Thread: BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Admin
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 5 Oct, 2009 02:17 PM
I THINK ALMOST ALL MAKE THE MISTAKE OF MAKING ASSUMPTIONS OR PLAYING MIND READER, FROM TIME TO TIME. BUT WHEN I AM CAREFUL TO DO THIS IS SOLVES ALMOST ALL PROBLEMS - I MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE WITH OTHER PEOPLE.
Titus 1:7-8 (ASV)
7 For the bishop must be blameless, as God's steward; not self-willed, not soon angry, no brawler, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre;
8 but given to hospitality, as lover of good, SOBER-MINDED , just, holy, self-controlled;
A bishop has to love hosting people and love good people. He has to be sober, which is referring to more than not getting drunk. The word "sober" means "safe (sound) in mind, i.e. self-controlled (moderate as to opinion or passion)" (Strong's). One dictionary says the word "sober" means to be "void of speculative imagination." That is powerful. A bishop can't be imagining what people are thinking. Satan will use that against him. The NIV translates this as "self-controlled."�Andrew Wommacks Living Commentary
SPECULATIVE IMAGINATION covers a whole lot more ground, I think than what is expressed here by Andrew Wommack. I think it all ties together with being selfcentered or selfconscious, but one of the worst forms of SPECULATIVE
IMAGINATION is when we play MIND READER AND ASSUME WE KNOW WHAT ANOTHER PERSON IS THINKING - INSTEAD OF ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS - TO CLARIFY WHAT THE OTHER PERSON IT THINKING. THERE IS VERY LITTLE THAT CAUSES MORE HARM IN RELATIONSHIPS.
I find when I am careful to ask good questions to clarify what the other person is thinking - it avoids a tremendous amount of problems - and lets me know how to proceed from there.
That's why if a person does not answer my questions I typically will abandon communications with them rather quickly. The main reason I will seperate myself from them is its impossible to have good communications under these conditions - and of course there is also a fairly good chance they may be hiding some things.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 6 Oct, 2009 05:35 PM
Andrew Wommack EXPOSED
By David J. Stewart
It's a shame that Satan has crept into the church today, subtilty introducing damnable heresies. Andrew Wommack offers many Biblically sound teachings; however, if a man is wrong on salvation, then he is wrong on the biggest issue. There is NO Biblical doctrine more important than salvation itself. We are warned in 2nd Corinthians 11:3... "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
In typical fashion of today's wayward prophets, Wommack states that he believes salvation is 100% by God's grace apart from all self-righteous works; BUT, then he teaches works salvation elsewhere. This is deceitful and many ministers are doing this today, such as Jack Chick, John MacArthur and Ray Comfort. Jesus said what He meant and meant what He said (John 14:2). I'm tired of deceitful ministers saying salvation is by God's grace; BUT then require a willingness to turn from sin, make a commitment or change their actions as part of saving faith. No Sir, salvation is a free gift and does NOT require any change, nor a willingness to change, on the part of a sinner to receive it.
Wommack's False Gospel
The King James Bible states in Romans 10:9, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Concerning Romans 10:9, Mr. Wommack writes...
"Therefore, this verse is a promise to those who believe on Jesus to the extent that they are willing to change their actions accordingly and confess Him as Lord (God) with their mouths so that they might be saved."
SOURCE: http://www.awmi.net/bible/rom_10_09
That is a false gospel. If lost sinners must be "willing to change their actions accordingly" to be saved, then that is a works-based salvation. As with other false prophets, Wommack makes the grave mistake of putting-the-cart-before-the-horse. The willingness to change is a FRUIT, or result, of genuine repentance; and not a part of saving faith. Wommack correctly recognizes "repentance" in his commentary on Matthew 3:2 as "a change of mind." However, he then perverts the definition of Biblical repentance by adding works...
"Repentance is simply a change of mind accompanied by corresponding actions (Mt. 3:8; Jas. 2:17)."
SOURCE: Matthew 3:2 - Andrew Wommack Ministries
Wommack is incorrect. Repentance unto salvation does NOT need to be "accompanied by corresponding actions." Wommack wrongly defines repentance as including "actions." What actions are Wommack vaguely referring to? Clearly, he is implying that a person must depart from their sinful living. Wommack's commentary on Romans 10:9 states that a person must "change their actions" to be saved. Again, he states...
"Therefore, this verse is a promise to those who believe on Jesus to the extent that they are willing to change their actions accordingly and confess Him as Lord (God) with their mouths so that they might be saved."
SOURCE: http://www.awmi.net/bible/rom_10_09
If Wommack were correct, which he is not, then a lost sinner could not be saved unless he or she were willing to stop committing sin. This is known as the heresy of LORDSHIP SALVATION, and it's of the Devil. Wommack plainly states that believing on Jesus Christ is NOT enough for salvation, unless it is a belief that includes "changing" one's "actions." This violates the plain teaching of Romans 4:5, "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." Biblically, a person DOESN'T have to change a thing to be saved. God does the changing. That's why He saves us, so He can cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1st John 1:9). Again, carefully notice that Wommack requires a sinner to be "willing to change" as a prerequisite to salvation. A willingness to change is the result of true repentance; and not a part of saving faith. Salvation is without works and a man's faith is COUNTED for righteousness. This is the simplicity that is in Christ.
Every heretic who teaches Lordship Salvation deceitfully claims to believe that salvation is 100% by God's grace; but they do not. If they truly believed that God's salvation is unconditionally offered to mankind on the basis of Christ's blood sacrifice alone, then they'd stop teaching that sinners must be "willing to change" their life and stop living in sin to be saved. The Biblical truth is that sinners don't have to "change their actions" to be saved. Wommack is teaching a false gospel which requires human effort in order to be saved. Salvation is of the Lord.
Conclusion
Although some people will no doubt allege that it's merely a matter of semantics, I can only go by the statements a man makes concerning salvation. Andrew Wommack plainly writes in his commentary regarding Romans 10:9 that a sinner must believe on the Lord "TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO CHANGE THEIR ACTIONS." That is a false gospel. Any amount of belief (i.e., trust) upon the Lord Jesus Christ as the Savior is enough to be saved. God does NOT require a certain degree of faith to be saved, just enough to call upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13). Wommack's false gospel invalidates the faith of those who are not willing to change their actions. This is nothing less than the damnable heresy of Lordship Salvation.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 6 Oct, 2009 05:59 PM
Man you have some nerve, Wow!
Again Andrew Wommack does more good in a hour than you do in a lifetime. (Readers please refer to my previous post here)
I am born again and obviously a whole lot more versed in scripute than you are.
Titus 3:2 (KJV)
2 To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
Anyone like the guy who wrote that post - or any of the other websites that attack "any" man of God and try to harm their are serving Satan as far as I am concerned. They will answer to God for that.
And I guarantee whomever that guy is doesn't have much going on and is not helping the Kindom of Heaven but trying to destroy it.
You got nothing I care to hear - thats for darn sure.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 6 Oct, 2009 07:01 PM
Once again Andrew Wommack's ministry trains pastors all over the world at AWMIs own expense and sends out millions of dollars in free teaching materials all over the world to people who can not afford them. They are have the highest rating possible (4 Star) with the Charity Navigator who investigates ALL charitable organizations, their books and how their funds are distributed.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 7 Oct, 2009 06:51 AM
Thats right dude,I got a lot of nerve,six years in one of the toughest prisons in the country will do that to a man,And frankly,I dont care who I offend!I know the gospel!And that garbage that Womack and his Ilk preach Is blasphemy straight from HELL!Im tired of all this fake phony baloney,man made trash that people try to pass off as the gospel,Paul used one of the strongest warnings ever issued by an apostle in galations 1,Read it,get educated!There is only one gospel,It cant be changed or altered!
Galatians 1 � Challenging a Different Gospel
A. Introduction to the Apostle Paul�s letter to the Galatians.
1. (1-2) The writer and the readers.
Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead), and all the brethren who are with me, To the churches of Galatia.
a. Paul wrote this book; his authorship of this magnificent letter is virtually unquestioned, even by more �liberal� scholars.
i. And what a magnificent letter this is! Galatians has been called the �Declaration of Independence of Christian liberty.� The great reformer Martin Luther especially loved this letter; he called Galatians his �Catherine von Bora,� because, he said, �I am married to it.� Leon Morris wrote, �Galatians is a passionate letter, the outpouring of the soul of a preacher on fire for his Lord and deeply committed to bringing his hearers to an understanding of what saving faith is.�
ii. Many scholars believe that Galatians was written in the late 40�s or the early 50�s; an approximate date of 50 a.d. is often given. It seems that Paul wrote this letter before the Jerusalem Council mentioned in Acts 15, because although he mentions several trips to Jerusalem, he makes no mention of the council. Because the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 dealt with the exact issues Paul writes about, it would seem strange if it had already happened, yet he made no mention of it. If it is true that Galatians was written around 50 ad, then Paul would have been a Christian for about 15 years, being converted on the road to Damascus around 35 ad.
b. Paul, an apostle: The emphasis on Paul�s apostolic credentials is important. Paul has strong words for these Galatians, and they must understand that he writes with authority, apostolic authority. Every one of us must answer the question, �What will I respect as an authority in my life?� Paul expected that Christians would respect his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ.
i. �The word apostle as Paul uses it here does not merely refer to one who has a message to announce, but to an appointed representative with an official status who is provided with the credentials of his office.� (Wuest)
ii. It is our duty to also respect Paul�s authority as an apostle. We do this by regarding this book as the Word of God, and taking it seriously to heart.
c. Not from men or through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father: Paul�s calling as an apostle was not from man, nor was it through man. It didn�t originate with man, and it didn�t come through man. It originated with God, and came directly from God. His standing as an apostle was not based on opinion polls or any human council. It is based on a Divine call, made through both the Father and the Son.
i. �The bluntness of Paul�s denial is due to the charge . . . that Paul was not a genuine apostle because not one of the twelve.� (Robertson)
ii. �When I was a young man I thought Paul was making too much of his call. I did not understand his purpose. I did not then realize the importance of the ministry . . . We exalt our calling, not to gain glory among men, or money, or satisfaction, or favor, but because people need to be assured that the words we speak are the words of God. This is no sinful pride. It is holy pride.� (Martin Luther)
d. And all the brethren who are with me: Paul gives greetings from all the brethren who are with him; but the use of I in the letter (such as in Galatians 1:6) shows that it was not really a �team effort� written by Paul and his coworkers. Paul is writing this letter, and sends greetings from his friends as a matter of courtesy.
e. To the churches of Galatia: This isn�t written to a single church in a single city. For example, 1 Thessalonians is addressed to the church of the Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians 1:1). But this is addressed to the churches of Galatia, because Galatia was a region, not a city, and there were several churches among the cities of Galatia.
i. �During the third century bc some Celtic peoples (or Gauls) migrated to this area and, after fighting with the people they encountered, they settled into the northern part of Asia Minor. In due course they came into conflict with the Roman, who defeated them, and from this time they remained under the authority of the Romans as a dependent kingdom. The name �Galatia� covered the territory settled by the Gauls.� (Morris)
ii. There were essentially two regions of Galatia, one to the north (including the cities of Pessinus, Ancyra and Tavium) and one to the south (including the cities of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe). There has been considerable � though mostly unimportant - debate as to if Galatians was written to the northern region of cities or the southern.
iii. �There was a wide difference between North and South Galatia in respect to language, occupation, nationality, and social organization.� (Wuest) The northern region of Galatia was made up of small cities and mostly agricultural development. The southern region of Galatia was full of cities and commerce.
iv. �It is clear that Paul intended his words to have a wide circulation in the region of Galatia. The letter would be taken to each centre and read there, or several copies would be made and one taken to each church.� (Morris)
f. Paul was in southern Galatia on his first missionary journey (Acts 13:13-14:23), he went through northern Galatia on his second (Acts 16:6) and third (Acts 18:23) missionary journeys.
i. So was this letter written to the Christians of the northern region of Galatia or the southern region of Galatia? In the end, we may not be able to know, and it doesn�t really matter, because this is a letter that has something to say to every Christian. The debate between northern Galatia and southern Galatia is interesting for scholars, and adds some understanding to the letter, but not much.
2. (3-5) Paul sends his apostolic greeting.
Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.
a. Grace to you and peace: This is Paul�s familiar greeting, drawing from the traditional greetings in both Greek (grace) and Jewish (peace) cultures. Paul uses the exact phrase of verse three five other times in the New Testament.
i. �Grace is always first, peace always second. This is due to the fact that grace is the source of peace. Without grace there is and can be no peace, but when grace is ours, peace must of necessity follow.� (Lenski in his commentary on 1 Corinthians)
ii. Paul uses the word grace 100 times in his writings. Among all the other writers of the New Testament, it is only used 55 times. Paul was truly the apostle of grace.
iii. �These two terms, grace and peace, constitute Christianity.� (Martin Luther)
b. Who gave Himself for our sins: Paul wished grace and peace unto his readers from both God the Father and God the Son. Now, Paul will briefly expand on the work of God the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. The first thing he says about Jesus is that He gave Himself for our sins. �Throughout the epistle Paul points the Galatians to the centrality of the cross. He cannot wait to make this plain, and we find a reference to it in his very first sentence.� (Morris)
i. Jesus gave. We know from John 3:16 that God the Father so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son. But the Father didn�t do the only giving. Jesus gave. Jesus is a loving, giving God, and a loving, giving Saviour.
ii. Jesus gave Himself. What did Jesus give? He gave the greatest thing anyone can give � Himself. Of course, one might debate if it was more a gift for the Father to give the Son (as in John 3:16), or if it was more of a gift for the Son to give Himself. But that is like discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Jesus gave the greatest gift He could; He gave himself. There is a sense in which we do not even begin to give until we give ourselves.
iii. Jesus gave Himself for our sins. This is why Jesus had to give Himself. Our sins had put us on a road to ruin and destruction. If God did not do something to save us, our sins would destroy us. So out of love, Jesus gave Himself for our sins! The love was always there; but there would never have been the need for Jesus to give Himself if our sins had not placed us in a terrible place.
iv. The word for in this passage clearly has the idea of substitution. Someone who wrote a letter for someone else could use this word to say he did it for that one. This meaning of the word translated for here is also clear from how it is used in passages like John 11:50 and 2 Corinthians 5:14.
v. Martin Luther on who gave Himself for our sins: �Let us equip ourselves against the accusations of Satan with this and similar passages of Holy Scripture. If he says, �Thou shalt be damned,� you tell him: �No, for I fly to Christ who gave Himself for my sins. In accusing me of being a damnable sinner, you are cutting your own throat, Satan. You are reminding me of God�s fatherly goodness toward me, that He so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. In calling me a sinner, Satan, you really comfort me above measure.� With such heavenly cunning we are to meet the devil�s craft and put from us the memory of sin.�
vi. �These words, �who gave himself for our sins�, are very important. He wanted to tell the Galatians straight out that atonement for sins and perfect righteousness are not to be sought anywhere but in Christ . . . So glorious is this redemption that it should ravish us with wonder.� (Calvin)
c. Why did Jesus give Himself for our sins? That He might deliver us from this present evil age. In many ways, the Galatians were battle with and sometimes losing against this present evil age. They needed to know that Jesus had come to save them from this present evil age.
i. The particular word for evil denotes someone who is not content in being corrupt themselves; they also must corrupt others, and draw them into their same destruction.
ii. The idea behind the word deliver is not deliverance from the presence of something, but deliverance from the power of something. We will not be delivered from the presence of this present evil age until we go to be with Jesus. But we can be experience deliverance from the power of this present evil age right now.
d. According to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever: The purpose of this saving work is not primarily to benefit man (though that is part of the purpose). Instead, it is to glorify God the Father.
i. False doctrine was a real problem in the Galatian churches, and their false doctrines robbed God of some of the glory due to Him. By emphasizing the rightly recognized glory of God and His plan, Paul hopes to put them more on the right track.
B. The danger of a different gospel.
1. (6) Paul�s amazement.
I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel.
a. I marvel that you are turning away so soon: Paul seems amazed not so much that they are turning away (this might alarm him, but not amaze him), but that they are turning away so soon.
i. Missing here are the expressions of thanks or praise that Paul often wrote in the beginning of his letters. Romans 1:8-15, 1 Corinthians 1:4-9, Philippians 1:3-11, Colossians 1:3-8, and 1 Thessalonians 1:2-10 are each example of Paul giving thanks and praising the churches in his greeting. But not here. Paul gets right down to business, essentially saying �We need to talk.�
ii. �This is the sole instance where St. Paul omits to express his thanksgiving in addressing any church.� (Lightfoot)
b. They are turning away from a Person (from Him who called you) as they turn to a false idea (to a different gospel). To turn away from the true gospel is always to turn away from the Person of Jesus Christ.
i. From Him who called you in the grace of Christ also connects their turning away to a turning away from the principle of grace. However the Galatians were turning, it was away from the grace of God, not towards it.
2. (7) Three facts about this different gospel brought to the Galatians.
Which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
a. Galatians 1:7 tells three things about this different gospel. First, it is an illegitimate gospel (which is not another). Second, it is not good at all but trouble (who trouble you). Third, it is a
distortion of the true gospel (pervert the gospel of Christ).
b. Which is not another: Paul recognizes that this different gospel is not really another gospel at all. Those who promoted this different gospel perhaps said, �We know our message is different than Paul�s message. He has his truth, and we have ours. He has his gospel, and we have ours.� Paul rejects the idea that their message is a legitimate �alternative� gospel in any way.
i. The word gospel literally means �good news.� Paul is saying, �There is no �good news� in this message. It is only bad news, so it really isn�t a �different good news.� It is bad news. This is not another gospel at all.�
ii. The King James Version translates this passage like this: unto another gospel: Which is not another. Actually, the New King James Version translation is much better, because it makes a distinction between different and another, because there are two distinct Greek words used. Different has the idea of �another of different kind� and another has the idea of �another of the same kind.� It is as if Paul writes, �They brought you a completely different gospel. They claim it is just an alternative gospel of the same kind, but it isn�t at all. It is all together different.�
c. There are some who trouble you: Those who brought this �other gospel� to the Galatians brought them trouble. They didn�t advertise their message as trouble, but that is what it was.
i. Some who trouble you means that someone brought this false gospel to the Galatians. False gospels don�t just happen. People bring them, and the people who bring them may be sincere, and have a lot of charisma.
ii. �Note the resourcefulness of the devil. Heretics do not advertise their errors. Murderers, adulterers, thieves disguise themselves. So the devil masquerades all this devices and activities. He puts on white to make himself look like and angel of light.� (Martin Luther)
d. To pervert the gospel of Christ: The �other gospel� was really a perversion or a distortion of the true gospel of Jesus Christ. It didn�t �start from scratch,� making up a new name for God and pretending to have a new Savior. It used the names and ideas familiar to the Galatian Christians, but it slightly twisted the ideas, and this made their message all the more deceptive.
i. The gospel of Christ: Notice that Paul is really not contending for the gospel of Paul, though it is his gospel also. But Paul�s gospel was only worth defending and fighting for because it was in fact the gospel of Jesus.
e. Want to pervert the gospel of Christ: Paul plainly says that these people want to distort the good news of Jesus. Why would anyone want to pervert the gospel of Christ?
i. It is hard for us to understand sometimes, but there is something about the message of the true gospel that is deeply offensive to human nature. To understand this, we should first understand what the true gospel is.
ii. Paul states his gospel most succinctly in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4: I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved . . . For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.
iii. What is there in that message that would make anyone want to pervert the gospel of Christ? What is there in that that is offensive to human nature? First, the gospel offends our pride. It tells us we need a savior, and that we cannot save ourselves. It gives no credit to us at all for our salvation; it is all the work of Jesus for us. Second, the gospel offends our wisdom. It saves us by something many consider foolish � God becoming man and dying a humiliating, disgraceful death on our behalf. Third, the gospel offends our knowledge. It tells us to believe something which goes against scientific knowledge and personal experience � that a dead man, Jesus Christ, rose from the dead in a glorious new body that would never die again.
3. (8-9) A solemn curse upon those who bring a false gospel.
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
a. But even if we, or an angel from heaven: Paul doesn�t care who brings a false gospel. Even if it is himself, or an angel from heaven, it is to be rejected. Any person who spreads a false gospel is worthy only of a particular curse from God (let him be accursed).
i. �The gospel preached by Paul is not the true gospel because it is Paul who preaches it; it is the true gospel because the risen Christ gave it to Paul to preach.� (Bruce, cited in Morris)
b. Let him be accursed: Paul seems to have in mind the solemn curses pronounced by God upon those who break His covenant (Deuteronomy 27). For Paul, it wasn�t enough to say, �Don�t listen to these people.� It was more than just not listening to them. Paul soberly thought that they should be cursed!
c. So now I say again: The curse is repeated for extra emphasis; it is really impossible for Paul to express this idea with any more strength than he does here.
d. It might be fair to ask, �Where is Paul�s love?� He asks for a �double curse� on people � people who spread a false gospel. He doesn�t just ask God to curse the message, but to curse the people who spread the message. So, where is Paul�s love? Paul�s love is for souls that are in danger of hell. If a gospel is false, and not �another good news� at all, then it can�t save someone.
i. Think of a sinking ship, and the waters fill with people about to drown. Two ships come to rescue people in danger, but one of the rescue ships carries a load of dynamite, and for some reason you know that that ship will explode before it reaches port, and everyone on it will be killed. The most loving thing you could do is help everyone to get on the right rescue ship! Getting on the wrong rescue ship would seal your doom! Paul looks at this false gospel, this perverted gospel, and says, �That is a rescue ship about to sink! It can�t save anyone! I want to do everything right before God to warn people away from the wrong rescue ship!�
C. The Divine source of the gospel Paul preached.
1. (10) Paul�s gospel did not come from a desire to please man.
For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.
a. For do I now persuade men, or God? Paul�s idea is not �I want to persuade God to my point of view.� The idea is God is his audience. When Paul speaks, he speaks first to God, not to man.
b. Or do I seek to please men? Paul�s first obligation was to please God, not to please men. He would not fashion and shape his message just to please his audience. He was more concerned about pleasing God.
i. Though it is not specifically said, we sense that Paul is making a contrast between himself and those who brought the different gospel. Apparently, in some way, that different gospel was built around the idea of pleasing man.
ii. �There have always been preachers who have sought popular acclaim above all else, and there are some still. It is part of fallen human nature that even those charged with the responsibility of proclaiming the gospel can fall into the trap of trying to be popular rather than faithful.� (Morris)
c. For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ: For Paul, it was one or the other. He could not direct his ministry towards pleasing men and at the same time direct it to pleasing Jesus Christ. And if his concern is not first to please Jesus Christ, then he is not a servant of Christ.
i. Servant perhaps is not the best translation here; it may be better translated slave. �It is unfortunate that . . . our English translations should so consistently fail to give this word its true meaning, thereby encouraging the false conception of Christian �service� (as something essentially voluntary and part-time) so characteristic of modern religious idealism. The �bond-servant of Christ� is not free to offer or withhold his �service�; his life is not his own, but belongs entirely to his Lord.� (Duncan, cited in Morris)
2. (11-12) The Divine source of Paul�s gospel.
But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
a. The gospel that I preached to you: �Paul makes a play on words when he refers to �the gospel that I gospelled to you.�� (Morris)
b. Is not according to man: In contrast to the different gospel brought by others, Paul�s message was a revelation from God. Paul�s message was not a man�s attempt to reach up and understand God; it was God�s effort to bow down and communicate with man.
i. Men may have many marvelous things to teach us, but God�s revelation has all things which pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3); now more than ever, the world does not need the good advice and wisdom of man, it needs a revelation from God.
ii. Did Paul�s message � the message of the Bible � really come from God, or is it a fine achievement of man�s spiritual and moral search for God? If Paul�s gospel, the message of the Bible, really came form God, then it is the most important fact in the world. If it is just a human invention or achievement, then it is the most dangerous lie in the world.
iii. There isn�t any shortage of people who claim that they have a revelation from God. But we have to be careful to not regard a message as being from God if it isn�t. How can we know that the Bible is really from God and not man?
iv. First, we know that the Bible is reliable, accurate and trustworthy as an ancient document. We know this because the text itself is reliable (we know this from the study and comparison of ancient manuscripts). And we know this because archaeology has consistently confirmed and supported the Biblical record, and has never contradicted the Bible. People, places, and events in the Bible are repeatedly verified by archaeology.
v. Second, we know that the Bible is unique, and special among all books ever written. It is unique in its continuity, being written over 1600 years, over 60 generations, by more than 40 authors, on three different continents, in different circumstances and places, in different times, different moods, in three languages, concerning scores of controversial subjects, but it speaks with one united voice. It is unique in its circulation, being the most published and popular book ever. It is unique in its translation, being the first book translated, and having been translated into more languages than any other book. It is unique in its survival, having survived the ravages of time, manual transcription, persecution, and criticism. It is unique in its honesty, dealing with the sins and failures of its heroes in a manner quite unknown among ancient literature. It is unique in its influence, having far and away a greater influence on culture and literature than any other book in existence.
vi. Third, the Bible is a book of predictive prophecy, literally fulfilled. For example, there are some 300 prophecies concerning the Messiah that were exactly and literally fulfilled by Jesus, such as His birth at Bethlehem, His manner of death and burial, and so forth. Another example is that the Bible describes the rise of four successive world empires (Babylonia, Persia, Greece, Rome) with such accuracy that all critics can do is claim that the passage was actually written after the events happened.
vii. Fourth, the Bible is a book that has profoundly changed the lives of millions, irrespective of their race, class, era, sex, locale, age, or social status.
viii. One might look at all this evidence and still say, �It doesn�t prove that the Bible came from God.� The point is granted; but it does give us a reason to believe that it did. In the end, believing the Bible is from God is a step of faith. But it is a step of intelligent and informed faith, not a leap of blind faith.
c. I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ: Paul�s own relationship to this gospel was unique. Most everyone hears the gospel from someone else; this is God�s �normal� way of communicating the gospel (Romans 10:14-15). But Paul was not �normal� in this respect. He received the gospel in a dramatic, direct revelation when He encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus.
i. Acts 9:1-9 describes this remarkable incident. The Lord Jesus spoke to Paul directly on the Road to Damascus, and then Paul spent three days without sight, before a Christian named Ananias came to him. It was probably during this time � either on the road or during the three days � when Jesus brought His gospel to Paul. Paul certainly had the gospel right away, because he was both saved and began to immediately preach the message Jesus gave him (Acts 9:20-22).
ii. �Paul did not receive instruction from Ananias. Paul had already been called, enlightened, and taught by Christ in the road. His contact with Ananias was merely a testimonial to the fact that Paul had been called by Christ to preach the gospel.� (Luther)
3. (13-24) Paul proves that his message did not come from man.
For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother�s womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord�s brother. (Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.) Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ. But they were hearing only, �He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy.� And they glorified God in me.
a. For you have heard: Everyone had heard how Paul came to the Lord! Paul�s story was familiar to Christians in general and especially to those he had personally ministered to. We can trust that if Paul was among a group a people for a while, preaching the gospel to them, it wouldn�t be long until he shared his personal testimony.
i. The value of a personal testimony is not restricted to those who have a dramatic conversion story like Paul did. We can see the glory of God�s work just as much in those who think they have a �boring� testimony.
b. My former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it: Paul�s credentials as a zealous Jew, persecuting Christians, are beyond doubt. Acts 8:1-3 and 9:1-2 describe Paul�s energetic persecution of Christians.
i. This shows that Paul was not looking for some other truth when he was first confronted with the gospel of Jesus. Unfortunately, many of those who are seeking a �new revelation� will find it - and find deception that draws them away from Jesus Christ (like a young Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon church).
c. But when it pleased God: Paul did not come to Jesus because any man decided that he should. It wasn�t at the pleasure of any man, but when it pleased God. Additionally, God did not choose Paul because there was something in Paul that pleased him; God called Paul through His grace, God�s unmerited favor.
i. We know this call wasn�t because of anything Paul did, because he said he was called from my mother�s womb. Therefore, God called Paul before Paul did anything to deserve it.
ii. Before Paul was a Christian, the emphasis was on what he had done: I persecuted . . . I advanced . . . (I was) more exceedingly zealous. Once Paul follows Jesus Christ, the emphasis was on what God had done: God, who separated me . . . called me . . . reveal His Son in me.
iii. Martin Luther summarizes Paul�s idea: �Did God call me on account of my holy life? Or on account of my pharsaical religion? Or on account of my prayers, fastings, and works? Never. Well, then, it is certain God did not call me on account of my blasphemies, persecutions, oppressions. What prompted Him to call me? His grace alone.�
iv. �He wanted to show that his calling depended on the secret election of God, and that he was ordained an apostle, not because he had fitted himself for undertaking such an office by his own industry or because God had discerned that he was worthy of having it bestowed on him, but because, before he was born, he had been set apart by the secret purpose of God.� (Calvin)
d. Separated is an important word. The Greek word aphorizo is related to the word used as a title for the religious elite in Paul�s day, the �separated ones� known as the Pharisees. Before Paul came to Jesus, he was an important Pharisee (Philippians 3:5), but he wasn�t really separated to God. Now, through the work of Jesus, he was really separated to God!
i. �The word is akin to that for �Pharisee�, and the Pharisees were in no doubt about it: they held firmly that they were �separated� to God.� (Morris)
e. To reveal His Son in me: In Galatians 1:12, Paul speaks of how Jesus was revealed to him (the revelation of Jesus Christ). But here is something different, and perhaps more glorious: Jesus revealed in Paul. God wants to do more than reveal Jesus to us; He wants to reveal Jesus in us.
i. �What begins by being a revelation of Christ to Paul becomes a revelation of Christ in Paul as the Spirit produces his fruits in unaccustomed soil.� (Cole, cited in Morris)
f. That I might preach Him among the Gentiles: Does God have a sense of humor? He selects a man before he is born for the job of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. And that man grows up hating Gentiles, and believing that the only reason God made Gentiles was so they would fuel the fires of hell.
g. Additionally, upon his conversion, Paul did not immediately confer with flesh and blood (even the eminent apostles in Jerusalem) to discover the content of the gospel. He didn�t need to, because the gospel was revealed directly to him by Jesus.
i. We shouldn�t think that Paul is saying here that it is wrong to hear of the gospel through others, or that those who do have an inferior salvation. The point is simply that the gospel Paul preached was not a gospel of man, and this is settled forever because he did not receive it from any man.
ii. Paul did not travel to what we would call Saudi Arabia. The area known in that day as Arabia in his day extended all the way to the city of Damascus. Paul probably lived in some quiet desert place outside of Damascus.
h. Then after three years: Paul did not learn the gospel from the apostles, because he had been a Christian for three years before he even met the apostles Peter and James.
i. �A new convert, especially one who had been foremost in persecuting the believers, would surely touch base with the leaders of the movement he was now espousing, if only to make sure that he now had a correct understanding of what the Christian movement was teaching. But Paul did not do this.� (Morris)
ii. Nor was Paul �commanded� to appear before the apostles in some kind of examination. It is indicated when Paul wrote, �to see Peter.� The word for to see speaks of someone coming as a tourist. ��A word used,� says Chrysostom, �by those who go to see great and famous cities.�� (Lightfoot) The idea is that Paul was not commanded to come to Jerusalem to give an account to Peter or the other disciples, but he came of his own accord, and visited as a �tourist.�
i. They were hearing only, �He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith he once tried to destroy.� If Paul did not learn the essential content of the gospel from any man, then it is also true that the early Christians were slow in learning just who Paul was in Jesus. All they really knew was that he had been dramatically converted - for which they glorified God. After his conversion, Paul was a �normal Christian� for many years.
i. Paul�s status as unknown is certainly different from our own habit of puffing up any prominent convert as soon as they come to Jesus. Paul was happy and well served to spend many years in obscurity before God raised him up.
ii. In this whole section, Paul shows there was enough contact between him and the other apostles to show that they were in perfect agreement, but not so much that it would show that Paul got his gospel from them instead of God.
iii. Paul�s whole point in the second part of this chapter is important. His gospel was true, and his experience was valid, because it really came from God. Does your gospel come from God, or have you made it up yourself? Does your Christian experience come from God, or have you made it up yourself? Only what comes from God can really save us and make a lasting difference in our lives.
P.S If you have a problem with me Ill meet you in person and tell you the same thing to your face!
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 7 Oct, 2009 10:18 AM
Relax. You also might consider that first of all not many people really read these posts and those who do probably are not going to read the several pages that you post.
Its good you stand up for what you believe without too much concern about who is offended> But you are wrong when you attack another mans ministry "period".
I as usually only read a small portion of what you posted. Just enough to know where you are coming from.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 7 Oct, 2009 10:28 AM
Titus 3:9-10 (KJV)
9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
10 A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject;
Second, to esteem someone better than ourselves simply means to value them more than we value ourselves. To some that may seem impossible, but it isn't. That is exactly what Jesus did, and Paul uses Jesus as the model for what he is preaching here in the next few verses
This is the only time the word "heretic" is used in Scripture. It is a transliteration of the Greek word "HAIRETIKOS," and its only definition is "a schismatic" (Strong's Concordance); i.e., one who causes schisms.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 7 Oct, 2009 04:14 PM
Alright, I wasn't going to debate what you said about Andrew and speaking to the problem - because I get furious when people attack any ministry.
Your theology is way wrong, but you actually are right about what Andrew says about speaking to the problem - but Andrew is quite correct - and proof from the word is below. I also know from personal experience - it works and have been healed twice that way - and have also been healed instantly twice - by claiming it in Jesus name. People who do not believe these truths can not operate in them - those who do can - simple as that.
Oh by the way I didn't copy this from Andrews site or any other ministries site.
Proverbs 18:20 (KJV)
20 A man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth; and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled.
Proverbs 18:21 (KJV)
21 Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.
�Cancer� (problem) in the name of Jesus I curse you. Death and life are in the power of the tongue. I use the power of this tongue to curse you. I command you to die cancer in Jesus name. Now I release life into you body. I command the parts of you that have been damaged by cancer to be healed in Jesus name.�
�Heavenly Father, I thank you and praise you that by Jesus' stripes I am healed. Your word is true and the devil is a liar�
Mark 11:21 (KJV)
21 And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.
Mark 11:22 (KJV)
22 And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God.
Mark 11:23 (KJV)
23 For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
Speak to the problem rather than to God about the problem. This is faith that we believe that God has given the authority to do these things as Jesus stated above as He said.
There is power in what is said when what is said is believed from the heart.
Romans 10:9 (KJV)
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Here again we see that power and change occurs as a result of speech and believing from the heart.
James 5:16 (KJV)
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
You have a choice to believe God's word. Instead of pe
ople interpreting the word for you, study it for yourself �that you may be approved�. Something which helps me greatly is a computer program I have which also contains 4 different commentaries. This helps tremendously in finding the true meaning of scripture. There's a tremendous amount of false teaching out there.
BEING SOBER MINDED..ASKING GOOD QUESTIONS VS. ASSUMING.. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO REPLY
Posted : 8 Oct, 2009 05:16 PM
Your entitled to think what you want, but its all in the word and besides that I have the personal proof.
I think you are right that we should "call out" false teachers,But when the word speaks of false teachers - it is speaking of those who teach works or something other than - faith in and a relationship with Christ Jesus..
I think probably most of the websites that focus on trashing other ministries - are just plain evil - and that a great deal of that comes out of jealousy. The people who do that sort of things are going to pay a price for it on rewards day in Heaven.
Someone once sent me to a website "World News" or something like that - that basically trashed almost every well know man of God that you could think of it seemed. The guy who sent me there was a Christian and had a huge "spiritual warefare" website. I was so angry reading that garbage that I could not see straight.
I guarantee you that theres no one more committed to the word than Andrew. But I am sure you realize we need to be careful about who we criticize. No one has "all truth" so in that sense we could all be considered false teachers.
I am nondenominational like Wommack, but you got Pentacostal, Charismatic, Chruch of God, Baptist, Lutheran, ect, etc, etc.All have some different beliefs or views on certain sciptures. So if you follow that to the logical conclusion - almost everyone has to be a false teacher.
