Lucruri bune facute de oameni dupa cadere – Ionel Tutac

SCHITA DE PREDICA:
Lucruri bune facute de oameni dupa cadere

1. Adam

  • a) si-a recunoscut goliciunea-Geneza 3:7
  • b) s-a temut de Dumnezeu-Geneza 3:8
  • c) si-a dat seama de siretenia Diavolului-Geneza 3:11-13
  • d) s-a preocupat de familie-Geneza 3:20, 4:1
  • e) si-a indreptat multumirea inspre Dumnezeu-Geneza 4:1, 25

Photo credit www.thewrap.com

2. David

  • a) si-a recunoscut pacatul-2 Samuel 12:13
  • b) s-a rugat si a postit-2 Samuel 12:16-17
  • c) si-a apreciat sotia-2 Samuel 12:24
  • d) s-a preocupat de educatia religioasa a copilului-2 Samuel 12:25
  • e) si-a reluat rolul de lider al natiunii-2 Samuel 12:27-31

Photo credit www.jesus-story.net

3. Petru

  • a) si-a plans pacatul-Matei 26:75
  • b) s-a dus sa cerceteze mormantul Mantuitorului-Luca 24:14
  • c) si-a declarat dragostea pentru Isus -Ioan 21:15-17
  • d) si-a propovaduit cu curaj crezul-Faptele apostolilor 2:14-36
  • e) s-a implicat in organizarea bisericii-Faptele apostolilor 6:1-4

Ionel Tutac

SURSA – http://www.baptist-tm.ro/schita-de-predica-lucruri-bune-facute-de-oameni-dupa-cadere/

A historical Timeline and five amazing facts about Adam and biblical events

CITESTE acest articol in limba ROMANA aici.

This timeline chart which you can actually purchase here is a great way to visually understand the Bible, especially the Old Testament. Here are some of the facts gleaned by overlaying the births and deaths of some of the biblical patriarchs.

  1. Surprises in the overlap. The Bible lists ages of fathers and their death dates, but a timeline shows us how they overlap. Methuselah, the man in the Bible who lived the longest, died the year of the flood. Adam was still alive when Methuselah and his son Lemech (Noah’s father) were born.
  2. Noah’s son Shem was still alive when Abraham was born. Abraham could have learned about the history of the world from Shem who learned about Adam on down from his grandfather and then passed it on to his great-great-great (8 greats) grandson Abraham.
  3. Who came first, Queen Esther or Daniel? They both lived during the Babylonian captivity. Esther’s book is first in the Bible, but she lived nearly a century after Daniel- toward the end of the captivity.
  4. What was going on in the world during important Bible events? For example, the Biblical prophet Daniel lived during the same century as the Chinese philosopher Confucius.
  5. What was happening in the Bible during important world events?  The Greek poet Homer and Solomon lived during the same century.

VIDEO by Amazing Bible Timeline

Beni Faragau – ‘Supunerea’ incepand de la Adam

Cum se explica faptul ca femeia nu si-a pastrat locul si nu si-a implinit rolul?

Deci cum se explica faptul ca tocmai femeia, pe care Dumnezeu i-a dat-o barbatului, l-a tras pe barbat in groapa caderii? Cum se poate?

Spuneam dimineata din experienta mea. Eram intr-o sala plina cu barbati. Eram la o conferinta cu Crestini dupa Evanghelie, cu unul dintre profesorii mei si el pune o intrebare: Cine-i vinovat de dezastrul pe planeta aceasta? Si in cor barbatesc: FEMEIA.

Si David R. se apleaca putin in fata si continua: ,,Femeia a fost inselata de cel mai intelept  si stralucitor arhanghel al lui Dumnezeu. Barbatul l-a vandut pe Dumnezeu pentru o femeie.”

Cine-i mai vulnerabil? S-a lasat o liniste in sala de mormant. Dragii mei, daca n-am avea o nevoie, o lipsa, Dumnezeu n-ar fi incurcat lucrurile, dandu-ne un ajutor.

BENI FARAGAU Genesa creatie cadere rascumparare

Caderea

Primul lucru pe care trebuie sa-l recunosc este ca Dumnezeu stie ce face. Dumnezeu nu face lucruri in plus. Si de aceea, Dumnezeu a zis: ,,Nu-i bine ca omul sa fie singur, am sa-i fac un ajutor potrivit pentru el.”  Dati-mi voie sa va explic cum s-a intamplat caderea. Dar pentru asta, nu-i suficient sa asculti predici de aici si de colo. Trebuie sa intelegi cartile Scripturii.

Si in seara aceasta,  as vrea sa va explic Genesa. Are doar 5o de capitole. Uitati-va la ea ca intreg. Sunt trei ingrediente, Genesa e facuta din 3 parti. Doua capitole de creatie, capitolele 3-11 cadere, si de la capitolul 12-50 este rascumparare, care  continua prin Exod, pana pe cruce, pe Calvar.

Rascumpararea: – Biblia este despre rascumparare. De ce a prefatat Dumnezeu istoria rascumpararii cu secventa Creatie-Cadere? Atunci cand Dumnezeu a terminat de creat totul, inclusiv pe om, „Dumnezeu s-a uitat la tot ce facuse si iata ca erau foarte bune.” (Genesa 1:31). Cand Dumnezeu zice ca e un lucru foarte bun, ii foarte bun. Dar intrebarea mea e: „Ce-i foarte bine pentru Dumnezeu?” Un lucru care tu il poti strica sau un lucru pe care sa nu-l poti strica? Ce-i foarte bine la Dumnezeu?

Creatia este stricata in relatia cu Dumnezeu pentru ca urmeaza alungarea din Eden. Deci, foarte bine pentru Dumnezeu este un lucru pe care tu il poti strica. Si asta este inclusiv rolul pe care Dumnezeu ti l-a dat. Stiti ce a facut femeia? Asta se cheama furca Edenica, alegerea dintre viata si moarte. In felul acesta a dat Dumnezeu omului libertatea de alegere. Tu nu esti un robot. Dumnezeu ti-a pus inainte viata si moartea. A spus: „Alege viata.” Dar El nu te obliga sa alegi viata. Tu poti alege moartea daca vrei. Aleg moartea prin neascultarea de Dumnezeu.

Orice viciu este o virtute supralicitata

Aleg viata prin ascultarea de Dumnezeu. Dragii mei, orice viciu este o virtute supralicitata. Cand Dumnezeu a facut-o pe femeie ca ajutor potrivit pentru lupta spirituala, i-a dat femeii o sensibilitate spirituala incomparabila cu a barbatului. Noi o numim intuitie feminina. Dar o numim si curiozitate. Spune-i unei femei o jumatate de propozitie si zi-i: „Restul iti spun maine.” S-o crezi tu. Nu te lasa pana cand nu afla tot.

Curiozitatea asta a ei a facut-o sa se intoarca spre sarpe si cand sarpele a inceput sa o traga pe mulineta, femeia a vazut ca pomul este placut de privit, bun de mancat, ca sa deschida cuiva mintea. Si a ales moartea. Si-a exersat libertatea de a-si parasi locul si rolul pe care Dumnezeu i l-a dat. Ca ajutor potrivit, ar fi trebuit sa se intoarca si sa zica: „Hei barbatule, lasa elefantul. Hai si vorbeste cu sarpele.” Dar femeile nu fac lucrurile acestea.

Femeile se vara in fata. Femeile au raspunsuri. Femeile iau initiativa. Noi barbatii, stam picior peste picior, zicem: „Du-te si fa.” Nu dragii mei, daca vrei sa-ti ajuti barbatul, sezi la locul tau, impinge-l in fata. El este preotul in casa, capul familiei. Pune responsabilitatea pe umerii lui.

Observati, trasaturile pe care o femeie le are, intuitia aceea feminina, curiozitatea ei a fost folosita de sarpe si femeia a avut libertatea sa ii dea crezare. Dumnezeu i-a dat aceasta libertate. Asa se explica faptul ca ea a atras pe barbatul ei, dar el nu-i mai putin vinovat. Dumnezeu, la judecata, la chemat mai intai pe Adam, apoi pe Eva. „Unde esti Adame?” Pentru a-si putea implini slujba, Dumnezeu a dat femeii aceasta sensibilitate in lumea spirituala. Dar, ascultati surorilor:

Orice femeie are libertatea sa-si accepte sau nu rolul si locul hotarat de Dumnezeu: acela de ajutor potrivit.

Asa cum am provocat barbatii, curajul de a te da rob a lui Hristos, asa trebuie sa provoc femeile, curajul de a te da rob lui Hristos, de-a te aseza la locul pe care Dumnezeu ti l-a dat. Sarpele e un mincinos. Lumea asta este a lui. Tot ce cititi in ziare, tot ce vedeti la televizor, internet, sunt minciunile lui. Aveti impresia ca va veti implini daca veti ajunge presedintele Statelor Unite, sau politai, dirijand circulatia, in mijlocul drumului in Seattle. Nu-i adevarat.

Singura implinire a noastra si a dvs. este sa ne asezam la locul si la rolul pe care Dumnezeu ni l-a dat.
Cine sunt si pentru ce am fost creata? Am fost creata ca sa fiu ajutor potrivit in lupta spirituala, care astazi nu-i mai mica ca si in Eden. Dimpotriva, se intarteste de la o zi la alta. Asta imi spune textul din Genesa 2.

Vezi aici mesajul

Din Seria Slujirea in Familia Crestina

The question of the historical Adam and why evangelicals are capitulating on this

by STEVEN WEDGEWORTH

creation of man

creation of man (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Modern evangelicalism has always had something of an identity problem. Wanting to be neither Fundamentalism nor Liberalism, it has often found itself unable to sit comfortably in the middle. More often than not, and sometimes with a bit of pressure from either side, it ends up swinging back and forth between the poles, often unable to explain why it isn’t one or the other. Traditionally a commitment to Biblical inerrancy was the one sure thing that all evangelicals could agree upon, but even that, in light of contemporary challenges, is proving inadequate. The question of hermeneutics must (again) be dealt with, as more and more professing evangelicals are re-reading the opening chapters of Genesis as myth. While the particulars of the discussion are not fully uniform (whether one must or should be a “literal” six-day creationist or not), the question of the historical Adam is now quite definitely the new lynchpin. We would like to here lay out some of the consequences of denying the historical Adam in order to substantiate our claim that this is a boundary of orthodoxy, but first a bit of context.

The reason that evangelicals are losing the historical Adam are several, but they all boil down to the dominance of the Darwinistic evolutionary theory, both in the academies and in the media. For both academic and cultural reasons, the denial of this evolutionary theory is shameful, and it is becoming increasingly clear that this theory also demands a sort of polygenesis. Thus the historical Adam cannot be retained. There are certainly those on both sides of the issue who hold out hope for a middle position, but as it currently stands, naturalistic science is basically agreed that the early chapters of Genesis cannot be historical. And so, in the face of this pressure, evangelicals are falling in line.

Read the entire article here – http://calvinistinternational.com/2013/05/10/what-depends-upon-an-historical-adam/

Also read Denny Burke’s article here –

More on the Poison Pill: Responding to Stanley, McKnight, and Bird – The doctrine of scripture is foundational, and at a time when it is so contested it is worth every effort to get it right

A challenge to evangelicals who have backed away from an historic Adam – Vern Poythress

Vern PoythressSCIENCE  A challenge to evangelicals who have backed away from an historic Adam, using a theologically informed look at ape ancestry genetic claims

As the battle between Darwinism and the Bible rages, some evangelicals have backed away from maintaining that Adam and Eve were real, historical individuals created in the way Genesis 2 relates:

“… the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. … So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.” 

In a just-published article from the Westminster Theological Journal, Westminster Theological Seminary professor Vern Poythress brilliantly explains why such a surrender is wrong biblically and scientifically. Poythress, with both a Th.D. and a Harvard Ph.D. in mathematics, is well-positioned to write about both theology and evolutionary theory. He has published 13 books, including Redeeming Science and Redeeming Sociology, and numerous scholarly articles. We post this new one with the author’s andWTJ’s permission. —Marvin Olasky

ADAM VERSUS CLAIMS FROM GENETICS

Did Adam and Eve exist? Does science say otherwise? The human genome project has produced voluminous data about the information contained in human DNA. Various news media and scientists tell us that this information demonstrates our ape ancestry. How do we evaluate these claims?

Click here to read the entire story on Worldmagazine – You will be prompted to scroll through 8 short pages: http://www.worldmag.com/2013/05/a_biblical_and_scientific_adam

Sin: The Dreadful Deformity of Our Soul

by John Piper Read the entire article here at – Desiring God

5PIPER12xx.jpgSomething terrible and profound happened to all humans when Adam sinned. All except Jesus, that is, “who knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). Something came into the world that had not been there before — something very powerful and very deadly in everyone of us.

But it was not exactly a “thing.” Yet it was more than the bad things we do. Sin and sinning are not the same. We do sinful things because there is this something in us called “sin.” It is a dreadful and deadly deformity of every one of us.

Consider these amazing statements from the Bible about who you are before and after conversion to Christ.

“All are under sin” (Romans 3:9). “I am sold under sin” (Romans 7:14). “You were onceslaves of sin” (Romans 6:17, 20). In other words, before the power of grace through Christ entered our lives, we were not just tempted by sin, we were ruled by it. Under it. Slaves to it.

So sin was not just what we did. It was the master that governed what we did. It was like a king over a territory. “Sin reigned” (Romans 5:21).

Sin is not just the bad deed and not just the bad desire, it is the doer and the desirer. So when Paul says he often does what he doesn’t want to do, he exclaims, “So it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me” (Romans 7:16–17). Sin is not just the bad deed or desire. It is the dreadfully deep, powerful doer of the deed and the desire.

Yet Paul does not excuse himself. “Wretched man that I am!” (Romans 7:24). Which means that this dreadful, deep, destructive power is who we are apart from Christ. It is not like a virus in me. It is a profound defect of me. The dreadful nature of sin is not just that itindwells me but that it defines me. It is me.

Know this about yourself. Don’t be naïve. Don’t be ignorant of your very nature. How will you worship your Redeemer, if you do not know what he has done for you? How will you pursue righteousness, if you do not know the deepest obstacle?

“Christ has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26; 2 Corinthians 5:21). And when he died, all those who are his died with him and — united to him. “We have been united with him in a death like his” (Romans 6:5). This is what happens through faith in Christ, expressed in baptism.

“Our old self was crucified . . . that we would no longer be enslaved to sin” (Romans 6:6;Galatians 2:20). That dreadful, desire-producing, deed-producing, me-defining power died when I died with Christ.

––

What then shall we do? “You must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:11). In Jesus Christ! “Sin will have no dominion over you, since you are . . .under grace” (Romans 6:14). Once “under sin” as king. Now “under grace” as king — “so that, as sin reigned, . . . grace also might reign” (Romans 5:21).

“Sin will have no dominion over you, since you are . . . under grace” (Romans 6:14). “You have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God” (Romans 6:22). And it was God himself who freed you. “But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart” (Romans 6:17).

It was God who dealt with sin in the death of Christ. It was God who put the monster sin to death. It was God who freed you from sin’s dominion. It is God who reigns over you. And it will be God who daily, through your faith, goes on putting the crucified monster to death (Colossians 3:5). “By the Spirit” you put sin to death (Romans 8:13). We are powerless in ourselves. God is the great sin-destroyer.

Worship him. And in his once-for-all victory over this dreadful deformity of our souls (Hebrews 9:26), do not let the defeated foe reign in your body (Romans 6:12). “Exhort one another every day . . . that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin” (Hebrews 3:13). God has worked a great victory over a great enemy. Live in it.

David Platt on Biblical Mahood and Womanhood

Click for David Platt RESOURCE PAGE

What better day to listen to David Platt giving the biblical perspective on manhood and womanhood, than on March 8 – the official international woman’s day.

adam eve gardenIn Part 1 – Platt gives a Summary of Manhood  & Womanhood in Genesis

Some of the Bible’s statements may sound chauvinistic or domineering in our contexts today, if they’re not understood in the context of the Scriptures’s teaching in Genesis 1&2. In part 1 we see 3 truths:

  1. Equal dignity. God created man and woman with equal dignity, both man and woman created in the image of God, and likeness of God, as representatives of  God. Man, not superior to woman, woman not superior to man. Any man who belittles a woman is violating the design of God. Any woman who disparages a man  is undercutting the beautiful design of God.
  2. Different roles. At the same time, men and women are created with different roles. Roles that don’t call into question one’s dignity and worth in any way. This is clear, we look to Genesis and walk through 8 reasons we know this is true. Man created to be the head, in a position of authority, Created first by the design of God with responsibility, representation, authority, entrusted by God. And woman, created to be the helper. Genesis 2:18 and 20 woman created as suitable helper for man, equal in dignity, different in roles in a complementary way, in a good way, not unfair, not demeaning. Cause God did this as a reflection of Himself and of the Trinity- God the Father, God the Son, God the Spirit- Equal in essence, worth, different in role. It’s not chauvinistic, domineering for God the Father to have authority over, and for God the Son to submit to God the Father. This is where we see, the understanding of the personhood of God is huge for understanding our own manhood and womanhood.
  3. For our good and His glory. So, He created all of us, men and women with equal dignity, different roles, for our good and His glory.

David Platt – Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Part 1

Platt recounts the points from the first part (video) and begins the second part message at the 9:30 minute mark.

Sin has woefully distorted those 2 roles. , and we bear, feel the effects of sin. Broken relations with men and women abound. Distorted ideas of manhood and womanhood abound all across our culture. What I want to show you is that it all goes back to Genesis 3.  Every detail is important. The anatomy and the consequence of sin are intertwined directly with manhood and womanhood. I want to show you how sin affects men differently than it affects women, how it expresses itself differently in man and in woman, how the results of sin are different in man and in woman. As sin expresses itself in man and in woman, we see how there’s an active picture and a passive picture.

Manhood-

  • Spineless abdication of his responsibility. This is the essence of what Adam did in verses 1-5. He stands by and does nothing. The serpent, in the very way he is tempting this couple, he is subverting the design of God. He does not come to the head (the man), he comes to woman. The serpent’s saying to woman, „Why don’t you lead the way? Why don’t you make this decision?” The serpent is undercutting the design of God, in the very way he is tempting. Then, when you get to verse 17, when God speaks directly to Adam, „Adam, because you have listened to the voice of your wife…” before He even addresses the fact that Adam ate the piece of fruit- direct disobedience to the command of God that Adam had been given. He says, „Fundamentally, you listened, instead of leading. You stood silently by, doing nothing.” Like a wimp, and then has the audacity, when God confronts his sin, to blame the woman.  Spineless abdication of responsibility in men, and dads, that is alive today because men refuse to lead. They sit and watch TV, play video games, surf the internet, who never come home from work, who don’t step up and take responsibility for wives and children. Males who think they are men, but in reality are little boys, shirking the responsibility that God Himself has entrusted to them. (13:00)
  • Aggressive: Selfish abuse of his authority. Then you go to the other extreme. And what you have is a more aggressive picture, selfish abuse of his authority. A man will rise up and say, „I’m not gonna be a wimp in this relationship, I’m gonna dominate this relationship. Some believe the end of v. 16 „he shall rule over you”, that word there is depicted of harsh, forceful, oppressive rulership, domineering, which is a distortion of God’s design. Headship does not equal domination, man’s controlling woman, man abusing his authority in his position of authority in the relationship. 
  • He will experience pain in his role of breadwinning. Notice of how punishment for sin in man’s life is then specifically linked to his responsibility. As a result of sin, man shall experience pain in his role of breadwinning. This is something that man was commanded to do in a way that woman was not commanded- working the ground and providing for the family. This is gender specific punishment for sin.

Womanhood-

  • Passive: Spineless dismissal of any responsibility. We can’t misunderstand the picture here. It’s not that woman was not responsible for her sin, here in Genesis 3. Man certainly had a level of responsibility, we see that when God confronts man for the accountability for sin, but, woman was obviously and clearly directly responsible for her disobedience to God. And, there’s a distorted picture, as a result of sin that leads, particularly when it comes to submission. Sin distorts this role and causes women to think, „Ok, well, if I’m the helper, he’s the head, then I’m not accountable for what I do. Maybe a woman sees her husband or her children doing something they should not be doing, she doesn’t do anything about it because she says, „That’s my role.” Or maybe she has a husband who is abusing her and she sits idly by, thinking that’s what submission is all about. That is a tragic distortion of biblical womanhood. God has created no woman to be a door mat. He’s created women with a responsibility towards God for how they think, for how they live, for the choices they make, the way they use and present their bodies. SIDE NOTE here- as we come up on summer here. I want to say to the women in our midst that you have a responsibility before God for the way that you dress for the summer, not to lead men into sin. Some would say, „Well, it’s their problem .” It is their problem and it is most definitely your problem. Do not do what Eve did in Genesis 3, leading your brother into sin. Run from every appearance of that. Guard your brother from sin in every way you can. 
  • Agressive: Selfish defiance against authority. In v. 16, as a result of sin, God says to the woman, „Your desire shall be for your husband.” Now, why is that bad, that the woman will desire the husband, as a result of sin? What does that mean- desire? You go to ch. 4:7, and you see the same word, the same language used when God is speaking to Cain about sin in his life. Listen to what God says to Cain, „If you do well Cain, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. It’s desire is for you. But, you must rule over it.” Same language there. Sin’s desire is for you. Is it good for sin to desire you? No. Sin’s desire is to overpower you, to oppose you, to work against you. That’s what sin does. And so, it’s the same picture that’s being used here in 3:16, when God says, „Your desire will be for your husband.” You will desire to overpower him, to oppose his leadership, to work against his leadership. This is defiance of his authority. Your desire will be to usurp his leadership with your own leadership. Not in a complementary way, but in a competitive way. The result of sin in you is you will say, „I wanna do this my way, my rule, regardless of what my husband says or does. I’m in charge here. That is a very sinful sense, desiring the authority that God has given to man.
  • She will experience pain in her role of childbearing. Here, the same way that we saw God’s punishment, uniquely fitted to man, we see God’s punishment and  sin uniquely fitted to women. As a result of sin, women will experience pain in her role of childbearing.Just as God had given man a specific role in providing, working the ground, God has uniquely given woman the role of bearing children. So, God says to woman, I will surely multiply your pain as a woman. You bring forth children. In other words, that which I have created you uniquely to do as a woman, will bring about pain in your life as a woman. You put this together and you realize just how much sin is intertwined with manhood and womanhood. This is not just a generic picture of sin in Genesis 3. This is a picture of sin that is a direct assault, from the adversary on manhood and womanhood , as God has designed it to be. (20:00)

Adam and Eve Casted Out from the Garden Genesis 3:24You can almost picture Satan, at the end of Genesis 3, just laughing, saying, „I’ve got things so distorted now, they’ll never figure this thing out.” You have aggressive man, and you say, „You need to be more passive.” You’ll have passive women, and you’ll say, „You need to stand up and be aggressive. Now, go back and forth between distortions, i.e. contemporary culture, and you’ll never get to the root of the issue. So, take us to the root of the issue: When you put all this together, and the results of Genesis 3 are all across this room.

So, what shall we do? This is the beauty, that in a sense, this is the worst chapter in the Bible. Genesis 3:15 is the promise of grace- the proto evangelion- the first Gospel. And it’s God saying, at the midst of the entrance of sin into the world, to the serpent, „I’m gonna raise up an offspring from woman, and He shall bruise your head, you will bruise His heel.” It’s a promise. God says, at the first entrance of sin in the world, „I’m going to send one, from woman, who is going to conquer sin and Satan and who will bring my redemption. And so, what shall we do, in light of the effects of sin on our marriages, in our homes, and our cultures, on manhood, and womanhood? What we must do is look to Christ. Because He is the one who conquers sin and its effects.

And this is the beauty, you realize. You come to Christ, you’re saved from sin. You trust in Christ as your Lord and Savior and follow the process of sanctification, where you and I, as followers of Christ are being made  in the image of Christ. Sanctification, all growing into the image of Christ. This is where we realize, that as you and I are conformed into the image of Christ, we’re not just conformed into the image of Christ generically. Certainly, some generalities across the board. But, we’re being formed into the image of men and women, and sanctification. If sin affected and is expressed in certain ways, among men and women, then  salvation and sanctification will then be expressed in certain ways among men and women. And our salvation in Christ is not just about becoming the people that God desired us to be, but, our salvation in Christ is about becoming the men and the women God desires us to be. Turning from sinful expressions of manhood, and womanhood, sinful inclinations of manhood and womanhood, to where in Christ be redeemed as the men and women He desires. SO, that’s where we come to God’s design.

This is God’s ideal- God’s design. None of us are there. How can we, from our unique situations, by the grace of Christ, pursue God’s design?

Manhood-

  • praying husband and wifeMan’s primary responsibility is to lead. 1 Corinthians 11, Ephesians 5, God has entrusted, in His design, from the beginning, man for the primary (not sole, but we’ll get to that) responsibility to lead, for the good of the woman. It was good in Genesis 1, and turned bad since Genesis 3. It was good in the design- good for man and for woman. This was not leadership for self appeasement, for self gratification, self exaltation.
  1. This is leadership for the good of others. Christ is our leader and He is good. He is a good leader, and so we gladly submit to Christ, our leader. God’s design , and that’s the whole picture, His design is for men to lead in a way that reflects Christ. Some say, „What about men who area abusive do women, domineering over women?” That’s not good, and that’s not God’s design. There’s a manual on church discipline from the 2nd century. And this manual gives the following instruction. „If there is a man that is abusing his wife in the church, the pastor should take 2 stout elders and go visit that home…”
  2. So it is for the good of woman, and ultimately for the glory of Christ. Man realizes that he is a leader under authority. Man is not the ultimate leader. He is the head. Christ is the head of man, and Christ is the ultimate leader, and man, in the design of God, never resumes the authority of Christ over woman. Man leads in a way that points woman to the authority of Christ. That’s God design from the beginning. That’s why God setup the whole picture, to show who Christ is. This is what drives men to lead: The good of woman and the glory of Christ.
  • In that, man is accountable to God for two things, based on what we see in the first 3 chapters.
  1. Man is accountable to God for protection of his wife and of women. It is clear here in chapter 3 that he does not protect his wife from the adversary. And this is what we see all throughout Scripture in spiritual warfare, in physical warfare, family warfare, man is protector for all of God’s people. In the Old Testament, it’s the men who go off to war, not women. In the New Testament, Joseph is told by God to protect Mary and the child, and go into Egypt. Men are commanded in the church, in the New Testament to protect the body.  In a general sense, we all know this. If you have 2 single guys, and 2 single ladies walking down the street together, and an attacker comes up, we all know it is not a sign of manhood for the men to step back and push the ladies forward. Spineless abdication. It is outside the design of God. Man is accountable to God for the protection of his wife.
  2. Man is accountable to God for provision in the home. When God doled out his punishment for sin, he’s directly addressing the responsibility He had given man to work and to provide for a family. A man feels accountability for provision. Now, it doesn’t mean sole accountability. The Bible’s not saying that it’s wrong for women to work outside the home, or to help provide for the family. But, the primary accountability here is upon man, the leader in the home. (29:00)

WOMANHOOD – 

  • woman prayingWoman’s primary responsibility is to support. She is a helper by God’s designGenesis 2. She is not devalued by that, but she is honored by that, in the same way the Son is honored by before the Father.
  1. She supports through a humble disposition that yields to man’s leadership. The reason I put disposition there is because I know there are all kinds of circumstances in this room. That’s what makes this issue really difficult to apply. I have yet to meet a woman who has a husband, that desires to show loving, Godly leadership, protection, provision, humble sacrificial care for her, I have yet to meet a woman that is complaining about that- that says God’s design is not good. Now, I’ve met a lot of women who have not seen that. But, when this is there, we see this is good. It’s very good. knowing that there’s all these circumstances in this room, knowing that there’s manhood nonexistent in many cases, the reason I use the word disposition, is because there is in the pattern of God, the design of God and inclination, a disposition that He has designed for women to desire that, in a good way, that kind of leadership. You might say, „What about a situation where you’ve got a wife that is really, really gifted? And the husband, not so gifted?” Should she still follow his leadership? Absolutely. This is the design of God, based on position, not on ability. Any husband is going to maximize his wife’s gifts
  2. With ultimate devotion to following Christ’s leadership. The husband is the head of the wife, but not ultimate head. Christ is the ultimate head. And, biblical womanhood does not say, „Whatever my husband tells me to do, I’ll do it, no matter what. No, biblical womanhood has a discerning spirit that is inclined to submit to a husband, but is further inclined to submit to Christ. And if her husband wants her to do something that goes directly against the word of Christ, she yields to Christ over him.
  3. Affirming her husband’s role. (35:00)
  4. Nurture in the home. She is equipped by God to nurture in the home, in a way that compliments a man’s leadership with the children. He protects, provides; she affirms and nurtures.

That is the ideal, and none of us are living in it. And, the temptation is to think, „I would, if my husband would get right.” Or, „I would, if my wife would start living out womanhood.” You could spend all day figuring out how to fix the other people in your life on this issue. But, let’s step back and see the application to our own lives. Let’s resist the temptation to shift blame and responsibility for lack of manhood and womanhood in our culture, in the church, in our families, and our lives. And, to say, „In my own life, how God, by your grace, can I be the man and woman you designed for me to be?

Overall exhortations to guide the application in our own lives:

MEN

Initiate humble, hardworking leadership. God made you to work hard, for the good of women, and the glory of His name. Work at leadership.

  1. in spiritual devotion. Is your wife and are your children flourishing in their relationships with Christ? 
  2. in marital duties. Don’t wait for your wife to come to you and say, „There’s some problems in our marriage and we need to talk about.” You initiate that conversation every single time. Turn off the TV, stop hiding on the ball field, behind the computer or at work. Go to her, as your wife, say, „How can I love you better?’ That’s your responsibility. Consistently and periodically sit down with her, and she will love you for it.
  3. in parental discipline. Men who don’t stand idly by, while their kids talk back to their wives. But use humble, loving discipline of children.
  4. in essential decision. It is not that men are supposed to make every single decision for his wife and family. But, that man will feel the overarching responsibility for decision making. That his wife and his children will look to him for leadership in decision making. That he’ll be known for making decisions for their good, and for the glory of Christ.
  5. amidst inevitable disagreements, in those tough decisions,  to lovingly, caringly, graciously, make the tough decisions, with a commitment to love, lead, guide, protect, shepherd his family in the implementation of that decision. This is not easy, brothers. None of us can do this on our own. That’s why Scriptures call us to look to Christ
  6. lay down your life to honor women. Honor your wife. Do not belittle our wife for her failures.
  7. train boys to be men. We need to show boys the humble responsibility, what it looks like in action.

WOMEN –

  1. incline yourselves toward wise, willing, submission. First and foremost to God, in constant prayer. Obviously, you need not submit yourself to abuse. You take that to a church.
  2. and then to men. If you are a wife, obviously, incline yourself to wise, willing submission to a husband, as best as you can, in a way that honors Christ.
  3. for the glory of Christ, live in a way that demonstrates Godly respect for men
  4. live in a way that shows girls how to be women.

David Platt – Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Part 2

Sin’s distortion of Manhood and Womanhood

Why the historicity of Adam is important

Adam and Eve Are Driven out of Eden by Gustave...

Adam and Eve Are Driven out of Eden by Gustave Dore. Picture portrayed over passage in Genesis. And he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life (Gen. 3:24). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

via Christian Post By Kevin DeYoung , CP Guest Contributor (article 2/9/12)

In recent years, several self-proclaimed evangelicals, or those associated with evangelical institutions, have called into question the historicity of Adam and Eve. It is said that because of genomic research we can no longer believe in a first man called Adam from whom the entire human race has descended.

I’ll point to some books at the end which deal with thescience end of the question, but the most important question is what does the Bible teach. Without detailing a complete answer to that question, let me suggest ten reasons why we should believe that Adam was a true historical person and the first human being.

1. The Bible does not put an artificial wedge between history and theology. Of course, Genesis is not a history textbook or a science textbook, but that is far from saying we ought to separate the theological wheat from the historical chaff. Such a division owes to the Enlightenment more than the Bible.

2. The biblical story of creation is meant to supplant other ancient creation stories more than imitate them. Moses wants to show God’s people „this is how things really happened.” The Pentateuch is full of warnings against compromise with the pagan culture. It would be surprising, then, for Genesis to start with one more mythical account of creation like the rest of the ANE.

3. The opening chapters of Genesis are stylized, but they show no signs of being poetry. Compare Genesis 1 with Psalm 104, for example, and you’ll see how different these texts are. It’s simply not accurate to call Genesis poetry. And even if it were, who says poetry has to be less historically accurate?

4. There is a seamless strand of history from Adam in Genesis 2 to Abraham in Genesis 12. You can’t set Genesis 1-11 aside as prehistory, not in the sense of being less than historically true as we normally understand those terms. Moses deliberately connects Abram with all the history that comes before him, all the way back to Adam and Eve in the garden.

5. The genealogies in 1 Chronicles 1 and Luke 3 treat Adam as historical.

6. Paul believed in a historical Adam (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 45-49). Even some revisionists are honest enough to admit this; they simply maintain that Paul (and Luke) were wrong.

7. The weight of the history of interpretation points to the historicity of Adam. The literature of second temple Judaism affirmed an historical Adam. The history of the church’s interpretation also assumes it.

8. Without a common descent we lose any firm basis for believing that all people regardless of race or ethnicity have the same nature, the same inherent dignity, the same image of God, the same sin problem, and that despite our divisions we are all part of the same family coming from the same parents.

9. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of original sin and guilt does not hold together.

10. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of the second Adam does not hold together.

Christians may disagree on the age of the earth, but whether Adam ever existed is a gospel issue. Tim Keller is right:

[Paul] most definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures. When you refuse to take a biblical author literally when he clearly wants you to do so, you have moved away from the traditional understanding of the biblical authority. . . .If Adam doesn’t exist, Paul’s whole argument-that both sin and grace work ‘covenantally’-falls apart. You can’t say that ‘Paul was a man of his time’ but we can accept his basic teaching about Adam. If you don’t believe what he believes about Adam, you are denying the core of Paul’s teaching. (Christianity Today June 2011)

If you want to read more about the historical Adam debate, check out Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? by C. John Collins.

For more on the relationship between faith and science, you may want to look at one of the following:

John C. Lennox, God’s Undertake: Has Science Buried God?
Should Christians Embrace Evolution: Biblical and Scientific Responses, edited by Norman C. Nevin
God and Evolution, edited by Jay Richards
Vern S. Poythress, Redeeming Science: A God-Centered Approach
C. John Collins, Science and Faith: Friend or Foes


Christ, the second Adam


Christ is the „image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” ( Col 1:15 ). Like the first Adam, he is the „ruler of creation” ( Rev 3:14 ). He is its author and perfecter ( Heb 12:2 ). Anyone in Christ is a „new creation” ( 2 Co 5:17 ).

He existed in the form of God, yet did not consider equality with God something to be grasped ( Php 2:6 ). He did not desire to be more than man ( 2:7-8 ). He was „made like his brothers in every way” so that „by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death” and free those held in slavery by fear of death ( Hebrews 2:14 Hebrews 2:17 ).

Christ was crowned with glory and honor over the world to come ( Heb 2:5-7 ). The first Adam lost his crown and gained death. The second Adam was crowned because he tasted death for every man ( 2:8-9 ). Sin and death upon all men entered the world through one man. By the obedience of the second Adam life abounds to many ( Ro 5:12-19 ).

He was tempted in every way, as was Adam, yet was without sin ( Matt 4:1-11 ; Heb 4:15 ). Like the serpent he says, „Take and eat” ( Matt 26:26 ), but this food brings life to the world ( John 6:33 ). Christ and Adam are both sons of God ( Matt 1:1 ; Luke 3:37 ). Both have their sonship by his power ( Gen 2:7 ; Luke 1:35 ; Rom 1:4 ). God breathed into Adam the breath of life. Jesus breathed on his disciples and said, „Receive the Holy Spirit” ( John 20:22 ).

„As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” ( 1 Co 15:22 ). Adam was a pattern of the one to come ( Ro 5:14 ). One of the greatest things to be said for the first Adam was that he became „a living being.” Christ, however, became „a life-giving spirit” ( 1 Co 15:45 ). This spiritual life force does not make us slaves again to fear but the spirit of the Son comes into our hearts crying „Abba, Father” ( Rom 8:15 ; Gal 4:6-7 ).

The first Adam came from the dust. The second Adam came from heaven ( 1 Co 15:47 ). He came down from heaven not to do his own will but the will of him who sent him ( John 6:38 ). God called the first man by name out of hiding ( Gen 3:9 ). The second Adam calls his own by name and they hear his voice ( John 10:3 ). One day the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God. Those who hear will live ( John 5:25 ).

We have borne the likeness of the earthly man, the first Adam. In the resurrection we will bear the likeness of the man from heaven ( 1 Co 15:49 ). By the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, he will transform our lowly bodies so they will be like his glorious body. The last enemy placed under the feet of the second Adam is death ( Psalm 110:1 ; 1 Col 15:26 ). He will not reach out and try to grasp more but will turn everything over to God who will be all in all (15:28).

via http://www.biblestudytools.com

Florin Ianovici – Frica? Victorii fara slava!

Debora

PAGINA – Predici Florin Ianovici aici

Un tablou biblic deosebit de interesant il regasim in Vechiul Testament in :

JUDECATORI 4 :4-9

4Pe vremea aceea judecător în Israel era Debora, proorociţa, nevasta lui Lapidot.
5Ea şedea subt finicul Deborei, între Rama şi Betel, în muntele lui Efraim; şi copiii lui Israel se suiau la ea ca să fie judecaţi.
6Ea a trimes să cheme pe Barac, fiul lui Abinoam, din Chedeş-Neftali, şi i -a zis: ,,Iată porunca pe care a dat -o Domnul, Dumnezeul lui Israel: ,Du-te, îndreaptă-te spre muntele Taborului, şi ia cu tine zece mii de oameni din copiii lui Neftali şi din copiii lui Zabulon;
7voi trage spre tine, la pîrîul Chison, pe Sisera, căpetenia oştirii lui Iabin, împreună cu carăle şi oştile lui, şi -l voi da în mînile tale„.
8Barac i -a zis: ,,Dacă vii tu cu mine, mă voi duce; dar dacă nu vii cu mine, nu mă voi duce„.
9Ea a răspuns: ,,Voi merge cu tine; dar nu vei avea slavă în calea pe care mergi, căci Domnul va da pe Sisera în mînile unei femei„. Şi Debora s’a sculat, şi s’a dus cu Barac la Chedeş.

Textul care a fost citit relateaza despre un plan pe care  Dumnezeu l-a pregatit pentru poporul lui Israel de a-l conduce in victorie impotriva unui imparat al Canaanului pe nume Sisera. Dumnezeu a pregatit o biruinta insa datorita faptului ca Barac conducatorul Israelului nu a avut indrazneala si suficienta incredere si s-a lasat biruit de frica acesta biruinta a fost una fara slava. De multe ori biruinta este atat de aproape. Dar neincrederea si mai ales frica ne lipsesc ea.

Datorita sentimentului de frica care de pune stapanire pe inimile noastre mersul nostru in viata, calea noastra este una fara slava.
Frica reprezinta astazi un sentiment care stapaneste inimile oamenilor mai mult decat ar crede unii.Timpul in care traim caracterizat printr-o permanenta competitie, modelele create de societate referitoare la omul de succes, presiunile de grup duc de multe ori la aparitia unui sentiment de frica puternic.

Insecuritatea economica, lipsa comunicarii dintre soti si membrii familiei, sarcinile din ce in ce mai mari pe care trebuie sa le ducem conduc de multe ori catre frica.Superficialitatea si ignoranta, batjocura si ironia celor dein jurul nostru ne fac sa ne ascundem si sa ne fie frica sa vorbim deschis sa ne spunem pararile de frica ca am putea fi sanctionati.
De la prima carte a bibliei din Genesa capitolul 3 la Apocalipsa capitolul 21 intelegem ca frica exista si constituie o problema extrem de importanta.

Astfel in Genesa ni se spune ca Adam a raspuns atunci cand Dumnezeu l-a chemat cu urmatoarele cuvinte : ,,Ti-am auzit glasul in gradina si mi-a fost frica pentru ca eram gol si m-am ascuns,Genesa cap.3vers 16

O prima constatare in ceea ce priveste frica este aceea ca ea apare atunci cand nu ne asumam constient si matur responsabilitatile actelor noastre.

Adam a fost omul care nu a ascultat de Dumnezeu.El a pacatuit ca si Eva.Dar nu si-a asumat responsabilitatea esecului. A fugit si s-a ascuns. A preferat sa fuga gandindu-se ca poate nu va mai da socotoala. Dar inaintea lui Dumnezeu totul este gol si descoperit. Nu poti fugi nicaieri si El sa nu fie acolo. Pana cand nu vei aseza in lumina cercetarii faptele tale, pana cand nu iti vei asuma responasbilitatile in mod constient vai fi in lumea aceasta un fugar plin de frica. Tendinta omului este aceea de a fi ezitant si de a invinovati pe altii sau a te considera o victima a imprejurarilor. Negresit sunt multe lucruri care pot concura la esec dar cel mai important lucru este sa ni-l asumam plini de responsabiitate si maturitate.

Avraam o numeste pe sotia sa sora din pricina fricii ca i-ar putea fi luata de catre faraon.

Fratii lui Iosif spre exemplu, au savarsit o mare nelegiuire prin faptul, ca datorita geloziei, au aruncat pe fratele lor mai mic Iosif intr-o fantana, lasandu-l prada mortii si au ascuns acest lucru de tatal lor, care il iubea deosebit de mult pe Iosif, spunandu-i ca l-am mancat fiarele pustiului..Au ascuns acest lucru, dar frica i-a urmarit toata viata.Insa in momentul cel mai greu al vietii lor ei au putere sa isi dea seama de greselile lor si isi asuma in mod constient responsabilitatea greselii.,,Da am fost vinovati fata de fratele nostru de aceea vine peste noi necazul acesta,,

Evrei 12-13 ,,croiti carari drepte cu picioarele voastre pentru ca cel ce schiopateaza sa nu se abata din cale ci mai degraba sa fie vindecat,, Vindecarea vine atunci cand vii in lumina dreptei judecati a lui Dumnezeu si cand il lasi pe El sa indrepte raul pe care l-ai facut prin acordarea iertari..

Psalmul 117-17,,Nebunii prin purtarea lor vinovata si prin nelegiuirile lor, ajunsesera nenorociti.sufletul lor se desgustase de orice hrana si erau langa portile mortii.Atunci in stramtorarea lor au strigat catre Domnul.El… a trimis cuvantul Sau si i-a tamaduit.
Tamaduirea presupune sa te indrepti spre dreptatea lui Dumnezeu care s-a descoperit prin cuvantul Sau intrupat in Hristos Isus.
Iosif care il prefigureaza pe Isus determina in fratii lui Iosif remuscari, durere fata de actul de samavolnicie comis.Dar Iosif le trezeste constiinta nu pentru a-i chinui ci pentru a-i ajuta sa fie vindecati de frica care ii stapanea , de spaima care domnea in viata lor pentru un pacat ascuns fata de care nu si-au asumat in mod deplin si constient responsabilitatea.Dupa ce lucrurile au fost marturisite si ei si-au asumat raspunderea au fost vindecati si au avut bucurie.Frica a fost invinsa pentru ca vina le-a fost iertata.

A doua constatare in ceea ce priveste frica este aceea ca ea apare cand ne lasam subjugati de oameni din dorinta de a fi acceptati de catre acestia.

Saul cu Samuel (Tissot)

,,Atunci Saul a zis lui Samuel :am pacatuit caci am calcat porunca Domnului si n-am ascultat cuvintele tale ;ma temeam de popor si i-am ascultat glasul,,1Sam.15.24

Cat de usor ne lasam influentati de cei din jur si savarsim lucruri de care mai apoi ne este rusine.La locul de munca, la scoala sau chiar in familie, ne temem de critica celor din jur, ne temem de reactiile lor batjocoritoare si intram in hora pacatului.Macar ca intelegem ca nu e bine, mintim si noi, barfim si noi, furam si noi. De teama ca seful nostru ne-ar da afara daca i-am spune adevarul mintim.De teama ca cei din jur ne-ar respinge si ne-ar izola barfim si noi.De teama ca sotia sau sotul ne critica ca nu aducem suficienti bani, furam si inselam si noi.

De teama represaliilor tagaduim si faptul ca suntem credinciosi.Ioan 9 :22…nu stim cine i-a deschis ochii.Intrebati-l pe el…..au zis aceste lucruri pentru ca se temeau de Iudei( sa fie dati afara din sinagoga)

Pentru a ne pastra un loc de munca sau anumite avantaje tagaduim puterea lui Dumnezeu pentru noi si zadarnicim planurile Sale.
Ceea ce trebuie sa facem este aceea de a nu ceda presiuni celor din jur cand te indeamna la pacat.frica de a fi respins de cei din jur daca nu faci ca si ei te poate conduce la pierdera locului in imparatia lui Dumnezeu.Cuvantul Domnului spune ca lui Saul ca urmare a faptuuli ca temandu0se de popor i0a facu pep lac pentru a nu isi pierde pozitia de imparat, tocmai de aceea el a pierdut in mod real si impartia pamanteasca si cea cereasca.

Dorim atat de mult sa fim acceptati de catre oameni.Important e ceea ce spune Dumnezeu despre noi. Araon cedeaza presiuniii exercitate de catre popor si construieste un vitel de aur pe care il numesc dumnezeu.Care este sistemul de valori al celor din jur de conteaza atat de mult pentru tine ?Nu stii nu ai auzi vorbindu-se de Dumnezeu cel care a facut cerurile si pamantul ? Cat de pilduitor este acest lucru. Un vitel aceasta este ceea ce omenirea poate produce chiar si astazi. Nu mai mult.

Nicodim vine la Isus doar noaptea din pricina fricii de a fi exclus din Sinod. Petru inainte de venirea unora din partea lui Iacov manaca impreuna cu cei netaiati imprejur dar mai apoi de teama celor taiati imprejur s-a dat deoparte. Paradoxul este ca noi nu castigan nimic nici chiar omeneste atunci cad de frica celor din jur nu umblam cu dreptate.

A treia constatare este ca frica apare ca urmare a subestimarii.

iscoadele se intorc din Canaan

Numeri 13:31-35 …”Tara pe care am strabatut-o, ca s-o iscodim este o tara care mananca pe locuitorii ei;toti aceia pe care i-am vazut acolo sunt oamani de statura inalta.Apoi am vazut in ea pe uriasi si ,pe copii lui Anac care se trag din neamul uriasilor: inaintea noastra si fata de ei eram niste lacuste”

Unele dintre cele mai puternice arme sunt armele folosite impotriva mintii. Nu degeaba sunt avertizati de catre apostolul Petru in prima epistola cap 1 vers 13:”De aceea, incingeti-va coapsele mintii voastre fiti treji…”In Efeseni 4 cu 23 ni se spune:…”sa va inoiti in duhul mintii voastre si sa va imbracati in omul cel nou facut dupa chipul lui Dumnezeu…”

Sentimentul de inferioritate, sentimentul de nepotrivire, lipsa de incredere, subestimarea stapaneste multi oameni in ciuda credintei lor si a cunoasterii cuvantului lui Dumnezeu.Desi isi inteleg calitatea de oameni ai lui Dumnezeu sunt oameni care sunt neputinciosi, au manile legate datorita sentimentului pregnant de inutilitate, datorita fricii de esec, fricii de a fi analizati, masurati, cantariti si judecati. Nu ne putem imbraca cu omul cel nou facut dupa chipul lui Dumnezeu si vedem doar acest lucru:… pe ceilalti ca niste uriasi… iar pe noi ca niste lacuste! – referinta la textul mai sus citat – Oricat ar fi de binecuvantata tara Canaanului, oricat ar fi de clare cuvintele lui Dumnezeu, oricat ne-ar spune Dumnezeu ca puterea lui este cu noi… ramanem in afara tarii binecuvantate, ne lipsim de biruinta unei vieti in care sa stapaneasca El datorita subestimarii.

Traim cu subestimarea, cu lipsa de incredere dar folosim anumite argumente pentru a nu fi obligati sa ne confruntam cu problema pe care o avem.Asupra noastra se creeaza o presiune imensa.Sarcinile pe care le avem de indeplinit ni se par foarte mari iar resursele noastre prea putine.De cele mai multe ori este adevarat.Dar in loc sa incercam sa ne eliberam de acesta imensa presiune stand de vorba in mod onest cu Dumnezeu noi folosim diferite subterfugii, diferite supape ca se ne eliberam de presiune, dar niciodata problema nu isi gaseste vindecare.

Supape:
oameni suntem!A gresi este omeneste.Toti oamenii gresesc, nimeni nu este supraom.Nu pot sa fac fata sarcinilor pentru ca in fond nu sunt decat un om.Nimeni nu ar putea face acest lucru.2Imp.6-15:’’Slujitorul omului lui Dumnezeu s-a sculat dis de dimineata si a iesit.Si iata ca o oaste inconjura cetatea, cu cai si cara.Si slujitorul a zis omului lui Dumnezeu:Ah!domnul meu cum vom face?Suntem doar niste oameni.Iata in fata noastra o mare ostire inamica.Omeneste ar fi sa fugim, sa ne ascundem.Nu putem lupta.Ce gand, auzi…sa luptam.Nu putem suntem doar biete fiinte umane.E omeneste daca incercam sa fugim, sa scapam. Eventual poate si un compromis e bun ca sa putem scapa.Care este raspunsul Domnului?

Deschiderea ochilor! Ca sa vada ceea ce nu putea vedea.sa vada resursele lui Dumnezeu. Puterea Sa, planul Sau, mila Sa.

Nu este logic! Nu putem face nimic. Pentru ca nu este logic. Logic este sa stai cuminte. Nu este rational. Nu este normal. Cum iti inchipui tu ca Dumnezeu ar putea face ceva cu cineva ca tine. Nu vezi ce esti? Nu vezi cine esti? Nu e logic ce vrei tu  1Samuel 17 cu 10 si 11.: ’’Filisteanul a mai zis: Arunc astazi o ocara asupra ostirii lui Israel! Dati-mi un om ca sa ma lupt cu el. Saul si tot Israelul au auzit aceste cuvinte ale Filisteanului si au fost cuprinsi de o mare frica.’’si 33…’’nu te poti duce sa te bati tu cu filisteanul acesta, caci tu esti un copil si el este un razboinic din tineretea lui’ ’Cu alte cuvinte…nu este logic. Este irational. Cine esti tu si cine este el de poti ca poti castiga. Stai linistit. Nu ai nici o sansa caci este ilogic. Si uite asa ramane ocara asupra noastra. uite asa toata viata traim cu minciuna ca noi nu putem lupta pentru ca suntem doar niste copii si este ilogic sa te lupti tu ca un copil cu un razboinic incercat.Nu putem face nimic.nu vom avea niciodata bani de intretinere pentru ca nu avem salariu…nu putem fi vindecati caci nu s-a gasit nici un leac… nu putem sa vorbim despre Dumnezeu fiind ca suntem prea slabi. De unde? Nu e logic. Va intreb cine a invins logica sau copilul David? Poate Dumnezeu sfida logica oamenilor? Poate Dumnezeu sfida imposibilul. Evrei 11 cu 11: ’’Prin credinta si Sara cu toata varsta ei trecuta a primit puterea sa zamisleasca… „Hei unde sunt doctorii acestei lumi? Unde sunt logicienii si statisticienii? Cine ne va ridica ocara? Cine ne va spala rusinea? Nu, nu Dumnezeu singur. Ci tu impreuna cu El.

la ce folos? La ce bun? Ce pot eu schimba? Au incercat si altii si lumea este la fel. Nu are sens sa lupti pentru ca nimeni nu are nevoie de asa ceva.1Imp.19 cu 4: ’’El s-a dus in pustie unde, dupa un drum de o zi, a sezut sub un ienupar si dorea sa moara, zicand: Destul! Acum Doamne, ia-mi sufletul, caci nu sunt mai bun decat parintii mei!’’

Destul! Nu mai vreau sa aud mimic. La ce bun? Lumea nu se poate schimba. Toate lucrurile raman la fel indiferent de ce fac eu. Vestim putin cuvantul lui Dumnezeu unui vecin, unui prieten si daca vedem ca nu se intoarce la Dumnezeu spunem: treaba lui, sa faca ce vrea, eu mi-am facut datoria. O! de ar spune si Dumnezeu la fel despre noi am fi pierduti pe vecie. Spre deosebire de aceasta atitudine Pavel spune: 2Cor.11 cu 28: Cine cade in pacat si eu sa nu ard? Noi nu mai ardem. Noi spunem:am incercat dar la ce folos?

La ce folos? Orice lucru facut pentru Dumnezeu conteaza. Conteaza un pahar cu apa dat in Numele Lui. Conteaza orice strop de transpiratie pe ogorul evangheliei.conteaza ca tu lupti. Conteaza ca tu esti unul care spune: ’’Noi nu suntem insa din aceia care dau inapoi…’’ Evrei 10 cu 39

Efectele subestimarii

Subestimarea blocheaza, paralizeaza potentialul
Impactul inferioritatii..Blocarea.Irosire.Indoiala.Ezitare.Neputinta.Intimidare.
Ex:pilda polilor.Unui om i-a fost incredintat un pol cu sarcina de a-l pune in negot in vederea realizarii unui profit pentru el si stapanul polului.Insa acesta prefera sa ingroape polul, san u il investeasca, desi l-a acceptat . Explicatia consta in faptul ca se temea de esec si nu si-a investit banul ci l-a ascuns.A incercat sa il protejeze.Frica de esec,frica de a fi respins de stapan l-a inghetat.Frica de a fi comparat cu altii, frica de a risca.l-a detrminat sa faca ceea ce fac toti oamenii care se subestimeaza:nimc!

Subestimarea distruge visele
Dumnezeu a avut o viziune pentru Israel. O tara minunata pe care chiar ei o descriu ca fiind incredibila. Dar mesagerii au inceput sa se planga fiind cuprinsi de frica.De unde a venit acesat frica? De la faptul ca ei s-au subestimat. S-au vazut pe ei ca niste lacuste si pe locuitorii Canaanului ca niste uriasi.Perceptia lor asupra lucrurilor i-a facut sa aiba o concluzie:ne vor manca locuitorii Canaanului. Iosua si Caleb descriu tara Canaanului la fel ca ceilalti dar perceptia lor este diferita si la fel concluziile. Depinde cu ce ochi vezi lucrurile. Cu ce credinta.”Domnul este cu noi, nu va temeti”

Subestimarea deterioreaza relatiile cu ceilalti
Daca ne consideram inferiori si lipsiti de valoare este greu sa poti aprecia dragostea lui Dumnezeu. Nu Ii mai vezi purtarea Lui de grija. Incepi sa nu mai fii multumit de nimic si sa ai resentimente. Sentimentul de inferioritate, subestimare va izoleaza tocmai pentru ca in final fiind singur sa va poate rapune mai usor. Poporul dupa ce l-a ascultat pe Iosuba si pe Caleb care vorbeau despre faptul ca trebuie sa creada in puterea lui Dumnezeu, reactia poporului a fost ca a vrut sa ii omoare cu pietre. Si astazi zboara atatea pietre in jurul nostru.Si unii sunt loviti si sangereaza. Inceteaza sa mai privesti la tine in felul acesta pentru ca nu vei face decat rau celor din jur. Lipsa increderii in sine, o gresita imagine de sine nu va afecta doar planul trairii personale ci va avea ca efect deteriorarea relatiilor cu ceilalti.

Subestimarea afecteaza planul profesional
Nu pot realiza lucrurile la fel ca ceilalti deoarece acestia sunt mult mai buni ca mine. Nu pot vorbi la fel ca ceilalti deoarece nu am o dictie la fel de buna ca altii.Nu pot vorbi nu pot lucra, eu nu pot face nimic. Stam si asteptam sa ne treaca viata intre durerea sentimentului ca suntem inferiori altora si lipsa de detreminare si energie , de vlaga spirituala datorate obezitatii noastre in viata de credinta.

Remedii
In slabiciune puterea lui Dumnezeu este facuta desavarsita.
„Si El mi-a zis:”Harul Meu iti este de ajuns;caci puterea Mea in slabiciune este facuta desavarsita. ’Deci ma voi lauda mult mai bucuros cu slabiciunile mele, pentru ca puterea lui Hristos sa ramana in mine. De aceea simt placere in slabiciuni…”2Cor 12cu 9 si 10.

Dumnezeu nu cauta supraoameni. Dumnezeu nu cauta genii. El a ascuns planurile Sale de inteleptii acestei lumi si le-a descoperit pruncilor. Dumnezeu nu cauta vedete ci pe cei nestiuti, necunoscuti, saraci in duh.Dumnezeu folosete balbaiti, foloseste depresivii fugari, foloseste pescarii, vamesi si chiar femei care au avut o moralitate indoielnica, foloseste pe toti aceia care pot da raspuns la singura inrebare majora a vietilor noastre pusa de Dumnezeu:’’caut un om!’ ’O inima care sa bata pentru mine. Pe cineva care sa spuna:nu sunt bun Doamne, pleaca de la mine…-  asa cum raspunde sfantul apostol Petru la intalnirea cu Mantuitorul! Ca El sa spuna:nu, nu Petru, nu Ioane la tine am venit si Eu nu gresesc. Tu ai pret in ochii Mei. Tu esti omul pe care. Il caut.
Mai mult.
Oameni incearca sa isi ascunda slabiciunile de teama ca ar putea fi respinsi si judecati. Omul lui Dumnezeu isi vede slabiciunile, le recunoaste si prin faptul ca le recunoaste capata indurare de la Dumnezeu care isi arata astfel puterea in el. Nu recunoaste slabiciunile tale, ascunde-te si vei fi un istovit toata viata, un nesigur, un singuratic nemultumit si fara biruinta. Recunoaste slabiciunile tale inainte lui Dumnezeu si El isi va revarsa puterea peste tine.

Indrazniti caci Eu am biruit lumea
1Tes.1cu 5:’’In adevar Evanghelia noastra v-a fost propovaduita nu numai cu vorbe, ci cu putere de la Duhul Sfant si cu o mare indrazneala.’’
’’cand au vazut ei indrazneala lui Petru si Ioan s-au mirat intrucat stiau ca erau oameni necarturari si de rand;si au priceput ca fusesera cu Isus”Fap 4cu 13.
„’propavaduia imparatia lui Dumnezeu si invata pe oameni cu tota indrazneala (Pavel)Fap.28 cu 31.
„Fiindca dar avem o astfel de nadejde (slujba aducatoare de neprihanire) noi lucram cu multa indrazneala”2Cor.3cu12.

Sa crezi fagaduintele lui Dumnezeu
’…te laud ca m-ai facut o fiinta asa de minunata.”’Psalm 139 cu 14.
Dumnezeu vorbeste despre cei credinciosi intr-un chip coplesitor. El ne numeste semintie aleasa si o preotie imparateasca, copii ai Sai, lumina a lumii. Oare face Dumnezeu conversatie politicoasa cu noi cand ne spune lucruri atat de marete? Oare Dumnezeu promite lucruri mari pentru cei ce cred ca sa ii faca sa se simta mai bine? Vrea Dumnezeu sa ne gadile firea si orgoliu cand ne promite biruinta? Raspunsul tine de fiecare in parte.

„…Eu te izbavesc, te chem pe nume:esti al Meu. Daca vei trece prin ape, Eu voi fi cu tine si raurile nu te vor ineca;daca vei merge prin foc, nu te va arde si flacara nu te va aprinde. Caci eu sunt Domnul Dumnezeul tau, Sfantul lui Israel, Mantuitorul tau. De aceea pentru ca ai prêt in ochii Mei, pentru ca esti pretuit si te iubesc, dau oameni pentru tine si popoare pentru viata ta.”Isaia 43 cu 1,2,3,4

CEA MAI MARE SARBATOARE A INTREGII OMENIRI – de Avram Cuc

INSEMNATATEA  INVIERII DOMNULUI ISUS CHRISTOS

Invierea Domnului Isus Christos, este cea mai mare sarbatoare din istoria omenirii. Nu exista nici o sarbatoare de o insemnatate mai mare pe acest pamant, ca aceasta sarbatoare a Invierii lui Isus Christos. Din momentul in care omul a cazut in pacatul cel mare al neascultarii, care a inceput prin primul om creiat de Dumnezeu, Adam si care a produs o despartire si o ruptura de la fata lui Dumnezeu, omenirea a fost condamnata la o moarte vesnica, adica la o despartire eterna de Dumnezeu, Creiatorul nostru si a tuturor lucrurilor vazute si nevazute. Cel ce a creiat toate lucrurile de pe pamant si de subt pamant, impreuna cu paradisul care se numea ,,Gradina Edenului” in care Dumnezeu l-a pus pe Adam si apoi pe sotia sa Eva (care a fost creiata din coasta lui Adam), barbatul ei, ca sa fie trup din trupul lui si sange din sangele lui. Dumnezeu a suflat in om viata, adica a suflat din Dumnezeu insusi viata vesnica, eternitatea, care i-a turnat-o in sufletul lui si a sotiei sale Eva si astfel a devenit un suflet viu. I s-a dat sub stapanire aceasta gradina a Edenului, raiul pe pamant, ca sa o lucreze si sa o pazeasca, si sa traiasca fericit impreuna cu sotia lui.  Dar Dumnezeu i-a dat porunca  lui Adam: ,,Poti sa mananci dupa placere din orice pom din gradina; dar din pomul cunostintei binelui si raului sa nu mananci, caci in ziua in care vei manca din el, vei muri negresit.” (Genesa 2:16-17)

Biblia, care este Cuvantul lui Dumnezeu ne spune ca Adam impreuna cu sotia lui Eva au trait in aceasta gradina fericiti, lucrau si pazeau gradina, si in racoarea diminetii Dumnezeu venea la ei si statea de vorba cu ei. Nu se stie cat timp a trait Adam impreuna cu sotia lui in Gradina Edenului dar s-ar putea ca aceasta sa fi fost de o durata destul de lunga, iar sarpele, adica diavolul care dadea tarcoale pe la ei ca sa-i faca sa pacatuiasca cu siguranta ca a facut-o de multe ori si nu numai o singura data, incetul cu incetul semanand in inima femeii pofta de a gusta din pomul oprit, fructul caruia era placut la privire, dar  dupa ce au gustat din el, l-a adus pe om la o moarte sigura. In trupul lor fizic aceasta moarte nu a avut loc pe moment, Adam a trait pana la varsta de noua sute treizeci de ani, dar partea sufleteasca a murit chiar in momentul cind a fost savarsit pacatul. Din acel moment omul  a devenit muritor , sufletul lui fiind despartit pentru totdeauna de Dumnezeu lucru care a insemnat o pedeapsa vesnica, adica iazul cu foc.  Acest loc care arde cu foc si pucioasa , iadul, a fost pregatit inca dinainte de facerea omului, pentru Satana impreuna cu ingerii lui care au vrut sa fie mai presus decat Dumnezeu. Omul datorita neascultarii lui, si a caderii in pacat a avut aceeasi soarta de a fi aruncat in iazul cu foc pe vecie.

Dar Dumnezeu care este bun si milostiv si care iubeste pe om  pe care El l-a  facut dupa chipul si asemanarea Lui, a vrut sa-l scape pe om de la aceasta pedeapsa vesnica, crunta, in a-si chinui sufletul zi si noapte in acest iaz de foc care arde fara incetare zi si noapte , pe vecie. Daca a trebuit sa vina Fiul lui Dumnezeu din ceruri ca sa ispaseasca aceasta pedeapsa pentru pacatele nostre si pentru a cruta oamenii de la un sfarsit groaznic si o pedeapsa vesnica, inseamna ca acest loc este un loc teribil in care nu vrea nimenea sa ajunga. Cine oare si-ar dori sa arda intr-un foc care arde fara incetare zi si noapte fara sfirsit? Insasi Fiul lui Dumnezeu, care stie de groaza care are sa vina peste intreaga omenire ca urmare a pacatului, si care stie de locul care ii asteapta pe cei pacatosi, a venit sa plateasca pentru acest pacat in locul nostru pentru a ne feri pe noi de o pedeapsa eterna si de un loc groaznic, adica iadul. Nu este un lucru de jucat sau de neglijat, sau de luat cu usurinta sau de nebagat in seama, cind insusi Fiul lui Dumnezeu lasa cerurile preainalte, slava care a avut-o inainte de intemeierea tuturor lucrurilor, si vine pe acest pamant ca sa plateasca in locul nostru pentru pacatele noastre cele multe si grele si sa se faca pacat pentru noi, ca astfel noi sa avem iertare de la Dumnezeu si ca sa mostenim impreuna cu El viata vesnica si raiul lui Dumnezeu, care a fost pregatit pentru toti aceia care au primit mesajul mantuirii si l-au primit pe Isus Christos ca Mantuitor personal in inimile lor, astfel sa fie nascuti din nou din Dumnezeu si ceia ce era mort odinioara datorita pacatului,  sa fie readus la viata, si inca la o viata vesnica impreuna cu Christos.

De aceea aceasta sarbatoare a Pastelui, sau a Invierii Domnului Isus Christos din morti, este cea mai mare zi din istoria omenirii caci datorita invierii Domnului, avem din nou speranta de a fi impreuna cu El in raiul Sau. El a invins moartea si prin aceasta cei care Il primesc pe El ca Mantuitor in inimile lor, si care traiesc o viata curata dupa poruncile Lui,  vor trece de la moarte la viata, si nu vor mai avea parte de iazul de foc adica iadul care este pregatit pentru toti fiii neascultarii. Sa fim dar oameni intelepti si sa avem frica de Dumnezeu, ca sa avem trecere inaintea Lui ca atunci cind El va veni in slava Sa cereasca sa ne gaseasca vrednici de a mosteni Imparatia Cerurilor impreuna cu El, si de a fi o vesnicie in raiul Lui Dumnezeu, fericiti pentru totdeauna, fara sfarsit, din bucurii in bucurii, din fericiri in fericiri care nu se vor termina niciodata.

CHRISTOS A INVIAT !

CU ADEVARAT CA A INVIAT!

Are we all Descendants of Adam?

Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. is a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and is a professor emeritus at Westminster Theological Seminary. He quotes the ESV. This article first appeared in New Horizons in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, March 2012. The article is excerpted from The Aquila Report.

Richard Gaffin sounds the alarm on where the questioning of the historicity of Adam is headed:
Every Christian who is truly submitted to the Bible’s authority needs to be alert to this recent development [i.e., that the descent of all human beings from Adam has been increasingly called into question by scientists, biblical scholars, and others who consider themselves evangelical or even Reformed Christians] and clear about the consequences of these doubts and denials. No matter how well intended, they undermine the gospel and will lead to its eventual loss. If it is not true that all human beings descend from Adam, then the entire history of redemption, as taught in Scripture, unravels. The result is no redemptive history in any credible or coherent sense, and so the loss of redemptive history in any meaningful sense.
he makes the point that Adam’s historicity is called into question more and more by
 scientists, biblical scholars, and others who consider themselves evangelical or even Reformed Christians. Moreover, they are persuaded that their doubts about this truth should be accepted as compatible with their Christian commitment.Every Christian who is truly submitted to the Bible’s authority needs to be alert to this recent development and clear about the consequences of these doubts and denials. No matter how well intended, they undermine the gospel and will lead to its eventual loss. If it is not true that all human beings descend from Adam, then the entire history of redemption, as taught in Scripture, unravels. The result is no redemptive history in any credible or coherent sense, and so the loss of redemptive history in any meaningful sense.
He lists the reasons given for this recent questioning of two sorts:
scientific and exegetical. Accumulating results in several fields—primarily paleontology, archaeology, anthropology, and, especially in the past couple of decades, genetics—allegedly make it virtually certain that all human beings have not descended from an original pair. The claim that everyone living today has the same “first parents” is deemed no longer credible.
In this article he deals with the biblical and theological views:
In that regard, let’s not suppose that we are faced here with yet one more “Galileo moment,” where Christians need to adjust their thinking and get on board with science. Plainly at issue here is not an aspect of our ever-changing understanding of the physical workings of our environment and the universe at large, but perennial and unchanging matters that are basic to who we are as human beings—what it means to be created in God’s image and the kind of relationship with him that that entails.
As a general rule, within the unfolding history of God’s special revelation consummated in Christ and recorded for the church in the completed canon of Scripture, the Old Testament is to be read in light of the New. Every passage is to be read from the vantage point of God’s speaking “by his Son” in “these last days” (Heb. 1:2).
 Specifically, in the overall profile of biblical revelation, it has been given to Paul, as an apostle of Christ, to speak about the origin of humanity in a way that has a clear and decisive bearing on the matters we are considering. That happens principally in two places: Romans 5:12–19 and 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–49.
Adam as the “First” man, and Christ as the “Second”
The central interest of both passages is plainly the person and work of Christ. Equally plain in both passages are (1) the sweeping historical outlook on Christ and the salvation he has accomplished and (2) within this historical outlook and fundamental to it, a contrast with Adam. In 1 Corinthians 15:44b–49, this perspective is the most comprehensive possible, covering nothing less than the whole of human history from its beginning to its end, from the original creation to its consummation.
Accordingly, in verse 45, Adam as he was by virtue of his creation and before the Fall (Adam in Genesis 2) is contrasted with Christ, “the last Adam,” as he is by virtue of his resurrection. In Romans 5 and the earlier verses in 1 Corinthians 15, the scope of the historical outlook is only slightly less comprehensive; on the one side, Adam is in view as he was after the Fall, as a sinner (Adam in Genesis 3). For Paul, redemptive history has its clear and consummate ending with Christ only as it has a definite and identifiable beginning with Adam.
 
In both passages, Adam and Christ are clearly in view as individual persons. But as individuals they no less clearly have a significance that is more than individual. They are contrasted as each represents others, as each is a head in a way that is decisive for those “in him.” This union-based contrast exhibits the representative or federal principle that is at the root of the Bible’s covenant theology taught, for instance, in the Westminster standards. This teaching may be summarized like this: as Adam by his disobedience has brought sin with all its consequences into the originally good creation for himself and all those “in him,” so Christ by his obedience has brought salvation from sin and all its consequences for those “in him.”
 
The significance of the identifying terms in the contrast must not be missed. Christ in his saving work is “second” and “last”; Adam is “first” (1 Cor. 15:45, 47). The uniquely pivotal place of each in the unfolding of redemptive history, at its beginning and end, is such that no one else “counts.” Only Adam, in his representative role in union or solidarity with “all,” is the “type of the one who was to come” (Rom. 5:14). As Christ is the omega-point of redemptive history, so Adam is its alpha-point.
 
It cannot be stressed too emphatically that these passages teach that essential to Christ’s work of saving sinful human beings is his full solidarity with them, personal sin excepted, as he is “second” and “last,” and that he has, and can only have, this identity as Adam is “first.” If Adam was not the first man, who fell into sin, then the work of Christ loses its meaning. Without the “first” man, Adam, there is no place for Christ as either “second” or “last.” The integrity and coherence of redemptive history in its entirety depends on this contrast. It is simply not true, as some claim, that whether or not Adam was the first human being is a question that leaves the gospel unaffected, at least if we accept the clear teaching of these passages. Paul is elsewhere similarly clear: Christ’s resurrection, the final judgment, and the attendant call for all people everywhere to repent, all stand or fall with the fact that God has made from one man every nation of mankind (Acts 17:26–30).
 
Other Interpretations of Adam
How do those who deny that all human beings descend from Adam and yet wish to remain committed to the authority of Scripture as in some sense God’s word, understand the references to Adam in these passage (and others, like Luke 3:38, 1 Timothy 2:13–14, and Jude 14)? It appears that two approaches are being taken: one denies the historicity of Adam; the other affirms his historicity, but denies that he was the first human being and father of the entire human race.
 
On the former view, Paul, like the other New Testament writers, may well have believed that Adam was a real, historical person, but that belief is immaterial for his teaching and can be jettisoned without detriment to the gospel or faith in Christ. In our passages, “Adam” is supposedly a personification either of humanity in general or of Israel as nation for all humanity; Adam is everyone. He serves Paul’s purposes as a “teaching model,” as it has been put, to highlight the universality of human sinfulness. Suffice it here to note that this view flatly contradicts the sustained emphasis in Romans 5 on Adam’s sin as the one sin of the one man, distinct from the sinning of “many” or “all.” To conclude that the historicity of Adam is irrelevant for Paul is in fact to make responsible exegesis irrelevant.
 
Another view affirms Adam’s historicity, but denies that he is the first human being. At least some who take this view assert that Adam is “first” in the sense that at some point in human history God set him apart as a representative from among a considerable number of already existing human beings for the dealings with humanity that he initiated at that point. But this view is faced with an insuperable difficulty: Adam is not simply the “first”; he is the “first” in relation to those who “have borne [his] image” (1 Cor. 15:49). People can hardly be described as image-bearers of Adam if they either existed before him or subsequently have not descended from him. Adam is the representative of all who, by descending from him, are in natural union or solidarity with him, and he represents only them. It is not enough today for Christians simply to affirm the historicity of Adam.
 
This is not a minor point. Paul is clear in verse 49. Believers will bear Christ’s heavenly image, the redeemed and glorified image of God, as they have borne Adam’s earthly image, the original image of God subsequently defaced by sin. It is quite foreign to this passage, especially given its comprehensive outlook noted above, to suppose that some who do not bear the image of Adam will bear the glory-image of Christ. There is no hope of salvation for sinners who do not bear the image of Adam by ordinary generation. Christ cannot and does not redeem what he has not assumed, and what he has assumed is the nature of those who bear the image of Adam, and as they do so by natural descent.
 
The Implications of Denying Adam’s Priority
By now it should be clear that questioning or denying the descent of all humanity from Adam as the first human being has far-reaching implications for the Christian faith. It radically alters the understanding of sin, particularly concerning the origin and nature of human depravity, with the corresponding abandonment of any meaningful notion of the guilt of sin. It radically alters the understanding of salvation, especially in eclipsing or even denying Christ’s death as a substitutionary atonement that propitiates God’s just and holy wrath against sin. And it radically alters the understanding of the Savior, by stressing his humanity, especially the exemplary aspects of his person and work, to the extent of minimizing or even denying his deity.
 
I don’t have room here to detail these implications, so instead I commend the following more extensive treatments, among others, as particularly helpful: Is Adam a “Teaching Model” in the New Testament? by J. P. Versteeg; Robert B. Strimple’s chapter, “Was Adam Historical?” in Confident of Better Things; and Michael Reeves’s chapter, “Adam and Eve,” in Should Christians Embrace Evolution?
 
I conclude with the closing words of Versteeg’s study:
 
As the first historical man and head of humanity, Adam is not mentioned merely in passing in the New Testament. The redemptive-historical correlation between Adam and Christ determines the framework in which—particularly for Paul—the redemptive work of Christ has its place. That work of redemption can no longer be confessed according to the meaning of Scripture, if it is divorced from the framework in which it stands there. Whoever divorces the work of redemption from the framework in which it stands in Scripture no longer allows the Word to function as the norm that determines everything. There has been no temptation down through the centuries that theology has been more exposed to than this temptation. There is no danger that theology has more to fear than this danger.
 
You can read the article in its entirety here  The Aquila Report.


John Piper on „old earth” age and evolution

Old Earth vs. Youung Earth (Biblical account) chart from Answers in Genesis Click on photo to read more on this comparison between the two beliefs.

Glad to know John Piper’s view:

By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org

The following is an edited transcript of the audio.

Do you accept „old earth” and evolution?

If by „accept” you mean, „Are there people on our counsel of elders who hold to the old earth theory?” then, Yes.

If by „accept” you mean, „Is that my view?” here is what I said the other day when the church staff was talking about this. We spent about an hour, talking about how we as a church should orient ourselves in the conversation about old earth and young earth, and I said that there seem to be two viable, biblical views for me. (This is going to offend a lot of people.)

One is young earth, because it seems to me that the natural reading of Genesis 1 is 24-hour days, not Day-Age.

And two, the view that John Sailhamer wrote in Genesis Unbound or in his other books, which says that all of creation happened in verses 1 and 2. It may be as old as 4 trillion years, as far as he is concerned, and what was happening in Genesis 1 each day was not the bringing into being of the earth and its various forms, but rather the ordering, managing and structuring of things. This allows for 24 hour days but also allows for an old earth.

I lean that way. I don’t believe in evolution as the way that Adam came to be a human. I think God created Adam from the dust of the ground. I think he was unique and that he is the father of all humanity—Adam and Eve—and that he is not the product of a long evolutionary process. I can’t make that jive with the way the text reads.

And I think that it’s very important that Adam be a historical figure, because that’s the way he is treated by the other biblical writers. The heart passage in Romans 5 collapses, and the whole nature of God’s making with Adam a covenant and then him failing and then Christ being a second Adam comes to naught, if he’s not a historical person.

© Desiring God

Perry Stone – SECRETE DE DINCOLO DE MORMINT – Misterul Despre Moartea a Doua Partea 5

traducere de Avram Cuc

In cele saizeci si sase de carti care alcatuiesc Biblia, expresia ,,moartea a doua” este folosita numai in Cartea Apocalipsa.

–- APOCALIPSA 2:11 Cine are urechi, să asculte ce zice Bisericilor Duhul: ,,Cel ce va birui, nicidecum nu va fi vătămat de a doua moarte.„

–- APOCALIPSA 20:6 Fericiţi şi sfinţi sînt ceice au parte de întîia înviere! Asupra lor a doua moarte n’are nicio putere; ci vor fi preoţi ai lui Dumnezeu şi ai lui Hristos, şi vor împărăţi cu El o mie de ani.

–- APOCALIPSA 20:14-15 14Şi Moartea şi Locuinţa morţilor au fost aruncate în iazul de foc. Iazul de foc este moartea a doua.     15Oricine n’a fost găsit scris în cartea vieţii, a fost aruncat în iazul de foc.

–- APOCALIPSA 21:8 Dar cît despre fricoşi, necredincioşi, scîrboşi, ucigaşi, curvari, vrăjitori, închinătorii la idoli, şi toţi mincinoşii, partea lor este în iazul, care arde cu foc şi cu pucioasă, adică moartea a doua.„

Ce este aceasta ,,moartea a doua”? Cind pacatul original a intrat in lumea aceasta prin Adam, lui i s-a spus: ,,dar din pomul cunostintei binelui si raului sa nu mananci, caci in ziua in care vei minca din el, vei muri negresit”(Genesa 2:17). Adam nu a murit fizic imediat, dar a murit spiritual atunci cind a fost separat de Dumnezeu, si a fost izgonit din gradina, nemaiavind acces la pomul vietii. El a trait 930 de ani, dupa care a murit si fizic. Astfel, a avut loc intii moartea spirituala si apoi a doua moarte (cea fizica). Toti oamenii trebuie sa moara, atit cei neprihaniti cit si cei pacatosi. Cei neprihaniti vor muri numai o singura data, si anume moartea fizica, iar dupa aceea nu va mai fi moarte, pentru ca noi vom avea parte de prima inviere, dupa care a doua moarte nu mai are putere asupra noastra!

Totusi, pacatosul care nu s-a intors din calea lui, va experimenta moartea de doua ori. Prima moarte este o separare de Dumnezeu  in sectorul Iadului din Locuinta Mortilor. Sint oameni care sint tinuti acolo in adincurile pamintului de secole. ,,Moartea” lor nu este o distrugere a sufletului sau duhului ci este o existenta eterna fara prezenta lui Dumnezeu, fara oameni iubitori de fapte bune, si fara de frumusetea ce se gaseste in  creatiunea lui Dumnezen, pamintul. Biblia ne indica ca moartea a doua este urmata de judecata de la Tronul de Domnie cel Mare si Alb, cind intreaga omenire, incluzind pe Satana si adeptii lui – fiara si proorocul mincinos – vor fi aruncati in iazul de foc ,,adica moartea a doua” (Apoc. 21:8)

EXISTA O NIMICIRE FINALA IN IAZUL CU FOC?

Sint multi care cred ca Dumnezeu nu va permite acestor suflete ca sa continue in felul acesta de pedeapsa o vesnicie intreaga, ci dupa un anumit timp, El le va da voie ca sa fie consumati de acest foc final, care este ,,moartea a doua.” Sint multe versete din scriptura care sint  folosite ca sa suporte aceasta teorie. Sa vedem citeva:

Fiindcă cei răi vor fi nimiciţi…  PSALMUL 37:9

–- PSALMUL 37:10 Încă puţină vreme, şi cel rău nu va mai fi; te vei uita la locul unde era, şi nu va mai fi.

–- PSALMUL 37:20 Dar cei răi pier, şi vrăjmaşii Domnului sînt ca cele mai frumoase păşune: pier, pier ca fumul.

Sa piara pacatosii de pe pamint, si cei rai sa nu mai fie! PSALMUL 104:35

–- PSALMUL 145:20 Domnul păzeşte pe toţi cei ce -L iubesc, şi nimiceşte pe toţi cei răi.

–- ISAIA 1:28 Dar pieirea va atinge pe toţi cei răzvrătiţi şi păcătoşi, şi ceice părăsesc pe Domnul vor pieri.

–- MALEAHI 4:1 ,,Căci iată, vine ziua, care va arde ca un cuptor! Toţi cei trufaşi şi toţi cei răi, vor fi ca miriştea; ziua care vine îi va arde, zice Domnul oştirilor, şi nu le va lăsa nici rădăcină nici ramură.

Multe din aceste referinte, declara ca cei rai vor fi distrusi, mistuiti si pier,  fac aluzie de obicei la distrugerea celor rai in timp ce acestia traiesc pe acest pamint – nu se refera la nimicirea lor atunci cind vor fi aruncati in iazul cu foc.

Dupa judecata de la Tronul de Domnie cel Mare si Alb, pacatosii vor fi aruncati in iazul de foc. Apoi, Dumnezeu va creia un cer nou si un pamint nou, si cetatea cea sfinta, Noul Ierusalim, va cobori din ceruri de la Dumnezeu pe pamint. Dupa ce aceasta cetate din pietre nestemate se coboara pe pamint, citim urmatoarea declaratie:

–- APOCALIPSA 21:8 Dar cît despre fricoşi, necredincioşi, scîrboşi, ucigaşi, curvari, vrăjitori, închinătorii la idoli, şi toţi mincinoşii, partea lor este în iazul, care arde cu foc şi cu pucioasă, adică moartea a doua.„

Mai tirziu , Ioan descrie faptul ca in Noul Ierusalim se afla un riu al vietii, si un pom al vietii pe ambele parti ale riului. Nu mai este nici blestem pe pamint si nici trebuinta de soare, pentru ca Mielul lui Dumnezeu lumineaza cetatea (Apoc. 22:1-5). Observati ca riul vietii cu cei doi pomi se gasesc in afara portii cetatii care are. o mie cinci sute de mile patrate:

–- APOCALIPSA 22:14-15 14Ferice de cei ce îşi spală hainele, ca să aibă drept la pomul vieţii, şi să intre pe porţi în cetate!     15Afară sînt cînii, vrăjitorii, curvarii, ucigaşii, închinătorii la idoli, şi oricine iubeşte minciuna şi trăieşte în minciună!

De ce acesti indivizi  – ,,caini” ( o expresie evreiasca pentru o persoana necurata, nu un animal), vrajitori (vraci) – (cuvintul grecesc este pharmakos droguri si potiuni), curvarii (perverti sexuali si perversiune), impreuna cu mincinosii, ucigasii, si inchinatorii la idoli – sunt inca identificati ca fiind  afara din cetate dupa ce pamintul a fost purificat (2 Petru 3:7)?

Se pare ca iazul cu foc, acel lac de foc va fi deasemena amplasat dedesuptul pamintului cel nou. Dumnezeu nu distruge pamintul ca sa-l spulbere complet si nu va da foc cerului, ca sa recreize un altul nou si sa porneasca de la inceput. El de fapt reinnoieste planeta si cerurile printr-un foc curatitor  despre care Petru  vorbea  Aceasta va avea loc dupa judecata de la Tronul de Domnie cel Mare si Alb, cind fiecare, incluzind sfintti, vor fi in cer. Petru a scris:

–-2 PETRU 3:7 ar cerurile şi pămîntul de acum sînt păzite şi păstrate, prin acelaş Cuvînt, pentru focul din ziua de judecată şi de peire a oamenilor nelegiuiţi.

In Apocalipsa, Ioan nu mentioneaza despre o ardere a cerului si a pamintului cu un foc purificator (Isaia 65:17; 66:22; 2Petru 3:1-13), dar el face aluzie la un cer nou si un pamint nou (Apoc. 21:1). Ioan a spus ca marea nu va mai fi pe pamintul cel nou. Aceasta obseravatie a fost importanta pentru Ioan. Cind a scris Cartea Apocalipsa, el era un prisonier politic pe insula stincoasa din Patmos si a fost inconjurat de apele Marii Egee. Pentru Ioan, aceasta intindere masiva de ape i-l separau de bisericile lui si de cei pe care ii iubea. Pe paminntul cel nou nu vor mai fi frontiere sau limitatii de nici un fel! Singurul mod in care apele marilor ar putea sa dispara este daca ele s-ar evapora printr-un foc global de o oarecare forma, similar cu ceea ce Petru a zis: ,,Trupurile ceresti se vor topi de mare caldura” (2 Petru 3:10)

OAMENII DIN IAD

–- ISAIA 66:22-24 22Căci după cum cerurile cele noi, şi pămîntul cel nou, pe cari le voi face, vor dăinui înaintea Mea-zice Domnul-aşa va dăinui şi sămînţa voastră şi numele vostru.     23În fiecare lună nouă şi în fiecare Sabat, va veni orice făptură să se închine înaintea Mea, -zice Domnul. –     24,Şi cînd vor ieşi, vor vedea trupurile moarte ale oamenilor cari s’au răzvrătit împotriva Mea; căci vermele lor nu va muri, şi focul lor nu se va stinge; şi vor fi o pricină de groază pentru orice făptură.`

Mai inainte am mentionat despre o posibila legatura a Marii Moarte in timpul imparatiei de O Mie de Ani a lui Christos. Totusi, dupa reformarea cerului si a pamintului, sufletele pierdute ale oamnenilor vor fi asezate in afara portilor cetatii (orasului). Astfel, nu apare ca duhurile ingerilor si a oamenilor cazuti vor fi nimicite sau distruse in lacul de foc.

Judecata de la Tronul de Domnie cel Mare si Alb va separa pe cei pacatosi de acei credinciosi care au murit in timpul Imparatiei Milenare a lui Christos. Acolo, in ziua aceea nu vor fi oameni necredinciosi. Ateii vor deveni credinciosi, agnosticii vor fi socati cind il vor vedea pe Creiatorul pe Tronul Sau. Batjocoritorii vor tacea, si cei nelegiuiti isi vor regreta caile lor… dar va fi prea tirziu pentru ei.

Pentru cei neprihaniti, viitorul arata minunat. Bucuriile cele mari, vor veni in curind (The best is yet to come).

John Piper – What did manhood and womanhood look like before sin distorted them into what we see today?

you can listen to the mp3 here at desiringGod.org

Genesis 2:18-25

Then the Lord God said, „It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, „This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.

Last week we focused on the mess that men and women are in because of sin. We saw that sinful men use their unique powers to exploit women for their evil purposes. And we saw that sinful women use their unique powers to exploit men for their evil purposes. There is at least one muscle that is probably equally strong in both men and women—the tongue. And you can hear sinful men and sinful women in their little pockets of derision wielding this weapon to tear each other down.

But we have seen for two weeks now that this is not the way God created the world. And so we asked, How were man and woman supposed to relate to each other before sin ruined things? What did manhood and womanhood look like before sin distorted them into what we see today?

Part of the answer, we said, was that man and woman were created in the image of God as male and female. And we stressed that this means, at least, that they are to enjoy equality of personhood, equality of dignity, mutual respect, harmony, complementarity, and a unified destiny. But we stressed that this is only part of the answer.

Do Men and Women Have Unique Responsibilities?

It leaves open this question: Within the equality of personhood and the equality of dignity might there not be some special responsibilities that man has because he is man and that woman has because she is woman? In showing mutual respect and care, might there not be some special ways that a man is to respect a woman and special ways that a woman is to respect a man? Does equality of personhood and mutuality of respect demand sameness of responsibilities or even equal access to all responsibilities? Or did God intend from the beginning that our equality be expressed differently in the way we relate to each other as man and woman?

That is the question we take up today. And we will stay with it for several weeks as we try to find what the Bible teaches about this matter of diversity and complementarity. Today we will look at the biblical description of manhood and womanhood as God intended them to be before sin ruined things.

The Question Raised by Genesis 2

I think this is a good question to ask for two reasons. One is that Genesis chapter 2 calls for this kind of question. In Genesis 1 Moses tells us how God sovereignly created all things out of nothing and put them together in an orderly way so that everything serves man. Then God creates man as male and female in his own image, and declares that everything is very good.

But in Genesis 2 Moses puts the zoom lens on his camera and comes in for a close up on that sixth day of creation. And as you come to the end of the chapter you realize that one of the reasons he has done this is to say something tremendously important about the relationship of man and woman. In Genesis 1 he had said something very important: both are created in the image of God. Now in chapter 2 he says something more specific. So chapter 2 calls for the question: how are manhood and womanhood different?

What Jesus and Paul Appealed To

The other reason I think this is a good question (i.e., God’s intention for manhood and womanhood before sin) is that in the New Testament Jesus and Paul, when they use the Old Testament to answer questions about how man and woman should relate to each other, go back to what things were supposed to be like before the fall. They don’t take the messed up relationships of Genesis 3 and make them normative. They come back to Genesis 2 and talk about how it should have been from the beginning.

So what I want to do is make four observations that begin to answer the question of whether man and woman, in their equality of personhood, are supposed to have some different responsibilities. Does Genesis teach that there are special responsibilities that come with being male and special responsibilities that come with being female?

1. The Man Is Created First

The first thing chapter 2 makes clear is that man was created first and then after some intervening events woman was created. Verse 7: „Then the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” Verses 21f.: „So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.”

In 1 Timothy 2:13 the apostle Paul simply says, „Adam was formed first, then Eve.”

Why This Order?

Now why did God create man and woman in this way? Why did he not create them both simultaneously from the same lump of clay? Would that not have established their equality of personhood more clearly? The answer is that he had already established that beyond all doubt in Genesis 1:27 where it says that both were created in his image.

Now God wants to say something more about the relationship between man and woman. And what he wants to say is that when it comes to their differing responsibilities, there is a „firstness” of responsibility that falls to the man. This is not an issue of superior value. That issue has been settled in Genesis 1:27. It’s an issue of a sinless man, in childlike dependence on God, being given a special role or responsibility. God makes him the initial half of the pair to say something about his responsibility in initiating. God makes him lead the way into being to say something about his responsibility of leadership.

Does the Order of Creation Mean Nothing?

Some teachers have said that the order of creation means nothing because in Genesis 1, for example, the animals were created first and then man. So if order implies responsibility for leadership, then the animals should lead man.

There are two answers to that objection. One is this: When the Hebrew people gave a special responsibility to the „firstborn” in the family, it never entered their minds that this responsibility would be nullified if the father happened to own cattle before he had sons. In other words when Moses wrote this, he knew that the first readers would not lump animals and humans together as equal candidates for the responsibilities of the „firstborn.” And we shouldn’t either.

The other answer to this objection is that the apostle Paul, who was inspired by the Holy Spirit in his handling of the Scripture did see significance in the man being created first (1 Timothy 2:13). We will talk about that in a couple weeks. We do well not to say there is no meaning in something where an inspired apostle finds significant meaning.

So the first observation is very significant: man was created first, then the woman. And this points to a leadership responsibility for the man, especially in view of the other observations that follow.

2. The Man Is Given the Moral Pattern

The second observation to make is this: One of the responsibilities that came with being there first was the primary responsibility (not the only, but the primary responsibility) to receive and teach and be accountable for the moral pattern of life in the garden of Eden.

Before woman was created, God came to man in verse 16 and said, „You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 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 die.”

After the woman was created, there is no record that this pattern of moral life for the garden was repeated by God to the woman. I think that Moses, as he writes, expects us to conclude that Adam is entrusted with the moral pattern of the garden and with the primary responsibility of sharing it with Eve and being accountable for it.

Are we on track here, or are we reading too much into Adam’s being given the moral instruction? The third observation is to me a very strong indication that we are on track.

3. The Man Is Interrogated First

After the moral pattern had been broken by both Adam and Eve, God came to call them to account in chapter 3. And even though the woman had eaten the forbidden fruit first, God came to Adam first, not Eve, to hold him accountable for the failure to live by the pattern he had given.

Verse 9: „But the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, ‘Where are you?'” Adam, where are you? Verse 11 (still interrogating Adam first): „Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?”

Adam Held Primarily Accountable

Why would God come to the man first, and call him to give and account instead of going to the woman first, especially since she ate the fruit first? The most natural answer is that God gave to the man a primary responsibility for the moral life of the garden and therefore man has a primary accountability for the failure to live by it.

Make no mistake: God does hold the woman accountable for her actions. She is a personal, morally accountable being in the very image of God. And what man does or fails to do relieves her of no personal, individual responsibility to know and to obey God. But in their relationship to each other God looks to the man and says, „Have you been the moral and spiritual leader you ought to have been?”

When a Husband/Father Abdicates His Responsibility

James Dobson (of „Focus on the Family”) has seen the tremendous importance of this truth very clearly and the terrible effects when a husband and father abdicates his responsibility. Here is what he said,

A Christian man is obligated to lead his family to the best of his ability . . . If his family has purchased too many items on credit, then the financial crunch is ultimately his fault. If the family never reads the Bible or seldom goes to church on Sunday, God holds the man to blame. If the children are disrespectful and disobedient, the primary responsibility lies with the father . . . not his wife . . . In my view [says Dobson], America’s greatest need is for husbands to begin guiding their families, rather than pouring every physical and emotional resource into the mere acquisition of money. (Straight Talk to Men and Their Wives, Word Books, 1980, pp. 64f.)

I agree with Dobson because I think that is what is being taught in these chapters. God brought man onto the scene first as the leader. He entrusted him first with the moral pattern of the garden. And he called him to account first for the failure of disobedience. Therefore even though man and woman bear equal individual responsibility before God for their own obedience (that’s what it means to be created in his image), nevertheless in relationship to each other man bears a greater responsibility for leadership than woman does.

The Pattern Before the Fall

This is the way God meant it to be before there was any sin in the world: sinless man, full of love, in his tender, strong, moral leadership in relation to woman; and sinless woman, full of love, in her joyful, responsive support for man’s leadership. No belittling from the man, no groveling from the woman. Two intelligent, humble, God-entranced beings living out, in beautiful harmony, their unique and different responsibilities.

Now Satan knows that this is a beautiful arrangement. He knows that God’s pattern of life is designed for man’s good. But Satan hates God and he hates man. He is a liar and a killer from the beginning. And so what does he do? This is the fourth observation.

4. Satan Attacks the Woman First

Satan assaults God’s pattern by attacking the woman instead of the man. If God means for man to bear special responsibility for leadership in the garden, then Satan will do what he can to destroy that pattern.

Why did he approach the woman in Genesis 3:1? Why did he draw her into discussion first and make her the spokesman for the couple? Why did he lure her into being the moral guardian of the garden? Was it because she was easier prey? Is woman more gullible than man? Or could the answer be: Satan drew the woman in first, and made her the spokesman and the moral guardian, because that is exactly what should not have been done?

In other words Satan spurns the order that God has established and simply ignores the man and takes up his subtle battle with the woman. And in doing that, he makes man into exactly what he wants him to be: a silent, withdrawn, weak, fearful, passive wimp. And a masculine wimp is a very dangerous person. One moment he’s passive and follows his woman; and the next moment he’s angry and blames her for all of his problems.

And Satan laughs to himself and says, „Now I have created such a confusion of roles they will never sort this out. They will look at the abusive man and tell him to be more passive with women. And they will look at the abused woman and tell her to be more assertive with men. And they will never get to the root of the problem.”

But in Genesis 3:17 God goes right to the root of the problem. He says to the man, „Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you.” In other words, „Adam, you were listening when you should have been leading.” God is not confused about what Satan did.

And he doesn’t want us to be confused either. He created man first; he gave him the moral pattern of the garden first; he held him accountable for failure first; and he punished him for falling right in line with God’s archenemy when Satan lured man and woman into a great role reversal at the fall.

What Should We Do?

So what should we do? Well, men, we should humble ourselves before God for our failures. All of us. This is not a call to exalt yourself over any woman. This is not a call to domineer, or belittle, or to put woman in her place. She is, after all, a fellow heir of God and destined for a glory that will blind us some day. This is a call to stoop down and to take the responsibility to be a leader—a servant leader in the various ways that are appropriate to every different relationship to women.

It’s a call to us men

  • that we should take the risk of getting egg on our faces;
  • that we should pray like we’ve never prayed for help in this tremendous responsibility;
  • that we should be in the Word more than we ever have been to know what God expects of us;
  • that we should plan things more than we do, and be intentional and thoughtful and less carried along by the mood of the moment;
  • that we should be disciplined and ordered in our lives;
  • that we should be tender-hearted and sensitive;
  • that we should take the initiative to make sure that there is a time and a place to talk to her about what needs to be talked about—this „her” could be a friend, a date, a colleague, a wife, a sister;
  • that we should be ready to lay down our lives in discharging this responsibility to be the leaders God is calling us to be.

May God continue to teach us and humble us and heal us in all our relationship for his great glory and for our joy.

Ian Hamilton – The Sabbath is God’s weekly, and so very gracious provision for His people

I came across this article that almost seems out of place in the frenetic American life. Oh that we may be wise and heed the instruction. The author of the article is Ian Hamilton, Pastor of Presbyterian Church, Cambridge,England. This article was published in The Banner of Truth Trust, United Kingdom.

The Foundations of Godliness

We live in a mad, as well as a bad, world. The pace of life is simply frenetic, and shows few if any signs of slowing down. One danger facing the Christian in this mad, bad world is that we become swept along in the rush and never really take, and make, the time to be still before God. Consequently, the rhythm of our lives lacks any poise, far less peace. We are never off the treadmill long enough to savour the surpassing joy and blessedness of being a Christian. And yet, are we not told that ‘those who wait upon the Lord will renew their strength’? (Isa. 40:31); or do we imagine that we can leave off waiting on the Lord and still maintain a vibrant, godly, Christian life? How spiritually deranged Christians can become!

In his great goodness, the Lord has anticipated our need for rest and recreation. In the fourth commandment, our kindly Lord has so structured the weekly rhythm of his creatures that we have a day in which to draw breath, re-order our wearied minds, renew our tired bodies, and engage in soul-refreshing worship. The Sabbath day is not only a day set apart for the Lord, it is a day set apart for the good of his creatures: ‘the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath’ (Mark 2:27). Today, however, many Christians give the impression they are wiser than God. Too often the blessing of the Sabbath day is neglected, and lost, because we use it to catch up on work or studies, most often left undone by poor planning in the previous days of the week. Not only do we dishonour the Lord when we misuse his day, we rob ourselves of the renewing blessings of a life that has waited on the Lord with his people (see Isa. 58:13-14).

The Sabbath day is woven into the moral framework of God’s creation (the fourth commandment simply codifies an existing creation ordinance). Our Maker, who is also our Husband, knows our needs; he never forgets that we are dust. If Adam in his innocence needed a Sabbath day, how much more do we need God’s day of rest to renew our wearied bodies and tired minds.

The Sabbath is God’s weekly, and so very gracious, provision for his people. But you are not to imagine that you have to wait a whole week before you ‘wait upon the Lord’. The example of our Lord Jesus is instructive. Luke tells us that ‘Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed.’ Quiet times were basic to the rhythm of the Saviour’s life. He needed time alone with his Father. He needed to wait upon the Lord to renew his strength. His humanity was no charade, he felt the strain of constant service. Are we holier than our Saviour? If he needed to spend time often alone with his Father, do we not need to do the same? A daily quiet time is not a luxury, it is a necessity!

It is sadly fashionable in some Reformed circles to pour scorn on the quiet time, as if it were a pietistic cop-out from the rigours of serving Christ. I must confess that I am all for more piety. The more pious a man or woman is, the more they will, like their Saviour, feel the need to set time aside to draw near to God. In his presence our minds are re­ordered, our souls are refreshed, even our bodies are strengthened.

We live in a mad, bad world. Equip yourself to face it and not be overwhelmed by it, by honouring the Sabbath day, and by imitating the example of the Saviour, who ‘often withdrew to lonely places and prayed.’ He needed to, and he did. We need to and we must.

(VIA) Banner of Truth Trust, United Kingdom

Blogosfera Evanghelică

Vizite unicate din Martie 6,2011

free counters

Va multumim ca ne-ati vizitat azi!


România – LIVE webcams de la orase mari