvin (d. 1564) followed many of the same principles of interpretation that Luther did. There was one major difference, however. When Scripture says something that is difficult or even impossible for human reason to grasp (e.g. predestination, the real presence in the Lord's Supper, the two natures of Christ), Luther insisted that what Scripture says must be what it means, even though it may not be able to be fully understood. Calvin, on the other hand, felt that any such matter should be interpreted in a way that the meaning of the words were comprehensible to human reason." page 152-153

The impeccability or peccability of Christ dictates how one views Heb. 4:15. Was it possible for Christ to sin, or was it impossible for Christ to sin. In the discussion, the peccability views says he could have sinned in his human nature or it would not have been a true temptation; viewed by the impeccability of Christ he could not have sinned. One brief proof for me is "No one, when tempted, should say, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil and he himself tempts no one. But one is tempted by one’s own desire, being lured and enticed by it; then, when that desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and that sin, when it is fully grown, gives birth to death." (Jas 1:13-15 NRSV)

John Gill in his Body of Divinity states in Book 5, Chap. 1 & 2 - "for in Christ was no sin, lust, or corruptton to stir up" and "Perfect holiness and impeccability: it is called, "the holy Thing"; it is eminently and perfectly so; without original sin, or any actual transgression; it is not conscious of any sin, never committed any, nor is it possible it should."

I therefore deny the possiblity of separating the Human from the Divine in the One Person, the Christ. In view of my belief, what am I to do with Mark 13:32, a favorite used by the Jehovah's Witnesses?

“But about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mark 13:32 NRSV)

If I can't separate the Human from the Divine in Christ as to Heb. 4:15, how can I explain to my human reason, this verse restricting the knowledge of Jesus Christ by restricting this to Christ's human nature apart from his Divinity? I choose to admit I do not have a certain answer to this? I prefer to leave such questions in the realm of the incomprehensibile nature of God and just let the verse mean what it says. In like manner, I deal with such passages as the proof text of Christ's divinity in Zech. 12:10 and a similar statement in 1 Cor. 2:8.

"And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born." (Zech 12:10 ASV) The text refers to [b]Yahweh being pierced, "me whom they have pierced"
[/b]
"...which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory:" (1Cor 2:8 ASV) Again, it is the Almighty God who is "the Lord of glory" that was crucified.

Rather than being dogmatic on theological theories, I prefer to stay with the following:

"Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other." (1Cor 4:6 ASV)

"O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! “For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” (Rom 11:33-34, NRSV)

To see the debate, try an AI Search such as www.phind.com and ask something like "Was the Son of God incarnate omniscient?" Bing's "copilot" is another AI search option as well as perplexity or you.com
2 529 Read More
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 51 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
PaulWatkins, His Unworthy Son, Nahum, TheSojourner, Larry
974 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,505,587 Gospel truth