SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : If Noah, who was not born again, was a preacher of righteousness . .

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Internet Trolls

Quote:
Just want to issue a warning to those who have not been on this forum for very long that Intense has been attempting to spread false doctrines on this site for many years now, usually under the nickname Ormly. If you do a search under that name you will find much that will give you an understanding of the merry-go-round that he has attempted to put this forum on in the past.



in worldly terms, Intense/Ormly is an "internet troll"...for an explaination:

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFTT]Internet Trolls[/url]

the second best way to stop them, DNFTT, "do not feed the trolls", the best of course is if the moderators take him in hand, ask him to turn, failing that, ejection.

 2009/5/26 10:14









 Re:


anonymity wrote:
Intense,

Quote:
Their best shot in the OT was Justification by faith, in God.



Quote:
Jesus is God.



Oh? What do I do with this that speaks otherwise: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."
Luke 1:32-33 (KJV)

Quote:
Therefore if they had faith in God they had it in Jesus. The Gospel was preached to them for one instance Eve was told that her seed would smash Satan's head.

I will still say that even if they were not born again in a concealed way that they were seriously influenced by the Holy Spirit and therefore it was not by them but the grace of God for by nature man is enslaved to sin.



Say what you will however, answers to other questions will elude you.

Quote:
I was also saying that Noah was not righteous before God because of His own works of righteousness but by His faith which resulted in righteousness.



Good. Then we agree on that.

Quote:
Job did not keep God's law perfectly He came to a point of practicing righteousness but He was not perfect.



No one was perfect, that is true however, Job walked in the light given him that kept him from offenses. It is called walking blamelessly before the Lord. Job was blameless.

Quote:
For you to say that is to reveal you haven't read most posts very well nor are you grasping what Paul taught on the matter.



Quote:
From what I have read in this thread I have only seen 2 posts. I meant to write IF you are saying this. It sounded like you were saying Noah was saved by His works. Therefore I thought you were saying that. I understand what Paul says on the matter it is what you were saying that I was unclear of.



Ok. Thanks for the clarification. I trust you will investigate other threads I have started. They are guaranteed to offend traditional thinking. . . Why some are given now to call me a 'Troll' while others would me burned at the stake..And yet they can't show where the offense is except to their own pride. . . ;-)

Quote:
Given the fact that Enoch was taken to be with God how so?



For much the same reason I would imagine Noah could/would have been as well, provided God did not have further plans for him, don't you think? Certainly God would not have allowed him to die with the rest of condemned humanity, do you think?

Quote:
Yep however, in Noah's case, it could only be faith in God. Jesus wasn't born and the Holy Spirit wasn't given. Elementary stuff, my friend.. .




Once again it was His faith in God but Jesus is God so therefore it was His faith in Jesus plus the Gospel was preached to them beforehand.


When was Jesus God, in the OT? You cannot explain that except to say: "It is a mystery". It is not a mystery, as many will say. It can be seen quite clearly if one will only make necessary distinctions given from the scriptures instead of relying upon interpretations as scripture that have been given us by traditional thinking that presents us with a deadend theology we are to have faith in.. Therefore, are you speaking of the foreknowledge of God or the "reality" of God's mind before eternity began, that was not yet, an "actuality"? You will have to be more clear since Jesus was a man not yet born, not yet God.

Quote:
Jesus has always been as the Logos and some would even argue that He appeared to Moses and other as a Theophany.



You must mean the pre-incarnate Christ, the WORD? In the Mind of God, you are correct. [When referring to Jesus, there are those two words again to be considered, "reality" and "actuality".

Quote:
The Spirit may not have been given in the exact sense as after Jesus sent it but it was on the earth it was upon Samson it was in the Temple it was over the seas it was causing some to prophesy it was also giving men hearts after God's own heart.



Ah, but the operative word in your reply is: "Upon". That is true. The Spirit of god was definitely "upon" many in the OT however, no indwelling could have been possible. The man Jesus had not yet ascended on High. .

Quote:
Please be more clear about what you believe and what your aim is so that there is more clarity instead of revealing you stances piece by piece as you please and as favors your debating tactics.



But I don't want to think for you. That is the reason for my "debating practices". Anything is better remembered when discovered.

 2009/5/26 11:07









 Re: If Noah, who was not born again, was a preacher of righteousness . .

Hello Intense,

I see you've taken to quoting [i]youself[/i] without making that clear, and adding an inaccurate response to back yourself up! Cunning! EDIT: On the other hand, perhaps it was an oversight?

Quote:
Yep however, in Noah's case, it could only be faith in God. Jesus wasn't born and the Holy Spirit wasn't given. Elementary stuff, my friend.. .
~~~
Once again it was His faith in God but Jesus is God so therefore it was His faith in Jesus plus the Gospel was preached to them beforehand.

How could anyone have faith in 'Jesus' before He was born? Gal 3:8

EDIT: I see that there had to be descendents of Adam saved, despite the Flood, or what God had said in the Garden would not be true. [end edit]


I think there is much unnecessary confusion in the minds of believers today, arising from the assumption that from Adam to the molten calf (Exo 32:4) in the wilderness, God was physically invisible.

The Bible says:

10 And they saw the God of Israel: and [there was] under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in [his] clearness. 11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

Exo 24

And, the apostle John said twice 'No man hath seen God at any time'. I conclude that both are true, rather than ditch the record in Exodus, or Genesis. Genesis 3:8


Thus, our discussion about faith could be restricted to whether - as God looked upon the heart of the man to whom He was talking - He found faith there, in His ability to perform His promises.

Another way God could tell if the man was genuinely believing, was by the actions which followed His commands to the man. Gen 22:18


I thought some of you might like to dig into a website on the Hebrew letter which begins Abraham's name, and also consider how many other important associated meanings would have been going round and round in Paul's mind, as the Holy Spirit revealed to him truth from his memorisation of the Pentateuch.

[url=http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/Spokes/Aleph_Abraham.asp]Aleph[/url]

[url=http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/gr_808.asp]Abraham = Faith and other key meanings (by numerical value)[/url]

 2009/5/26 13:09









 Re:

Hello Alive

Quote:

Alive-to-God wrote:
Hello Intense,

I see you've taken to quoting [i]youself[/i] without making that clear, and adding an inaccurate response to back yourself up! Cunning! EDIT: On the other hand, perhaps it was an oversight?
Quote:
Yep however, in Noah's case, it could only be faith in God. Jesus wasn't born and the Holy Spirit wasn't given. Elementary stuff, my friend.. .
~~~
Once again it was His faith in God but Jesus is God so therefore it was His faith in Jesus plus the Gospel was preached to them beforehand.

How could anyone have faith in 'Jesus' before He was born? Gal 3:8

EDIT: I see that there had to be descendents of Adam saved, despite the Flood, or what God had said in the Garden would not be true. [end edit]


I think there is much unnecessary confusion in the minds of believers today, arising from the assumption that from Adam to the molten calf (Exo 32:4) in the wilderness, God was physically invisible.

The Bible says:

10 And they saw the God of Israel: and [there was] under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in [his] clearness. 11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

Exo 24

And, the apostle John said twice 'No man hath seen God at any time'. I conclude that both are true, rather than ditch the record in Exodus, or Genesis. Genesis 3:8


Thus, our discussion about faith could be restricted to whether - as God looked upon the heart of the man to whom He was talking - He found faith there, in His ability to perform His promises.

Another way God could tell if the man was genuinely believing, was by the actions which followed His commands to the man. Gen 22:18


I thought some of you might like to dig into a website on the Hebrew letter which begins Abraham's name, and also consider how many other important associated meanings would have been going round and round in Paul's mind, as the Holy Spirit revealed to him truth from his memorisation of the Pentateuch.

[url=http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/Spokes/Aleph_Abraham.asp]Aleph[/url]

[url=http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/gr_808.asp]Abraham = Faith and other key meanings (by numerical value)[/url]

 2009/5/26 13:19
hulsey
Moderator



Joined: 2006/7/5
Posts: 640
Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Hi KJ,

I lost the post I'd prepared a few minutes ago, and don't want to re-write it right now.

Perhaps you could explain - 'if' Noah and Abraham were 'born again' - why the Son of God become Man, and died on a cross?



I'm not Jimmy, but I'll try to help. Noah was justified before God the same way you and I are only from a different perspective and with a lot less revelation than us. A promised child from God that would be born of men was and is the basis of the whole of OT prophecy. The work of Christ on the cross was as necessary and, with the ressurection, was the justifying factor of ours and Noah's life only from different perspectives. We are in a greater position than Noah and according to Jesus even greater than John the Baptist because we can look back on a completed work. The mysteries that were not revealed to Noah and those who would come to live under the law of Moses have been revealed and given to us. However we are all justified by the same work, Christ dieing in our place. If the law could justify then Christ did not have to die.


_________________
SI Moderator - Jeremy Hulsey

 2009/5/26 13:44Profile









 Re: If Noah, who was not born again, was a preacher of righteousness . .

Hi hulsey,

I appreciate your answer, and understand justifcaiton by faith. But we are, from our perspective, [i][b]required[/b][/i] to believe in Jesus Christ, and to be baptised into his death (are we not) for our salvaton?

You did not touch on the matter of new birth, of which Nicodemus had never heard.

Surely, there is nothing in scripture to say Noah, Abraham or Moses were 'filled with the Holy Spirit', as the apostles were, and believers since Pentecost are today?

If they had been, would they not be 'sons' on the same terms as we are in Christ? Are you suggsting that it is merely the terminology of our revelation which has progressed, and they did indeed receive power over sin, because they 'believed' God?

 2009/5/26 14:04









 Re:

"They are guaranteed to offend traditional thinking. . . Why some are given now to call me a 'Troll' while others would me have burned at the stake..And yet they can't show where the offense is except to their own pride. . . " Intense

There will be not pity party here for your 'burned at the stake' comment. Those words are yours, yours only, and can stay with you.



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep however, in Noah's case, it could only be faith in God. Jesus wasn't born and the Holy Spirit wasn't given. Elementary stuff, my friend.. .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Intense

"Once again it was His faith in God but Jesus is God so therefore it was His faith in Jesus plus the Gospel was preached to them beforehand." Intense

The pattern through your whole post up until this point was to quote another as in; Quote: "such and such said"....... and in each case you provide your answer outside of the quote. However in this one instance you seem to be debating yourself. You respond to your own quote yet WE are full of pride??? Your doctrine offends traditional thinking yet somehow you offend and contradict your own doctrine by answering your own quote... and that being 'elementary stuff'?

It seems in this case you couldn't even keep track of your own argument. I think this speaks to motive and credibility. This is quite a telling 'oops'.

 2009/5/26 14:24









 Re:

Quote:

hulsey wrote:
Quote:
Hi KJ,

I lost the post I'd prepared a few minutes ago, and don't want to re-write it right now.

Perhaps you could explain - 'if' Noah and Abraham were 'born again' - why the Son of God become Man, and died on a cross?



I'm not Jimmy, but I'll try to help. Noah was justified before God the same way you and I are only from a different perspective and with a lot less revelation than us. A promised child from God that would be born of men was and is the basis of the whole of OT prophecy. The work of Christ on the cross was as necessary and, with the ressurection, was the justifying factor of ours and Noah's life only from different perspectives. We are in a greater position than Noah and according to Jesus even greater than John the Baptist because we can look back on a completed work. The mysteries that were not revealed to Noah and those who would come to live under the law of Moses have been revealed and given to us. However we are all justified by the same work, Christ dieing in our place. If the law could justify then Christ did not have to die.



Hi Hulsey, Instead of the word "Justification", which is by faith, wouldn't the word "Reconcile" be accurate? Just asking.

 2009/5/26 14:57









 Re:

Quote:

ccrider wrote:
"They are guaranteed to offend traditional thinking. . . Why some are given now to call me a 'Troll' while others would me burned at the stake..And yet they can't show where the offense is except to their own pride. . . " Intense

There will be not pity party here for your 'burned at the stake' comment. Those words are yours, yours only, and can stay with you.



Pity? I ask for no pity.
Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep however, in Noah's case, it could only be faith in God. Jesus wasn't born and the Holy Spirit wasn't given. Elementary stuff, my friend.. .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Intense

"Once again it was His faith in God but Jesus is God so therefore it was His faith in Jesus plus the Gospel was preached to them beforehand." Intense



Wrong. They had faith in what God "preached" to them, at least as much as Abraham had when the Lord told him, Sarah would bear a child. .. and he is called the "father of faith". Enter Ishmael.

Quote:
The pattern through your whole post up until this point was to quote another as in; Quote: "such and such said"....... and in each case you provide your answer outside of the quote. However in this one instance you seem to be debating yourself. You respond to your own quote yet WE are full of pride???




Sorry ???


Quote:
Your doctrine offends traditional thinking yet somehow you offend and contradict your own doctrine by answering your own quote... and that being 'elementary stuff'?



Ditto ??? Perhaps I have made some typos I can correct. I will review my post.

Quote:
It seems in this case you couldn't even keep track of your own argument. I think this speaks to motive and credibility. This is quite a telling 'oops'.



Think so? What do you believe it might be if not to speak of the work of the cross to be more about enabling us for the way of cross,a perspective I find few here have considered aside from the issue of redemption and even on that subject, few find agreement.

 2009/5/26 15:23
narrowpath
Member



Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1067
Germany NRW

 Re:

If you check Intense's website you will find that he introduces a hidden numeric code in the bible.

Numbers have their place in the bible but he goes much to far into numerolgy. He claims to be the only one who has this revelation, so we can only get it from himself. I have not read it all through and I do not see the need for it, because that alone rings alarm bells for me. This is in essence gnostic.

2 Peter 1:19-21 (New King James Version)

19 And so we have the prophetic word confirmed,[a] which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,[b] 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God[c] spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

narrowpath

 2009/5/26 18:33Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy