Comments - bible RecentComments

kjv@Romans:4 @ @ RandyP comments: This law of faith not only separates us from our Jewish brothers but also our Muslim; it is our dividing point in many respects. Their reward is essentially boiled down to "God owes them" because of their obedient works. They do what He commands them and He is obliged/indebted to pay them back. God is committed thus only to their blood seed or proselytized seed. It is our belief that God owes no man no thing, that what He does give us is freely given of His own supreme grace through and for the establishment of His own son Jesus Christ's reign and lordship. We have the entirety of the Bible including the accounts of Abraham and David to confirm this Law of Faith. It's reward is available to all peoples who like Abraham hope beyond hope in imputation and God's providential grace. The story of Abraham thus becomes a prophecy of God sacrificing His son in substitution for reasons of His own love and grace and not because of indebtedness to some percieved goodness we may or may not of performed. The difference is huge!

kjv@Isaiah:38 @ @ RandyP comments: The king was suffering from some disease causing the skin to boil. Indications are that it was making him to be bitter towards God. Hezekiah had been a good godly king, the right man for the times at hand in Judah, but, not even that keeps one from suffering deadly illness, the curse of Adam. We cannot say that bitterness caused this cancer. We cannot say that the illness was intended to bring to light a hidden bitterness that then could be dealt with. We can not say that Hezekiah's illness was intended to stir the faith of the others around him. For then we would have to say the same about anyone of us. Though these things may have resulted, we can say that God dealt with everything that happened with the good of His plan and love for His servant in mind. The same would have been true if Hezekiah would have been called back into the Lord's rest.

kjv@Genesis:25:34 @ @ RandyP comments: It seems to me that the birthright would have meant more to Esau had his father's love meant more to him. We don't know the full details of their relationship, but, for all intensive purposes it was boiled down to one's love of hunting and one's love for venison; not much to stand on. There is also the possibility that he knew or it had been discussed in the family of God's revelation to Rebecca. Then Esau would have grown to despise the birthright because he knew sooner or later it would be taken from him. I am not sure that birth right would have made any difference to the revelation or whether this was just the way that the individuals were interpreting it.