Posts Tagged ‘theology’

Can the Lord relent or repent for something?

Posted on Thursday January 5th, 2012 at 6:06 am by

At ERC, where I fellowship, preach, and teach, we have a question and answer time once a month where people can submit their questions anonymously and then either Thang Bwee or I answer them. For the questions that I have the privilege of answering I’m posting the answers here for your edification and general discussion. If you think there’s room for correction then you’re more than welcome to do that publicly using the comment feature below this post. I look forward to our interactions.

The Question(s)

Exodus 32:14

14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.

  1. What does ‘relented’ mean here?
  2. Can the Lord repent for something?

 

The Response(s)

To question 1 …

  • The Hebrew word for relented is nacham (naw-kham’), and further meanings of that word include grieve, to be sorry, to pity, console, comfort, rue (regret), and avenge.
  • A more accurate rendering of the Hebrew used here in verse 14 would be that God took pity and consoled Moses (and the people) by not bringing the disaster upon them.
  • God shows in the Bible that He has real emotions. He has compassion on people’s pain, listens to people’s pleas for help, and his anger and wrath are roused when he sees the suffering of people from others’ deeds.
  • So what seems to be happening here is similar in nature to the command God gave to Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. It was never God’s intention to see Isaac killed, but to invoke an act of obedience and to set up yet another Old Testament type of a New Testament truth.
    • Likewise, here in Exodus 32, God speaks of disaster and Moses responds with compassion for his people and pleas for them. God accepts Moses plea (an appropriate and obedient response) and takes pity on the people and does not bring the disaster he spoke of.
    • The New Testament parallel would be that of the threat of disaster God says is on those who are a stiff-necked people and who do not seek him, living as if he doesn’t exist. We saints plea for them and God spares some. He says there will be disaster for all who sin, yet he doesn’t meter our that disaster on all but in fact gives grace. He ‘relents’ of what he spoke of bringing on the people.

 

To question 2 …

  • Simple answer:
    • Num 23:19 God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
    • 1 Sam. 15:29 And also the Strength [or Glory] of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he [is] not a man, that he should repent.
  • When it comes to ‘changes of purpose’ in God’s dealings with man, God helps us by using language that we will understand. This is called anthropomorphism – the representation of God under a human form, or with human attributes and affections. Anthropomorphism is used extensively throughout the Bible.
  • Some may say then, that God is being deceptive, saying one thing and then doing another.
    • Anthropomorphism is metaphor. Metaphor, analogy, and similes are never intended to be taken to the extreme. For example, in the Bible we see that the Father “makes his sun rise on the just and on the unjust” (Matt.5:45 ESV). Does the sun really rise in the sky? No. The sun neither ‘rises’ nor ‘falls’; rather, it is the Earth that rotates on its axis, which causes the perception of a rising and falling sun. The Bible is not being deceptive for using such language. It should not be taken to the extreme, but, rather, at what it was intended to convey. It is the same with anthropomorphism.

 

——

What are your thoughts on these answers? Agree? Disagree? A bit of both? Please use the comments section to share what you think.

Blessings,
Martin

 

Tags: ,

Gen.2:17 – What kind of death is it?

Posted on Thursday October 20th, 2011 at 6:52 am by

At ERC, where I fellowship, preach, and teach, we have a question and answer time once a month where people can submit their questions anonymously and then either Thang Bwee or I answer them. For the questions that I have the privilege of answering I’m posting the answers here for your edification and general discussion. If you think there’s room for correction then you’re more than welcome to do that publicly using the comment feature below this post. I look forward to our interactions.

The Question(s)

Gen 2:17

17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

What kind of death is it that is mentioned in this verse?

 

The Response(s)

  • A death of body and soul.
  • God postponed the death of Adam’s body, but a physical death was assigned to him.
  • Miseries and evils come upon our bodies and our souls here on earth. This is a kind of death, and entrance into death, until the final moment when death entirely absorbs us.
  • Our souls see a kind of death because of our separation from God. And we do not seek God or understand God, and so this curse on our souls is equal to a spiritual death
  • Both the physical and the spiritual death we experience can only be overwritten or cancelled when grace comes in the form of salvation

 

——

What are your thoughts on these answers? Agree? Disagree? A bit of both? Please use the comment section to share what you think.

Blessings,
Martin

 

Tags: , ,

Old and new garmets, old and new wineskins

Posted on Thursday October 13th, 2011 at 6:34 am by

At ERC, where I fellowship, preach, and teach, we have a question and answer time once a month where people can submit their questions anonymously and then either Thang Bwee or I answer them. For the questions that I have the privilege of answering I’m posting the answers here for your edification and general discussion. If you think there’s room for correction then you’re more than welcome to do that publicly using the comment feature below this post. I look forward to our interactions.

The Question(s)

Luke 5:36-39

36 He also told them a parable: “No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment. If he does, he will tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old.
37 And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed.
38 But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins.
39 And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.’

We see here two contradiction words, such as old and new. Old wine with garment and new wine new garment.

What does it mean… Old? and New? from this passage.

 

The Response(s)

Mark 2:17

And when Jesus heard it, he said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.”

  • In the verses of Luke 5, Jesus talks about how the changes that his coming brings will be treated by different types of people.
  • He gives us 3 pictures which represent the 3 types of people
  1. Some will take only bits of his new message. They will try to stitch these new teachings into their old and decaying ideas and beliefs. Jesus’ word is not meant to patch up an old and failing belief system. Rather, his word is meant as a total replacement. Jesus is saying, “Don’t patch your old garment, or your old old beliefs, with my new teaching. It won’t work and it’ll tear apart. Totally replace your old garment with my new teaching.”
  2. The second picture Jesus give us, about wine and wineskins, is about those people who don’t want patches, they don’t want bits and pieces of his new teaching, they want all of the new teaching. The problem is, they want to keep the old teaching as well. Jesus says that won’t work. He says says that if you pour my new teachings into your old and brittle belief system then it will not be able to hold together and will burst apart. He says that we must forsake the old beliefs and place our new beliefs in a new and fresh place all on their own.
  3. The third picture, in verse 39, talks of those who are not prepared to even taste the new wine, which means they’re not prepared to even consider Jesus’ new teachings. That person says that the old ways are good, they work for me. They won’t even admit that the new teaching has any merit at all. He will not bother to compare the two because the old is good enough. He refuses to accept even the possibility of change.

 

——

What are your thoughts on these answers? Agree? Disagree? A bit of both? Please use the comment section to share what you think.

Blessings,
Martin

 

Tags: , , ,

False teachers and the Christian response

Posted on Thursday October 6th, 2011 at 10:15 am by

At ERC, where I fellowship, preach, and teach, we have a question and answer time once a month where people can submit their questions anonymously and then either Thang Bwee or I answer them. For the questions that I have the privilege of answering I’m posting the answers here for your edification and general discussion. If you think there’s room for correction then you’re more than welcome to do that publicly using the comment feature below this post. I look forward to our interactions.

The Question(s)

II John 1:10-11

10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting,
11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.

III John 1:5-7

5 Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are,
6 who testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God.
7 For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles.

We know that false teachers are very much dangerous for the whole family. They can destroy the family lead into astray. In order to protect from such dangers… it said we should stop them and should not allow them to enter into our house. We should not welcome them from our home. Even not need to greet them on the street. It is what the text is teaching?

If like that…. My questions are….
1. If we act like that to them isn’t it that people consider us as a very rude and impolite man? They might think that we are not like Christian.

2. Can we distinguish or separate differently between life of Christian and social life?
My experience: When it happen to work together with people from outside the Church, they understood us as we use to forgive others. Then they use to take opportunity over us for their own benefits. Labourers do not take serious on duty to us. When we show our love in Christ to them, they use to take more opportunity for their own sake and least concern their duty to us. Many times we lose because of those unfaithful non-believers.

Questions….
2a. How shall we show our love to such unfaithful people correctly?
2b. Do we have to content for losing our own?
2c. How shall we deal to such people effectively both for Gospel and for the works at the same time?

 

The Response(s)

To question 1 …

  • In the West, we tell our kids not to talk to strangers because it could be dangerous. Do you teach your children this also? And if your children don’t stop to talk to a strange man do people think they are rude and impolite? No. They realise that they are being careful and they have probably been told by their parents not to talk to strangers. Like that, John, as our spiritual parent, is telling us not to talk to men with strange teaching. He is saying, “Have no religious connection with him, and don’t act towards him so that other people believe you and him are brothers.” Why? Verse 11 says that if you do you take part in his wicked works. His accursed beliefs are filthy, and if you spend any time with him then you become filthy too. And the result is that the pure teachings of Jesus that you proclaim, become confused in the minds of people watching you, and this brings problems with sharing the gospel and many other things. Your witness for Christ become impure because of the impure man.
  • Though they might think you’re not like a Christian, you are in fact doing as you have been told, making you a Christian indeed. As a Christian, we live with upside-down logic sometimes. The fist become last, the last become first, the meek inherit the earth, the rich become poor, if we save our life we lose it, if we lose our life we save it. Likewise, by having nothing to do with a false teaching we’re proclaiming Christ crucified in all its purity.

To question 2 …

  • First I want to start with some Scripture, then I will answer the question more fully.
  • Matt.5:38-42You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.
  • 1 Pet.2:23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.
  • Rom.12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”
  • 1 Cor.6:7 To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?

Q2b …

  • The above Scriptures say yes, you have to be content with past loss, but you don’t have to continue losing if you are more wise in the first place.
  • These Scriptures give us some important principles that we must remember when dealing with anyone. However, that doesn’t mean that you must always be a victim.

Q2a and Q2c …

  • You need to set boundaries to show love and to display justice. These boundaries will become for you a reputation. I will give you just an example. You can probably think how to change this slightly to suit your needs. EG – When you hire someone, you make it a condition of hiring them that they do a job a certain way. In the agreement you also say that because of dishonest people in the past, you will not tolerate being cheated and will not pay them fully if they cheat you. It is very important that you have at least 2 other people witness this agreement. Then, when the job is done according to your agreement, you reward them with a bonus that they did not know was coming. If they defraud you or cheat you in any way, then because of the agreement you made at the beginning, they do not receive full payment. You will receive a reputation of being a rewarder of those who treat you well, and a man not to be cheated because you do not tolerate it. This way you’re being just and loving and not bringing any disgrace to Christ. Working for you will be something people will want to do and they will want to be sure to do it according to your agreement.

 

——

What are your thoughts on these answers? Agree? Disagree? A bit of both? Please use the comment section to share what you think.

Blessings,
Martin

 

Tags: , , ,