THE DOOR OF HEAVEN
https://youtu.be/0NcMUtkKZGQ
The door of heaven
ON VIDEO-
.Mystery family tree
.I had a dream
.Meth a demon?
.Granpa’
.Floppin’ on the floor n speakin’ in tongues?
.Agonize thru the door
PAST POSTS [verses below]-
Okay- why do Philosophy- or Physics- or any other of a
number of schools of thought? Because
too often Christians abandon these fields- and then when someone from that
field says ‘this is why we don’t need God’ we usually have no answer.
When we think about philosophy- most of us think about the 3
great big shots- Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. While it is true that these
guys were the major guys at right around the 5th century B.C.- yet
we actually date the beginning point to the early 6TH Century B.C.
to a man by the name of Thales.
Thales accurately predicted a solar eclipse in the year 585
B.C. and he gained notoriety because of this. Thales was the first Greek
thinker to grapple with the idea that there must be one reality that makes up
all things.
He would argue that Water was this element- that contained
being and Motion and life. Many of these pre Socratic thinkers were obsessed
with the idea of motion- where did it come from?
Thales observed that streams and rivers- and all types of
water sources flow- so to him this was a logical source of motion.
This idea- that only one element makes up all reality- is
called Monism. Monism is not be confused with Monotheism- the belief in one
God- Monism actually leads to another religious view- called Pantheism- the
belief that God is everything- and everything is God.
This is not the historic Christian view.
Now- the pre Socratic guys- Parmenides, Zeno, Heraclitus-
these guys would challenge Thales view that water was the main thing.
Some said ‘maybe it’s Air’ another said ‘Earth’ and some
Fire. These 4 elements [Earth, Air [wind] Fire and Water- are the 4 basic
elements of the early Greek philosophers.
We see these things in the naming of musical groups [Earth
Wind and Fire] as well as the themes in movies [fantastic 4- based on 4 basic
elements- powers].
Now- one of the thinkers said ‘wait- maybe the reality
behind all things is not any one of these elements- maybe there is a 5th
dimension [another musical name- and also the famous Bruce Willis flick- called
the 5th Element] a Boundless being- outside of time and matter-
maybe this 5ht element is the foundation for all things.
Of course this view would lead to the more developed view of
God that Socrates and his followers would embrace- an early view of God- much
like the later Christian view [absent the Trinity].
By the way- the view that 2 or more elements make up all
reality is called Pluralism- not to be confused with religious Pluralism [that
all religions lead to the same God]. The most common form of Pluralism is
Dualism [2 realities equally true] but all non Monists who embrace more than
one reality are Pluralists.
Okay- maybe a bit much with the 10 dollar words- but it
might spark the interest of some.
The church has debated for centuries on whether or not
Philosophy should be taught to Christians. One of the early church fathers-
Tertullian- said no- his famous quote is ‘what does Jerusalem have to do with
Athens’.
Meaning what does Philosophy have in common with
Christianity [Athens- Greece was the seat of philosophy in Jesus’ day].
For the most part- the early church fathers would embrace
the study of philosophy- and try to make arguments for the Christian faith by
presenting Christianity as ‘thee’ philosophy that best answers the questions of
man.
These early Christian thinkers are called Apologists- men
like Justin Martyr are in this class.
Apologist is a word we use to describe those who defend the
faith- it comes from the Apostle Peter’s letter in the N.T. where Peter says
‘give an answer to those who ask you about the faith’. In the Greek language-
the original language the N.T. was written in- this phrase is talking about a
defense- an ‘apology’ in the sense of ‘making the case’ not in the common sense
of apologizing.
In the book of Acts- chapter 17- we read the famous sermon
of the apostle Paul- given at Mars Hill.
He was in Athens at the time- and he was debating with all the philosophers of
the day. He tells them ‘as I was looking around town- I saw that one of your
altars is addressed to The Unknown God’.
He would go on and declare unto them that this Jesus is the
true God- the one raised from the dead.
Paul also said ‘in Him we live and MOVE and have our being’.
Kind of a popular verse quoted by preacher’s today- but we often overlook the
significance of the MOVE part.
I mean- why say we MOVE in him too? Paul was a smart guy- he
knew these children of Socrates questioned where motion came from [Remember
Thales?] So he was basically saying ‘I am declaring to you the one true
reality- the true 5th Element- the missing God particle from your
system’ and he went on and preached Christ- being raised from the dead.
Paul knew that you can’t really do true philosophy- to
grapple with the questions of life and being and ‘motion’ without realizing
that God is indeed the ultimate answer to all things.
Even Peter Singer- who claimed that you don’t need God or
religion in order to do Ethics- even he unknowingly quoted Jesus in attempting
to give a basis for his Philosophy- yes- he quoted a God- one unknown to him-
just like the altar at Athens- but a God never the less.
An inescapable 5th element- the missing part to
the whole puzzle.
[1735] THE YEAR UZZIAH DIED
After the debate last night I caught the 1st 7
minutes or so of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. As an avid news watcher- I
try to catch what the most influential pundits are saying at the time.
Though Stewart is a comedian news guy- yet he usually gives
you a balanced view- with a few F bombs thrown in every so often.
[parts]
(848)ROMANS 9: 1-8 Paul returns
to an earlier theme ‘Christ came, as pertaining to the flesh, in response to
the covenants that God made with Israel’ [my paraphrase!] Paul says that
natural Israel played a very important role in the coming of Messiah. He was
[is] the fulfillment of the prophecies that came as a result of Gods
interaction with ‘the commonwealth of Israel’. Now Paul again says ‘they are
not all Israel, which are of Israel, but “in Isaac shall thy seed be called’”.
Understand something here, Paul is not teaching ‘another’ natural lineage to
Christ. The mistake of the worldwide church of God [Herbert Armstrong] which
teaches British Israelism, trying to trace the natural lineage of Europeans and
saying ‘these are the lost tribes’. Paul is simply saying ‘those who are of the
Law, the natural tribe of Israel [Jews] are not automatically counted as ‘the
seed’ [children] but those who ‘are of promise’. Paul also uses this in
Galatians 3 and 4. ‘Of promise’ is simply saying ‘those who have been born of
Gods Spirit [Jew or Gentile] are the children that God promised to Abraham’ he
is the father of ‘many nations’. All who would believe. These themes are
building upon Paul’s earlier theology in this letter. This letter [Romans] has
a little more ‘weight’ than say a pastoral epistle [Timothy, Titus]. Now, I am
not saying it is ‘more inspired’ but I want you to see that even in the book of
Acts you see Paul place special emphasis on ‘I must make it to Rome’! Paul
fully realizes that this letter will be read among the believers and Jews at
Rome. Rome is the capitol city of the Empire. He wants the early believers to
understand the role and purpose of God for Israel. Paul’s efforts are being
seen by some Jewish believers [Jerusalem] as antagonistic. Paul wants to make
it clear that he was not trying to start some type of movement that rejected
natural Israel. At the same time he wants natural Israel ‘my kinsman according
to the flesh’ to receive their Messiah! So in this context Romans is a
theological treatise saying ‘God wants to bring both Jew and Gentile together
as one new man in Christ [Ephesians]’. When he argues ‘they that are the
children of the flesh ARE NOT THE CHILDREN OF GOD[verse 8] but the children of
the promise are counted for the seed’ he is simply saying ‘all people, both
Jews and Gentiles [which includes all races that are ‘non Jews’ even Arabs!]
can partake of this free gift by grace’. The promise is to all who ‘will
believe’.
(849)ROMANS 9:9-23 now we get into
predestination. Paul uses the example of Jacob and Esau [I spoke on this in the
Genesis study, see chapter 25], he says God chose Jacob over Esau before they
were born. He also uses the story of Pharaoh and says God was the one who
hardened his heart. Paul says these things show us that God’s mercy and choice
are a sovereign act. He specifically says ‘God chose Jacob, not on the basis of
any thing he did [or would do!] but because of his own sovereign choice’. Now,
this is another one of those arguments where Paul says ‘you will then say to
me, how can God find fault? If everyone is simply doing the things he
preordained, fulfilling destiny, then how can God justly hold people
accountable’? First, I want you to see that this statement, that Paul is
putting into the mouths of his opponents, only makes sense from the classic
position of predestination. Second, if predestination only spoke of Gods
foreknowledge of the choices that people were going to make [like asking Jesus
into their heart!] then the obvious response to the argument would be ‘Oh, God
chose Jacob because he knew what a good boy he was going to be’. Not only would
this be wrong, Jacob [the supplanter] was not a ‘good boy’, but Paul does not
use this defense in arguing his case. He simply says ‘who are we to question
God? Can the thing formed say to him that formed it “why have you made me like
this”? It seems as if Paul’s understanding of predestination was in the
Augustinian/Calvinistic Tradition. A few years back a popular author on the
west coast, Dave Hunt, wrote a book called ‘what kind of love is this’? He took
on the Reformed Faiths understanding of predestination. Dave was a little out
of his league in the book. He seemed to not fully grasp the historic understanding
of the doctrine. He quoted some stuff from Charles Spurgeon that made it sound
like he was not a believer in predestination. Spurgeon did make strong
statements against certain ideas that were [are] prevalent in classic
Calvinism. Some taught that Christ’s Blood was shed only for the elect. This is
called ‘particular redemption’ or from the famous ‘Tulip’ example ‘limited
atonement’. Spurgeon did not embrace the idea that Christ’s Blood was not
sufficient to cover the sins of the whole world. The problem with Hunt using
this true example from Spurgeon, is that he overlooked the other obvious
statements from Spurgeon that place him squarely in the Calvinistic camp. Some
refer to this as ‘4 point Calvinism’. I myself agree with Spurgeon on this
point. The reason I mention this whole thing is to show you that major
Christian figures have dealt with these texts and have struggled with the
obvious difficulties involved. I think Paul does a little ‘speculative
theology’ himself in this chapter. He says ‘what if God willing to show his
mercy and wrath permitted certain things’. He gives possible reasons for the
seeming ‘unfairness’ of this doctrine. The point I want to stress is Paul never
tries to defend it from the classic Arminian understanding, that says ‘God knew
the way people were going to choose, and he simply ‘foreordained’ those who
would choose right’. To be honest, this argument does answer the question in
the minds of many believers, I simply don’t see it to be accurate.
(851)ROMANS 9:24-29 Paul quotes
Hosea and Isaiah to show that God has a purpose for both Jew and Gentile. He
uses a few verses from Isaiah 10 and 13 to say ‘except the lord had left us a
remnant, no one would be left’. Now, once again we come up against the mindset
of always reading ‘saved’ as meaning ‘born again’. In context, God ‘saving’ a
remnant simply means ‘he spared them from ruin and total destruction’. There is
a verse in Revelation that says ‘the nations of them which are saved shall
enjoy the new heavens and earth’. Some commentators will show you how some
versions leave out ‘which are saved’ which would leave the text as saying ‘the
nations [that are left, remain!] shall walk in it’. This is the context here.
Paul is saying God always had a few from Israel that remained, he didn’t
utterly wipe them out. Now, this of course fits in with ‘having sins forgiven’,
being ‘saved’ or redeemed. There are prophets who say ‘the Lord will turn away
ungodliness from Jacob’ [delivered from sin] and ‘the lord comes to those who
have turned away from their sin’ speaking of Israel. So I want you to grasp the
biblical concept of God saving [sparing] a remnant. The word ‘remnant’ actually
speaks of the part of cloth/ material that is ‘left over’ from the whole piece.
Jesus also said ‘unless those days were shortened, their would no flesh “be
saved”’. Once again meaning ‘no human would survive unless God cut short his
wrath’. Paul also uses this language here ‘the lord will do a quick work on the
earth and cut it short [shortened!] in righteousness’.
(853)ROMANS 9: 30-33 ‘What shall
we say then? That the Gentiles which followed not after the law of
righteousness have attained it, even by faith’.
Paul concludes the chapter by summing up his ‘righteousness by faith’
argument. Natural Israel, who sought to become righteous by law, who were
always striving for perfection thru the keeping of the law. They did not attain
that which they sought after. Why? Because they sought it ‘not by faith, but by
law’. No law could ever make a man righteous. The Gentiles, which were not even
looking! They got it. Why? Because they simply believed in the Messiah, it was
the best message they ever heard. They were told their whole lives ‘you are
separated from Gods promises. You are not included in the commonwealth of
Israel’. They never dreamed that the Jewish Messiah would say ‘neither do I
condemn thee, go and sin no more’. They received Gods righteousness by faith.
Israel ‘stumbled’ at the stumbling stone. Jesus is called a precious stone and
also a rock of offence. To those who believe, he is great, precious. To those
who don’t believe he is this tremendous obstacle. The unbelieving world doesn’t
know what to do with him. I was watching Ravi Zacharias the other night. He is
a good Christian apologist. He was telling the story of being in Russia and
speaking to a large group of Atheists. During his talk they were really
aggressive, making motions with their hands and all. He was told ahead of time
to be prepared. At the question and answer time a Russian Atheist asked ‘what
are you talking about when you say God? I have no idea what you mean by this
false concept’. Ravi asked him ‘sir, are you an Atheist?’ He replied yes. ‘What
is an Atheist’? Ravi asked. The man responded ‘someone who denies God’. Ravi
said ‘what exactly is it that you are denying’? The unbeliever has come up
against this ‘rock of offence’. He tries to get around it, to develop all types
of systems and philosophies to deny it. The rock is there, you can either ‘fall
on it’. That is admit he is who he claims to be. Submit and be ‘broken’. Or it
will eventually ‘grind you to powder’. You will pass from the scene and the
next crop of Atheists will rise and face the same dilemma. This rock ‘aint
going away’.
ROMANS 10 [On the video I give a
broad overview of the doctrine ‘the salvation of the righteous’. I cover many
verses not in the post].
.DOES THE BIBLE TEACH ‘A SINNERS
PRAYER”?
.DOES THIS CHAPTER SAY ‘THOSE WHO
CALLED/ASKED- DID NOT GET IT?
.IS THEIR A ‘RIGHTEOUS MAN’S
PRAYER’ THAT BRINGS SALVATION?
. PLEASE- LETS STOP DIVIDING OVER
SMALL STUFF-
(854)ROMANS 10: 1-13 Many years ago I referenced all the
back up scriptures for this chapter [and book!]. The study was intense because
I saw a fundamental ‘fault line’ that ran thru many in the Evangelical church
[the revivalist tradition]. The ‘fault line’ was reading this chapter as in if
it were saying ‘ask Jesus into your heart, or you won’t be saved’. Now, I have
no problem with those who trace their conversion to an experience like this.
But I want to give you my understanding of this chapter, based on the
exhaustive study I did years ago. Also, I will probably quote some verses and
you will have to find them later [I forget where they all are]. Paul begins
with his desire for ‘all Israel to be saved’. I taught in chapter one how come
the gospel is the power of God unto salvation.
[parts]
VERSES-
Luke
13:20 And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?Luke 13:21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
Luke 13:22 And he went through the cities and villages, teaching, and journeying toward Jerusalem.
Luke 13:23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
Luke 13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
Luke 13:25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
Luke 13:26 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
Luke 13:27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice
which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up
hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. Rev. 4:1
And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it
reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it.
Gen. 28:12
Wherefore I put thee
in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. 2nd Tim.
9 And a
vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and
prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.
10 And after
he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia,
assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for to preach the gospel unto
them.
Acts 16:9-10
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and
broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in
thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is
the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matt.
7:13-14
And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they
that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Matt. 25:10
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto
you, I am the door of
the sheep. Jn. 10:7
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first
voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said,
Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
Rev. 4:1
facebook.com/john.chiarello.5
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts-
re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. I deal with
issues at times that it would be beneficial for some of you to download and
save the file from the Word Press link. This creates a permanent record. The
on-line videos are only good if sites are not hacked- which has happened in the
past. Thanks- John.#
No comments:
Post a Comment