l***@hotmail.com
2006-08-14 03:58:13 UTC
Part 2 of 2
Continuing.....
So how is this Divine Light (DL) imparted unto men?
1) Natural faculties.
We were created such that it is natural to us to be receptive of DL.
This was our original design. However, after the fall, this construct
was greatly demented. Originally we were created to operate under but
on inclination -to derive all knowledge from God Himself. However,
after the fall, as the Divine reflection reveals, "They have become
like Us, knowing good and evil." The moral consciousness of Adam was
originally "receptively reconstructive. That is, man operated off of
what God revealed to him, reconstructing it to make it his own while
yet based on DL. However, after the fall, man's inclination was _only)
creatively constructive. That is, man was made his own reference point
of adjudicating what was right and what was wrong. Orginally, God
addressed His commands to the consciousness of man either directly,
verbally communicated, or indirectly through the original perfect
condition of the moral consciousness. But after the fall, this was
lost to all men.
So here in lies the necessity of the Scriptures. Apart from them, the
moral conscience of men operate independently of God, adjudicating
right and wrong as they seem fit and the moment. This does not detract
from man yet retaining something of his original self. Thus it is a
universal construct that it is wrong to murder. However, left to
himself, man can only elevate this to a a unversal, not to an absolute
because man is constitutionally finite. Even given that all men from
the history of time so believe it to be a moral evil, does not elevate
it beyond the finite. Natural faculites therefore require DL inorder
to correct assess the true nature of reality. This is the Pauline
argument in Rom 1:18-32.
2) The Scriptures.
The only qualification that needs be made at this point is, "as
illuminated by God." Because man, "by the one act of sin" lost his
original inclination to be only Divinely derivative (being finite, man
is naturally derivative), to correctly understand their meaning, DL
must be imparted. Thus Peter writes"
2 Pet. 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture
is a matter of one's own interpretation,
3) God gives divine light without making use of any means that operate
by their own power or natural force. The Word of God is made use of
only to convey to the mind the subject matter of saving instruction,
but the mere verbage is not the cause of the sense of their divine
excellency in our hearts. The mind cannot see the excellency of any
doctrine unless that doctrine be first in the mind by the reading of
the Word. However, the seeing of the excellency of the doctrine within
is immediately a ministry granted to us by the Spirit of God alone.
(sola spiritus sanctus)
And is this not exactly what the Scriptures themselves attest to? Just
a couple of instances:
John 2:22 When therefore He was raised from the dead, His disciples
remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture, and the
word which Jesus had spoken.
John 12:16 These things His disciples did not understand at the first;
but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things
were written of Him, and that they had done these things to Him.
Acts 11:16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, .
. . .
Okay, a defense of what has been written or a direct rebuttal to what
Brenda and others have asserted.
1) The regenerate are different than the unregenerate.
1 Cor. 2:12-14 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but
the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given
to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human
wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts
with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of
the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot
understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
John 14:19 "After a little while the world will behold Me no more; but
you will behold Me; because I live, you shall live also.
Those who have been "born again" of "Spirt and of water" (the Word)
have the new capacity to receptively reconstruct that which is derived
from DL. Those who have not been regenerated, remain in their state of
blindedness.
2 Cor. 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of
the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the
glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
The unregenerate are slaves to the darkness of sin and Satan. Their
inclination is always and only "continually to do evil."
Therefore DL is a gift of God (Mt 11:25-27), a revelation (2 Cor 3:18),
requires the act of recreation (2 Cor 4:6) as an election/calling of
God (Gal 1:15-16).
John 17:6 "I manifested Thy name to the men whom Thou gavest Me out of
the world; Thine they were, and Thou gavest them to Me, and they have
kept Thy word.
2) Now to the point of greatest contention: doctrine is rational. For
expediency and for brevity, let me just once again quote Edwards:
It is rational to suppose that divine things are so exceedingly
superior to other things that they could be distinquished as high,
glorious, and Godlike insomuch that if the difference were but seen,
they would have a convincing, satisfying influence upon anyone that
they are divine. What reason can be offered against it, unless we
would argue that God is not remarkably distinquished in glory from men?
It is also rational to supose that when God speaks to the world, there
should be something in His word vastly different from man's word.
Doubtless it would be thought rational to expect this and unreasonable
to think otherwise.
If there be such a distinquishing excellency in divine things, it is
rational to suppose that there may be such a thing as seeing it. It is
no argument that there is no such thing as such an excellency because
some cannot see it. It is rational to suppose that those whose minds
are full of spiritual pollution should have any relish or sense of
divine beauty or excellency? It need not seem at all strange that sin
should so blind the mind, seeing that men's pride, anger, jealousy, and
melancholy blind them in secular matters already.
It is rational to suppose that this knowledge should be given
immediately by God and not be obtained by natural means. Upon what
account should it seem unreasonable that there should be any immediate
communication between God and the creature? Why should He that made
all things not still have something immediately to do with the things
that He has made? And because spiritual wisdom and grace are the
highest and most excellent gifts that God bestows on any creature (it
is that wherein man's happiness consists and on which his everlasting
welfare depends), it is rational to suppose that God should reserve
this divine communication to be bestowed immediately by Himself
according to His own sovereign will as a thing too great for second
causes to be concerned in!"
End quote.
Now to the heart of the matter. Is it not ultimately then rational to
suppose that it should be beyond a man's power to obtain DL by the mere
strength of natural reason? DL uses those things which are familar to
men, i.e. creation, but is in and of itself, wholly separate from them.
Therefore DL is beyond the realm of men and must of a necessity be
specifically imparted to men inorder to perceive the beauty, the
loveliness and the resonableness of Divine/Spiritual things as they
truly are in God.
Now, if we define reason very strictly being not the faculty of mental
perception in general but rather the power of inferring by argument,
then the perceiving of spiritual things no more belongs to reason than
it belongs to any other sense of man. Men do not "feel" the sense of
red or see as to perceive the sweetness of honey. Reasonablity is only
capable of perceiving truth, not arrising to sensing its excellency.
Application: Very briefly put and simply stated, if the Gospel were a
matter of reason, dependent upon intellectual cognizance and
intellectual perception, then it would be beyond the reach of the
greater part of humanity. But this is contrary to what is taught, is
it not?
1 Cor. 1:22-29
For indeed Jews ask for signs, and Greeks search for wisdom; but we
preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles
foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness
of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise
according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has
chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has
chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are
strong, and the base things of the world and the despised, God has
chosen, the things that are not, that He might nullify the things that
are, that no man should boast before God.
sola scriptura
sola gratia
sola fide
Continuing.....
So how is this Divine Light (DL) imparted unto men?
1) Natural faculties.
We were created such that it is natural to us to be receptive of DL.
This was our original design. However, after the fall, this construct
was greatly demented. Originally we were created to operate under but
on inclination -to derive all knowledge from God Himself. However,
after the fall, as the Divine reflection reveals, "They have become
like Us, knowing good and evil." The moral consciousness of Adam was
originally "receptively reconstructive. That is, man operated off of
what God revealed to him, reconstructing it to make it his own while
yet based on DL. However, after the fall, man's inclination was _only)
creatively constructive. That is, man was made his own reference point
of adjudicating what was right and what was wrong. Orginally, God
addressed His commands to the consciousness of man either directly,
verbally communicated, or indirectly through the original perfect
condition of the moral consciousness. But after the fall, this was
lost to all men.
So here in lies the necessity of the Scriptures. Apart from them, the
moral conscience of men operate independently of God, adjudicating
right and wrong as they seem fit and the moment. This does not detract
from man yet retaining something of his original self. Thus it is a
universal construct that it is wrong to murder. However, left to
himself, man can only elevate this to a a unversal, not to an absolute
because man is constitutionally finite. Even given that all men from
the history of time so believe it to be a moral evil, does not elevate
it beyond the finite. Natural faculites therefore require DL inorder
to correct assess the true nature of reality. This is the Pauline
argument in Rom 1:18-32.
2) The Scriptures.
The only qualification that needs be made at this point is, "as
illuminated by God." Because man, "by the one act of sin" lost his
original inclination to be only Divinely derivative (being finite, man
is naturally derivative), to correctly understand their meaning, DL
must be imparted. Thus Peter writes"
2 Pet. 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture
is a matter of one's own interpretation,
3) God gives divine light without making use of any means that operate
by their own power or natural force. The Word of God is made use of
only to convey to the mind the subject matter of saving instruction,
but the mere verbage is not the cause of the sense of their divine
excellency in our hearts. The mind cannot see the excellency of any
doctrine unless that doctrine be first in the mind by the reading of
the Word. However, the seeing of the excellency of the doctrine within
is immediately a ministry granted to us by the Spirit of God alone.
(sola spiritus sanctus)
And is this not exactly what the Scriptures themselves attest to? Just
a couple of instances:
John 2:22 When therefore He was raised from the dead, His disciples
remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture, and the
word which Jesus had spoken.
John 12:16 These things His disciples did not understand at the first;
but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things
were written of Him, and that they had done these things to Him.
Acts 11:16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, .
. . .
Okay, a defense of what has been written or a direct rebuttal to what
Brenda and others have asserted.
1) The regenerate are different than the unregenerate.
1 Cor. 2:12-14 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but
the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given
to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human
wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts
with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of
the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot
understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
John 14:19 "After a little while the world will behold Me no more; but
you will behold Me; because I live, you shall live also.
Those who have been "born again" of "Spirt and of water" (the Word)
have the new capacity to receptively reconstruct that which is derived
from DL. Those who have not been regenerated, remain in their state of
blindedness.
2 Cor. 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of
the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the
glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
The unregenerate are slaves to the darkness of sin and Satan. Their
inclination is always and only "continually to do evil."
Therefore DL is a gift of God (Mt 11:25-27), a revelation (2 Cor 3:18),
requires the act of recreation (2 Cor 4:6) as an election/calling of
God (Gal 1:15-16).
John 17:6 "I manifested Thy name to the men whom Thou gavest Me out of
the world; Thine they were, and Thou gavest them to Me, and they have
kept Thy word.
2) Now to the point of greatest contention: doctrine is rational. For
expediency and for brevity, let me just once again quote Edwards:
It is rational to suppose that divine things are so exceedingly
superior to other things that they could be distinquished as high,
glorious, and Godlike insomuch that if the difference were but seen,
they would have a convincing, satisfying influence upon anyone that
they are divine. What reason can be offered against it, unless we
would argue that God is not remarkably distinquished in glory from men?
It is also rational to supose that when God speaks to the world, there
should be something in His word vastly different from man's word.
Doubtless it would be thought rational to expect this and unreasonable
to think otherwise.
If there be such a distinquishing excellency in divine things, it is
rational to suppose that there may be such a thing as seeing it. It is
no argument that there is no such thing as such an excellency because
some cannot see it. It is rational to suppose that those whose minds
are full of spiritual pollution should have any relish or sense of
divine beauty or excellency? It need not seem at all strange that sin
should so blind the mind, seeing that men's pride, anger, jealousy, and
melancholy blind them in secular matters already.
It is rational to suppose that this knowledge should be given
immediately by God and not be obtained by natural means. Upon what
account should it seem unreasonable that there should be any immediate
communication between God and the creature? Why should He that made
all things not still have something immediately to do with the things
that He has made? And because spiritual wisdom and grace are the
highest and most excellent gifts that God bestows on any creature (it
is that wherein man's happiness consists and on which his everlasting
welfare depends), it is rational to suppose that God should reserve
this divine communication to be bestowed immediately by Himself
according to His own sovereign will as a thing too great for second
causes to be concerned in!"
End quote.
Now to the heart of the matter. Is it not ultimately then rational to
suppose that it should be beyond a man's power to obtain DL by the mere
strength of natural reason? DL uses those things which are familar to
men, i.e. creation, but is in and of itself, wholly separate from them.
Therefore DL is beyond the realm of men and must of a necessity be
specifically imparted to men inorder to perceive the beauty, the
loveliness and the resonableness of Divine/Spiritual things as they
truly are in God.
Now, if we define reason very strictly being not the faculty of mental
perception in general but rather the power of inferring by argument,
then the perceiving of spiritual things no more belongs to reason than
it belongs to any other sense of man. Men do not "feel" the sense of
red or see as to perceive the sweetness of honey. Reasonablity is only
capable of perceiving truth, not arrising to sensing its excellency.
Application: Very briefly put and simply stated, if the Gospel were a
matter of reason, dependent upon intellectual cognizance and
intellectual perception, then it would be beyond the reach of the
greater part of humanity. But this is contrary to what is taught, is
it not?
1 Cor. 1:22-29
For indeed Jews ask for signs, and Greeks search for wisdom; but we
preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles
foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness
of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise
according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has
chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has
chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are
strong, and the base things of the world and the despised, God has
chosen, the things that are not, that He might nullify the things that
are, that no man should boast before God.
sola scriptura
sola gratia
sola fide