I
was reading in I Kings this morning about Abijam, the king who
succeeded Rehoboam. I Kings 15:5 "because David did what was right in
the sight of the Lord, and had not turned aside from anything that He
commanded him all the days of his life, except in the case of Uriah the
Hittite." Even after David's death, this was the biggest blot on his
character. Sorry, but I'm not blaming Uriah here. He's a man of
integrity!
If you look in Acts after Christ had actually
taken care of the sin... and taken all the spoils for His ownership that
phrase about Uriah is left out. Look in Acts. It only says.. David did
everything the Lord wanted him to do. So there is a New Covenant
completed focus on turning to Christ as opposed to the old covenant
looking forward to Christ. And this is repeated by the Apostle when He
said that the apostle was not guilty of any mans blood.
| 2041
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Meditation
|
on: October 18, 2011, 12:06:17 PM
|
Unfortunately just emptying a mind opens it up for influences other than the Holy Spirit.
To
be quite honest, I have never experienced an empty mind. I don't
think such a thing is possible. To have no thoughts is to be dead.
Meditation just loosens my compulsive grip on those thoughts. Satan
has never had a problem getting into my head, whether my mind is still
or active. Hey, I'm a sinner. Let's be honest. . . if keeping our
mind full of scripture prevented us from giving in to evil influences
then there would never be any church quarrels, right? Preachers would
be perfect, etc etc. I'm realistic. I DO meditate on the Word of
God. I am not substituting filling my spirit with the Word and
quieting my mind with a meditation. Like I said, I ain't looking for
salvation through TM. Just like I wouldn't expect jogging and eating
right and having a fit body to be a way of pleasing God enough to get
into Heaven. I really appreciate all the responses. I'm
still debating. Something in me has become uneasy about the topic. I
just want the truth. I don't want to be a stuffy religious donkey
about this. I do that too often. I think having the Mind of Christ
doesn't mean we have to close ours. Thanks again.
We
are all subject to tension in this life. Anxiety is an irritation
because we are sinners. The problem is that we most of the time , do not
understand what we are angry about. A lot of people are only able to
judge themselves on the level they of their own knowledge. This is the
same thing as saying we are what we think. When i approach meditation of
Gods word there is a passive addition ...active searching from the
Spirit and a kind of musing from my meditation. So this is really not a
universe where we exist in a vacuum. Our conscious level of peace is in
word form. So the words lead us down a road to understanding. The
old reformers used to call this preaching the gospel to ourselves .In
the Psalms...David actually speaks to his own soul. Now when we say he
speaks and says Put your hope in God!!! Hes actually not really speaking
to something that he does not possess but he is speaking to himself. I
hear a lot of this forget about oneself or do not be overly concerned
for ourselves because every time we look at ourselves we become
depressed. But i do not see how the gospel can be personal to us unless
we actively look at ourselves as if we needed a doctor to tell us what
is wrong. lol.How can a message just be outside of us and be personal to
us unless it pertains to something we experience? Does not make sense
to me. The bible is not just a book with a message about someone who
took care of everything a long time ago, but its a tool to a holistic
understanding of who we are. The reformers used to say that pleading the
promises brought about a change of experience because it was directly
related to their assurance. Assurance is not just through faith in
His word but its through direct communication that we are children of
God. Ive listen to some people who teach reformed theology and there are
many ways that we can teach something that looks like gifted faith but
its nothing but a back door way to teach pre salvation human faith. If
we say that the only way that God speaks is through the word with an
application of our faith then it would seem to me that salvation was
offered to us as a gift but then it was necessary that we applied the
faith with our own strength. In other words faith is initially a gift
but after that in order for it to work it must be applied by us. So i
ask where is the sola grace in this proposition? If faith comes by
hearing and hearing by the word of God doesnt the cause of our assurance
originate from grace? In other words our faith is what we understand by
the gifts of these spiritual senses and not the activity of faith
itself. The message of faith is actually through a divine fiat and not
through our determination to focus on the gospel message.
|
 Reply
 Quote
 Notify
|
|
2044
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: It takes a general to defeat a prince.
|
on: October 18, 2011, 07:45:50 AM
|
MBG,
your assertion that Uriah "shouldn't have gotten drunk" disregards the
fact that 1. David got him drunk and 2. David suffered horribly for his
sin. Oh, and 3. it's kind of hard to say David didn't act on vengeance
when his last words to Solomon were for him to not let Joab die in
peace.
We might also note that David got him drunk so he
would have sex with his wife and take the blame for the pregnancy of his
wife which was David's responsibility. But Uriah was such a loyal man
to David that he wouldn't go near his wife, for he wanted no softer life
than his men who were fighting David's war. 2 Samuel 11:8-13 And
David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So
Uriah departed from the king’s house, and a gift of food from the king
followed him. But Uriah slept at the door of the king’s house with all
the servants of his lord, and did not go down to his house. So when
they told David, saying, “Uriah did not go down to his house,” David
said to Uriah, “Did you not come from a journey? Why did you not go down
to your house?” And Uriah said to David, “The Ark and Israel and
Judah are dwelling in tents, and my lord Joab and the servants of my
lord are encamped in the open fields. Shall I then go to my house to eat
and drink, and to lie with my wife? As you live, and as your soul
lives, I will not do this thing.” Then David said to Uriah, “Wait
here today also, and tomorrow I will let you depart.” So Uriah remained
in Jerusalem that day and the next. Now when David called him, he ate
and drank before him; and he made him drunk. And at evening he went out
to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but he did not go down
to his house." K_k: I think you are trying hard to make David
look good here, mbG, but he was clearly trying to discredit a loyal
soldier, not a traitor.
Heres the just results in the
story. David takes Uriahs wife in adultery , brings her husband back to
Jerusalem while Bathsheba remains completely silent about the whole
thing ... maybe in honor of the king.. lol. David gets him drunk then
because he does not follow the kings advice... that advice was
completely an evil scheme ...of which Bathsheba was probably in on it.
David then sends Uriah out to be murdered ...which is really the result
of the kings insubordination. Uriah ends up slain in the
battle..probably a terrible death like a sword through the heart. What
was Gods response? He disciplined David but did not carry out the
justice that David deserved. Instead God pronounced the birth of Davids
child from the adulteress as saying He loved Solomon... which
pronouncement was not said of any of his other children. Then on top of
this David joins Josiah in the battle field against the Syrians and ends
up slaying thousands of the enemy .. David is crowned with the enemies
golden crown and David is blessed with more gold and the spoils of war
than in any other war. He takes the Syrians and makes them his slaves. David
was blessed more after his adultery and murder than before it. So David
commits crimes that not only he deserved to be dethroned he should have
received death. Instead God takes the evil and turns it into good even
tho David suffered from the discipline yet he never lost a battle after
that. All of those men who went against him in his own military were
slain. Even after his death the punishment for treason against David was
carried out by Solomon. I wont even talk about how much Solomon
dishonored the covenant and got away with it. And Solomon was called the
wisest man both past and present of all men.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2045
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: OF THE WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST IN OUR SALVATION... Thomas Goodwin
|
on: October 16, 2011, 12:43:26 PM
|
|
Some would understand that speech of Christ's,
'Who proceedeth from the Father,' to be meant in respect of God's
sending him forth to us, and his embassage to us. But that had been said
by Christ in the words afore, 'Whom I will send from the Father;' and
therefore to intend the words after—' Who cometh from the Father'—of an
ambassador's sending, had been needless, for Christ had said that
already; and therefore if that had been all the meaning of that
addition, he had but said the same over a second time. There is
therefore, in those speeches, a manifest distiagtiishing between that
dispensatory sending of him from the Father to them, and that
substantial proceeding of his from the Father, as a third person ; and
this is added to shew the original ground, why it must be from the
Father that he sends him, and with his consent first had; because his
very person is by proceeding from the Father, and therefore this his
office too. And therefore that latter is spoken in the present time,
whereas that other speech of Christ's, ' Whom I will send from the
Father,' is in the future; because the Holy Ghost his dispensatory
sending, both from the Father and from Christ, was yet to come; whereas
this personal proceeding of his from the Father was then, when he spake
it, and is continually, and had been from eternity. The Holy Spirit
as agreed to be sent out from the Father and Christ in a greater way in
coming upon the NT church at Pentecost. But He has always preceded from
the Father from eternity past. mbG
Now the tendency of these
reiterated designations of the person, doth manifest Christ's sedulous
intention, and tender regard to, and for the honour of this, so great a
person; and to raise up in their hearts a valuation of this person
himself, that should be the Comforter; and to make them careful to give
glory to him, even the Holy Ghost, as a third person, and the Comforter.
As likewise to assure them of his coming upon them, when himself was
gone; and that therefore they might honour him in his coming, for his
work, as he would have them to honour himself for his own work, and
coming in the flesh. It is as if he had said, I would not, for that
honour I ever look for from yourselves, that you should so attribute the
comfort yon shall have, or the revealing of truth to you (from which he
is called 'the Spirit of truth'), so unto me or my Father alone, as to
neglect or omit to give him his peculiar honour in it; for it properly,
and of due, belongs to him. You are and shall be beholden to me and my
Father, for the sending of him; but you are to be especially beholden to
himself, for that work he doth in you, being sent by us. Be sure
therefore to take notice of him and his person, distinct both from me
and my Father. For it is 'another Comforter' (says he, ver. 16) 'which
is the Holy Ghost,' (ver. 26), and therefore you ought as distinctly to
glorify him as you would do us. In this NT preceding from Christ its
like a baptism that Christ does to us for the purpose of experiencing
the Holy Spirit as a Comforter. mbG
|
 Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2046
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Freedom of the Will.... J. Edwards
|
on: October 16, 2011, 12:41:28 PM
|
|
Things that exist in the view of the mind have
their strength, tendency, or advantage to move, or excite its Will,
from many things appertaining to the nature and circumstances of the
thing viewed, the nature and circumstances of the mind the mind that
views, and the degree and manner of its view; of which it would perhaps
be hard to make a perfect enumeration.
But
so much I think may be determined in general, without room for
controversy, that whatever is perceived or apprehended by an intelligent
and voluntary agent, which has the nature and influence of a motive to
volition or choice, is considered or viewed as good; nor has it any
tendency to engage the election of the soul in any further degree than
it appears such. Kind of like the nature of the thing is the creation of the reality as it creates the motive. mbG
For
to say otherwise, would be to say, that things that appear, have a
tendency, by the appearance they make, to engage the mind to elect them,
some other way than by their appearing eligible to it; which is absurd.
And therefore it must be true, in some sense, that the will always is, as the greatest apparent good is. But only, for the right understanding of this, two things must be well and distinctly observed.
1.
It must be observed in what sense I use the term "good;" namely, as of
the same import with "agreeable." To appear good to the mind, as I use
the phrase, is the same as to appear agreeable, or seem pleasing to the
mind. Certainly, nothing appears inviting and eligible to the mind, or
tending to engage its inclination and choice, considered as evil or
disagreeable; nor indeed, as indifferent, and neither agreeable nor
disagreeable. But if it tends to draw the inclination, and move the
Will, it must be under the notion of that which suits the mind. The truth itself is in the nature as a plant grows in the nourishing soil.mbG
And therefore that must have the greatest tendency to attract and engage it, which as it stands in the mind's view, suits it best,
and pleases it most; and in that sense, is the greatest apparent good:
to say otherwise, is little, if any thing, short of a direct and plain
contradiction. the mind can not be free in an equilibrium sense mbG
The
word "good," in this sense, includes in its signification, the removal
or avoiding of evil, or of that which is disagreeable and uneasy. It is
agreeable and pleasing, to avoid what is disagreeable and displeasing,
and to have uneasiness removed. So that here is included what Mr. Locke
supposes determines the will. For when he speaks of "uneasiness," as
determining the will, he must be understood as supposing that the end or
aim which governs in the volition or act of preference, is the avoiding
or the removal of that uneasiness; and that is the same thing as
choosing and seeking what is more easy and agreeable. a natural inclination according to its nature. mbG
|
|
Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2047
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Freedom of the Will.... J. Edwards
|
on: October 15, 2011, 11:55:41 AM
|
|
CONCERNING THE DETERMINATION OF THE WILL
BY
determining the Will, if the phrase be used with any meaning, must be
intended, causing that the act of the Will or choice should be thus, and
not otherwise: and the Will is said to be determined, when, in
consequence of some action, or influence, its choice is directed to, and
fixed upon a particular object. As when we speak of the determination
of motion, we mean causing the motion of the body to be in such a
direction, rather than another.
The Determination of the Will, supposes an effect, which must have a cause.
If the Will be determined, there is a Determiner.
This must be supposed to be intended even by them that say, The Will
determines itself. If it be so, the Will is both Determiner and
determined; it is a cause that acts and produces effects upon itself,
and is the object of its own influence and action. This is a contradiction.mbG
With
respect to that grand inquiry, "What determines the Will?'' it would be
very tedious and unnecessary, at present, to examine all the various
opinions, which have been advanced concerning this matter; nor is it
needful that I should enter into a particular discussion of all points
debated in disputes on that other question, "Whether the Will always
follows the last dictate of the understanding?"
It
is sufficient to my present purpose to say, It is that motive, which,
as it stands in view of the mind, is the strongest, that determines the
will. Cause and effect. mbG
But may be necessary that I should a little explain my meaning.
By
motive I mean the whole of that which moves, excites, or invites the
mind to volition, whether that be one thing singly, or many things
conjunctly. Many particular things may concur, and unite their strength,
to induce the mind; and when it is so, all together are as one complex
motive. And when I speak of the strongest motive,
I have respect to the strength of the whole that operates to induce a
particular act of volition, whether that be the strength of one thing
alone, or of many together.
Whatever is objectively a motive, in
this sense, must, be something that is extant in the view or
apprehension of the understanding, or perceiving faculty. Nothing can
induce or invite the mind to will or act any thing, any further than it is perceived, or is some way or other in the mind's view; for what is wholly unperceived and perfectly out of the mind's view, cannot affect the mind
at all. It is most evident, that nothing is in the mind, or reaches it,
or takes any hold of it, any otherwise than as it is perceived or
thought of.
And I think it must also be allowed by all, that
every thing that is properly called a motive, excitement, or inducement
to a perceiving, willing agent, has some sort and degree of tendency, or
advantage to move or excite the Will, previous to the effect, or to the act of the will excited.
This previous tendency of the motive is what I call the strength of the
motive. That motive which has a less degree of previous advantage, or
tendency to move the Will, or which appears less inviting, as it stands
in the view of the mind, is What I call a weaker motive.
On the contrary, that which appears most inviting, and has, by what
appears concerning it to the understanding or apprehension, the greatest
degree of previous tendency to excite and induce the choice, is what I
call the strongest motive. And in this sense, I suppose the will is always determined by the strongest motive.
|
|
Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2048
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: The Doctrine of Election
|
on: October 15, 2011, 11:51:22 AM
|
From
your own descriptions of what you think those who believe in Biblical
based free will are saying, you show that you are attacking a strawman
or just tilting windmills. No one thinks about free will the way you're
talking. I listened to RC Scroul's talk and it's apparent he's confused
too. He thinks man does have free will but it is more like a rat in a
small carefully constructed maze, which pushes him along to a
predetermined destination. So G-d created rats in a maze? That's the best He could do? ...Amazing! That’s insulting to G-d. RJ
suggests man is predestined and has free will at the same time...that
is free to go in only one direction, i.e., heaven or hell! Of
course there are mediating forces acting upon all of us…its call the
world. I choose to go to the store and get stopped by a cop. I get up
to go to work and I find that I am sick. Those are outside influences. I
see a woman that is super attractive and want her but she is married so
I can’t and I deny myself that desire. Lust is an internal influence
but my moral sense, fear &/or will may hold me in check. There are
many things that thwart our desires and sometimes it’s our own will.
Sometimes we are driven to give in to our desire but weakly resist
knowing it is wrong. Sometimes G-d intervenes to help us. Life is very
complex and that is the way G-d wants it. He can handle it even though
many think free will is too dangerous for G-d to allow in creation. G-d
is almighty I think He can handle anything. Thor  I'm a humanist?  ...anything but! Heres
my problem with your reasoning. First your telling me that if we do not
repent then God rejects us. And if we do not continue in our repentance
then God will abandon us. But then you say there are other reasons that
cause us to choose. above.. Im wondering are we responsible or is it
these other things? Seems like you are all over the place. Im
wondering whether both of these reasons are equal. Our strength of will
and the circumstances of this life. I find it amusing that a person who
is so dogmatic about the human determination also is so quick to give
excuses. And it seems to me that this confusion comes because you do not
understand the law of non contradiction. So i completely understand
your reasoning about both outward circumstances and lack of the power to
will are both the cause...lol... Its logical to me that your
incoherent choices between not doing something and doing something equal
doing something in freedom or our own power. lol. All you guys are the
same.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2050
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: OF THE WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST IN OUR SALVATION... Thomas Goodwin
|
on: October 15, 2011, 11:00:50 AM
|
|
In prosecution of my design, to persuade you
to honour the Holy Ghost as you do the Father and the Son, I shall
consider the 14th, 15th, and 16th chapters of John, and make some
general observations upon various passages in those chapters serving to
this purpose; and we shall see therein what a valuation the Father and
the Son, the other persons with him, have in those chapters put upon him
and his work, and what a great and singular matter they make of his
work, and what divine esteem of his person, as by Christ's speeches
scattered up and down therein appears. Though the Father himself doth
not immediately speak, yet the Son doth in his name, as well as in his
own. And you may well take their judgments, for they are sharers and
co-rivals with him in point of glory about our salvation; the work of
which I shall only treat of.
There are these general observations
which I shall make upon the whole series of the aforesaid chapters,
which serve the design of my discourse.
Obs. 1. First, Our
Saviour had abundantly in all his former sermons discoursed both his
work and hand in our salvation, as also his Father's; and now at last,
just when he was to go out of the world, he then, and not till then,
doth more plainly and more fully discover to them this third person,
that had an after-work left to him, who to that end was to come when he
should be gone, and was to come visibly upon the stage, to act visibly a
new scone of works, left by the Father and himself unto him: John xiv.
16, * I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter.'
He had said, chap. viii. 17, that 'the testimony of two men' (or persons) ' is true;' and that he himself was one witness of those two there spoken of, and his Father another: ver. 18, 'I am one that bear witness of myself,
and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.' And he tells us
here, you see, that there is yet another, distinct from the Father and
himself; for in his saying, 'I will pray the Father to give you another
Comforter,' he must mean a third person, distinct from them both, to be
that other. And moreover this Spirit, as another person, is said
likewise to be a third witness of, and
unto Christ; John xv. 26, and so is to be joined as a person, and third
witness with these two: 'When the Comforter is come, whom I will send
unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth
from the Father, he shall testify of me ;' like as of the Father and
himself, the same had been spoken in that chap. viii. ver. 18, last
cited. And the coherence with ver. 17 argues their being witnesses
alike, to be distinct persons each from other, for, ver. 17, he allegeth
the law, 'It is written in your law, that the testimony of two men is
true.' For therein lies the validity of their testimony, that they must
be two men or two persons that mike up a legal testimony. And in this
15th chap. ver. 26, there is the Holy Ghost as a third witness brought
into court to testify with both; and therefore he is a person if a
witness, for there are three persons if three witnesses, and the law
itself he cites says, 'Under the mouth of two or three witnesses shall
the matter be established,' Deut. xix. 15, and Matt. xviii. 16. We may
also observe how industriously careful Christ is further to characterise
this person of the Holy Spirit, the author of these works,
and to describe who he was, and what manner of person, that they might
be sure to mind him, and have a regard to him, and to know whom and to
what name they were to be so much beholden. Thus, ver. 26, ' The
Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost' (says he); and ver. 17, ' Even the
Spirit of truth ;' and chap. xv. 26, 'Whom I will send unto you from the
Father, who proceedeth from the Father.' Which last addition is to shew
the divine procession of the Holy Ghost, and the original and the
consubstantiality of his person, to be out of the substance of the
Father, proceeding from him; as (1 Cor. ii. 12) the apostle signaliseth
him, 'The Spirit that is out of God ;' or (which is all one) that hath
his subsistence, or his being a person, by proceeding from God the
Father, and so being God with God, insomuch as it is not in anywise to
be understood that he subsisted extra Beam, out of, or separate from God; for he had said, ver. 11, that he is in God, even as the spirit of a man is said to be in him.
|
|
Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2052
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Meditation
|
on: October 15, 2011, 10:09:17 AM
|
Thanks
for your response. I hope I am reading it correctly. Are you saying
that TM is a no no? Because only God can give our minds rest?
Following
that argument, wouldn't that kind of thought be like saying that there
is no need for physical exercise because only God can give you good
health, and there is nothing you can do to be healthy or unhealthy
unless God gives it?
Like I said, I don't use TM like many do. I
have no expectations except to wind down. Some grab a beer. I sit
and meditate. I don't mix it or confuse it with God or His Word in my
life. I treat it like a workout. That's all.
But I do see
your point, which may be right. I'm still growing in my understanding
and believe there was a reason I asked the question in the first place.
Thanks again.
Thanks
for your response. I do not bite. But at the same time its become clear
to me there are some people on here who want to respond to my post with
a general accusation instead of asking me about the specific statements
they do not understand. The time i spend here is to discuss theology
and its also to create ideas that are difficult to understand. I want it
to be as difficult as it possibly can be with the purpose of getting to
the bottom of the reasoning of the other side. I like to try to
approach this in trying to write as a personal experience that goes on
in the minds of people and not just spoon feeding someone what other
theologians have said. I hope we can approach the lack of understanding
by particular questions rather than sitting back and making general
observations. I react genuinely toward different people and the style
they have. Since i have been here ive never complained about the way
another person writes. I ve always understood what they are saying
...even the post on the Edwards downloads. Ok...I do not believe
that the practical way of doing things is wrong. I know that in
attacking physical problems we need to use the proper medication and
technique to address them. Nor do i want to say that the way a person
does things must be the way ive learned to do them. If you know anything
about me i am in my personal life practice these things as they have
been taught to me and as if i was on this path and God brought these
people into my life to teach me a specific thing to do for me . So i
believe that we are all different and there is never the same way to
approach a problem. This is a personal universe in which when we seek to
glorify God we are amazed that He is more concerned for the very small
things in our lives and He does these things with the concern that we
know He is teaching us. He gives us a real assurance since its exactly
what we need at the time to address our suffering. I want the most free
available reason to show that we are individually connected to the
Shepherds voice. We think that God must act in a general way
through forgiveness, reconciliation, bringing us to a peaceful state...
but God is more detailed than the best the world offers in advice. God
does things through many different second causes that seem to be
absolutely foolish in our culture and its only when we accept that even
when we think we are getting things in order in our lives that we are
simply displaying our tendency to take things into our own hands. And
even in spite of trusting in our own reasoning God is able to work these
deceitful ways for His glory and for our good. Its just from our side
it seems messy and it produces a lot of friction in how other people see
our lives. God is more coy and sly than any one on this earth. He does
whatever pleases Him. I hope you can understand what i am saying... lol
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2053
|
Forums / Theology Forum / OF THE WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST IN OUR SALVATION... Thomas Goodwin
|
on: October 14, 2011, 09:40:38 AM
|
|
CHAPTER I.
Some general observations premised out of the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth chapters of St John's Gospel.
Theee
is a general omission in the saints of God, in their not giving the
Holy Ghost that glory that is due to his person, and for his great work
of salvation in us, insomuch that we have in our hearts almost lost this
third person. We give daily in our thoughts, prayers, affections, and
speeches, an honour to the Father and the Son; but who almost directs
the aims of his praise (more than in that general way of doxology we use
to close our prayers with, 'All glory be,' &c.) unto God the Holy
Ghost? He is a person in the Godhead equal with the Father and the Son;
and the wprk he doth for us in its kind is as great as those of the
Father or the Son. Therefore, by the equity of all law, a proportionable
honour from us is due to him. God's ordination amongst men is, that we
should ' render to all their due, honour to whom honour is due,' Rom.
xiii. 1. To the magistracy (which there he speaks it of) according to
their place and dignity; and this he makes a debt, a due, ver. 8. And
the like is enjoined concerning ministers, that are instruments of our
spiritual good, that we should • esteem them very highly for their
work's sake,' 1 Thes. v. 18. Let the same law, I beseech you, take place
in your hearts towards the Holy Ghost, as well as the other two persons
of the Trinity. The Holy Ghost is indeed the last in order of the
persons, as proceeding from the other two, yet in the participation of
the Godhead he is equal with them both; and in his work, though it be
last done for as, he is not behind them, nor in the glory of it inferior
to what they have in theirs. And indeed he would not be God, equal with
the Father and the Son, if the work allotted to him, to shew he is God,
were not equal unto each of theirs. And indeed, no less than all that
is done, or to be done in us, was left to the Holy Ghost's share, for
the ultimate execution of it; and it was not left him as the refuse, it
being as necessary and as great as any of theirs. But he being the last
person, took his own lot of the works about our salvation, which are the
last, which is to apply all, and to make all actually ours, whatever
the other two had done afore for us. The scope of this treatise is to
set forth this work to you in the amplitude of it, to the end you may
accordingly in your hearts honour this blessed and holy Spirit. And
surely if to neglect the notice and observation of an attribute of God,
eminently imprinted on such or such a work of God's, as of power in the
creation, justice in governing the world, mercy in bearing with sinners,
grace in our salvation; if this be made so great a sin (Rom. i.) then
it must be deemed a greater diminution to the Godhead to neglect the
glorifying one of these persons, who is possessed of the whole Godhead
and attributes, when he is manifested or interested in any work most
gloriously.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2055
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Mind Renewal Through Transparency : The Psychology of Life
|
on: October 13, 2011, 02:20:05 PM
|
I'm with you in most everything you say here. One problem:
mbG:
"But God must love us with the only purpose in loving us as to show
that He alone deserves the praise because He alone is the only one who
is pleased with His standard of love."
K_k: He loves us because
He is by very nature perfect love, not to get praise from us. The
praise will come when we awaken to Him -- our returning His love to Him
is part of that praise. And He gives us growing pleasure with His
Standards of His love as we come to know Him more intimately.
Praise
is owed to God in an unlimited amount because it is based upon Gods
worthiness and not on our proclaiming that He is worthy. Praise as
focused on God is that emanation of pleasure from God. I would say there
is desires that God places in us that we could not fathom. So in a
sense all of this emanation of Gods gifts to us .. His love.. goodness..
faithfulness are in this emanated pleasure that consumes our own love
and good desires. The apostle concluded that Gods love was gifted to us
in such a way that we would be consumed in the height ...depth and
length of that love. God gifts us with a consuming pleasure in response
to our praise that is without the true sense of our completed self
image. I do believe that Christ in us is this gift for our miss guided
ability that creates in us such pleasure at times that we cease to exist
being so consumed in Him. We no longer live but Christ lives in us. Praising
God is His gift to us as our experiencing this consuming love. So we
conclude like the Psalmist that we did not praise Him in the past like
He deserves. There is not enough power and vision to praise God like He
deserves. In this sense God must act upon us in order for us to be able
to praise Him. In our acknowledging that He deserves our praise before
we praise Him then we are in this panting after God focus. So this
experience is God entering our space and creating a future pleasure of
longings in us that cannot be satisfied. We enjoy the consuming of our
human vision of worth and we enjoy Christ in us as an experience. We are
filled with longings for God that cannot be satisfied.
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment