Ephesians 1-3

[wolfpurplemoon]

Those that are blessed were predestined to be saved, God chose them before the foundation of the world.

Everyone near and far has been preached to in peace and are therefore no longer foreign to each other as they are fellow citizens in God's household.

Paul had the divine secret made known to him by revelation, a secret not disclosed to any previous prophets, that everyone can be saved rather than just the chosen few (though they have to have been predestined as it said in the previous chapter). Paul's calling is to reveal this secret plan to everyone after it was hidden for ages.

The love of Christ surpasses all knowledge so you can be filled up to the fullness of God, you don't want knowledge filling up space that could be used for God.

Comments

New Reader

[(Anonymous)]

Oh man, your already at ephesians and I just started following your blog. I found you on youversion can you include a link to your passages so I might make informed comments after visiting your site first?
I'm looking forward to this exploration, don't disappoint me with text regurgitation.

TOR on, why are you logging IP addresses?

Re: New Reader

[wolfpurplemoon]

The IP address logging is just a setting on Livejournal, nothing sinister but it has helped me spot multiple comments from the same anonymous person like yourself.

My blog is: http://community.livejournal.com/wolfbiblemoon and my posts on each book of the bible are listed on this page: http://community.livejournal.com/wolfbiblemoon/tag/

Thanks for your interest in my reading, you may be disappointed that I'm so close to the end but I'm looking forward to finishing!

Re: New Reader

[(Anonymous)]

No one is ever done Reading Gods word. I have read and reread His word.and have never regretted one day

Predestination

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Basically, if you read this within this context, he is talking about the predestination of the Ephesians. God knew that many would be willing to listen to his Word in each city, and he predestined these to be for the praise of his glory. God had been planning for the coming of Jesus for a while, so that it would be at the right time and in the right place. Everyone knew Greek, thus making Paul's trip much easier. The Romans had built roads, so that Paul and the apostles could travel much more effectively. The Israelite martyrs brought a hope to people. This all occurs in the 400 years of silence.

Pleasant Surprise

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

I'm reposting this b/c I posted it on a much older page, unsure if you would've seen it. Anyway.
Wolfpurplemoon, I'm unsure if you are reading this to make sarcastic remarks, to better understand Christians, or to look the bible through for inklings of truth. My advice to you would be to read it without any preconceived notions, and try to find real truth within the text, for instance, the fact that God's law IS reallly written on our hearts, and in our minds.
C.S. Lewis was an atheist until JRR Tolkien told him to ACTUALLY read the bible without intentions of bashing and ridiculing it. This is what he did, and he eventually came to accept A God, and then, eventually, THE God of the Bible.
I think you would find a biography of C.S. Lewis quite interesting. I recommend you read one, or any of his work, even the Chronicles of Narnia, which basically shows what God would be like in a different world.
Anyway I just wish for you to be open-minded, thank you for your time.
-Brennen

Re: Pleasant Surprise

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Sorry if I sounded a bit pushy about believing the bible.
Though I still seriously recommend you read some C.S. Lewis books. Mere Christianity would be a good start. The book mainly derives from 15 minute broadcasts he gave over the British radio. The beginning of the book narrows down the belief systems with an intuitive view. Whether you accept his view or not, it is an interesting and very descriptive book. C.S. Lewis is great at incorporating stories within arguments and vice-versa.

[zen-says.livejournal.com]

dear wolf, why should you read c s lewis while you can waste your money on the trilogy,,,

read godless by dan barker, cosmos by carl sagan or even stephen hawkins,,,

what the hell. get a anthrophology degree, physics, biology and whatever degree to refute the bible,,,,

maybe you should pick up greek and hebrew and history to get the bible into "CORRECT" context,,,

wtf,,,, better travel through time in a telephone booth of Dr Who and see the history for yourself,,,,,,,,

haha,,,,, or another just read the bible, complete y=what you set up, finish it, and throw into the bin and find something more realistic like santa claus

[(Anonymous)]

Why in the world are you so very rude? How are your opinions more right than anothers, and why is it you feel the right to be down right antagonistic while getting so hateful when someone else does the same? You use the name zen, which I'm guessing comes from buddhist beliefs. Buddhists believe in the equality of beings, doing onto others, moral principles....so instead of bashing those with opposing beliefs that you feel are such hypocrites, take some time and focus on your own shortcomings.-sue

[zen-says.livejournal.com]

better than a god than killed the first borns of eygptians, wiped out the world's population less 8 people and many animals and sending all who do not believe in a "virgin" conceived non-historical recorded "character" into an eternal hell.

ya,,just a just and loving god that send people to hell,,,,,,,,

thank you, you prove my point

Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Some much easier things along those lines (by the way ...physics? does that have anything to do with atheism or theism?)
1. Look at the origin of religions and see how basically all have stemmed from original judaism, while incorporating random Gods and also involving evolution. Basically evolution is what the pagans of old believed, so its nothing new.
2. Abiogenesis has been disproved. Look it up.
3. Basically no matter what you believe, you must acknowledge the fact that the world and the universe couldn't have slowly edged into existence from nothingness, some other force had its hand in the making of everything. I've never seen spaghetti make itself.

I could go on a bit longer, but the more I type like this the more I feel like a jerk. Both sides of atheism and theism have good arguments. Both sides have found "found" evidence that contradicts the other. What matters is what you believe, and what seems logical. I'm not going to thrust my beliefs upon anyone, but I will defend them.

Re: Zen

[zen-says.livejournal.com]

Dear Brennen,

you are so presumptous that you actually believed all religion stemmed from judaism (if you care to explain what you understand by judaism).....

tell that to the mayans, hindus, and buddhists,,,,,

so a intelligent designer which called the universe into existence than a good scientific theory "still a theory though" is better explanation for the created world?

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Dear Zen,
What?
Ok I might have said that a bit wrong.
Judaism came first.
Then came mayans, hindus, and buddhists.
Hinduism and buddhism came around 600 b.c.
Most of these religions included the All Knowing God of the bible (besides buddhism of course, which is atheistic) but most of their polytheism overshadowed this one God.
Basically, they did descend from an original religion, but they added in other "Gods" and "Goddesses."
I'm not saying these Gods and Goddesses were complete myths, but they stemmed from a rebellion against the actual God. Until they almost completely overshadowed him and He was forgotten in those religions. (Sorry I can't be more descriptive, I don't have the best memory, and the book I read went into much more detail on other things).
And presumptuous? No. Did I study history? Yes.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Oh and buddhism came from Buddha. Plus some morals sprinkled in. aka karma.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Also Zen,
If you could at least use proper grammar or go take english class it would be easier to understand what your saying.
Your last paragraph makes little to no sense.
And yes, I have problems with saying other things after my initial post.

Re: Zen

[wolfpurplemoon]

I have a feeling that English isn't Zen's first language and if so I think he's more comprehensible than some apparent English speakers I've had commenting. I never accuse people of bad English on the internet because they may be foreign or have dyslexia and are actually trying their hardest to be understood.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Oh ya sorry about the english thing. Honestly, I didn't think about it until a few minutes after the post.

Re: Zen

[liedownlovely.livejournal.com]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the religion of polytheism came first. It's believed the Hebrews took the belief of monotheism from the Egyptian pharaoh, Akhenaten, who was the first one to believe in such a thing. While we're talking pharaohs, let's not forget the Egyptians and their religions, who were way before Judaism.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Yes, polytheism came first when the Genesis texts aren't considered. So this would just be a subject both of us would disagree on. Though I do find the history of religions interesting, I haven't looked into them much, but I plan on reading some more in the future. If you care, anyway.

Re: Zen

[liedownlovely.livejournal.com]

I guess it would be pointless to mention the scientific aspect of humanity's roots in Africa and their polytheism then - even if the descendants between Adam and Eve and Abraham turned their back on YHWH before he relocated them to the modern day Israel?

I mean, it seems perfectly plausible to me that not every single person since YHWH (YHWH being one of his names) believes in him, right? Imagine how pissed Adam and Eve must've been to been kicked out. They tell their children angry stories of this paradise lost. So it's not until Abraham comes along before the belief in YHWH spreads again.

But then... yeah. That's trying to mix religion and science.

Re: Zen

[wolfpurplemoon]

Physics has had a long track record in showing that the bible is wrong about many things. Why else do you think various physicists were so reviled by the Catholic church through the centuries? Right up to the present day physicists are finding out more and more that shows there is no need to invoke God to explain how the universe got here.

Re: Zen

[wolfpurplemoon]

Oh and I can't work out the reason for your random abiogenesis remark, but it is rather wrong - just a cursory search of some scientific journals shows that there are many recently published studies adding to the wealth of evidence already accumulated to support the theory.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

The main reason for that was b/c it is a link in the long chain of evolution theory. Also, I'm just going to conclude that worldwide it is accepted as false, though I'm sure a few scientists still wish to hold on to it. I also forgot to mention the fact that we all have the Law of Human Nature (morals). But of course this is somehow disproved (for some people) with evolution theory.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

On that note, I'd like to hear what you guys think about the origin of morals or a conscious. Am I correct in assuming you think we evolved into a sense of morals so as to get along with eachother, since without them, basically anything would go? (death, destruction, bla bla, bad stuff) I don't plan on arguing anything, just interested if thats the basic theory.

Re: Zen

[wolfpurplemoon]

Sounds about right to me.

Re: Zen

[wolfpurplemoon]

What theory of the origin of life is being studied now if abiogenesis has been 'accepted as false' (worldwide no less)? Because if a theory is proved false scientists don't just abandon study of that area and say 'oh well, God must've done it'.

Re: Zen

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Alright cool thx. And you do have a good point on the abiogenesis subject, though that doesn't mean its necessarily correct. I'm sure there are scientists experimenting and trying to prove abiogenesis correct still. Though I'm sure you have more knowledge on this subject than me.

One thing that really irritates me though: The fact that with many important things, there are always two sides to the problem. A person could just as easily accept one side as the other. I was in debate this year and each team would always have evidence going directly against the other teams' evidence. This doesn't make sense, since one of them had to be correct, but it always happens nonetheless.

So whenever there are two equally good sides to an argument, I see no point in continuing. (Unfortunately, in debate you HAVE to keep arguing)

[wolfpurplemoon]

You're right about Santa being more realistic, I've certainly had more proof of his existence in my life than I have of God's. He used to leave me presents and thankyou notes for the snacks we'd left him and his reindeer (that they'd also eaten).

John 6:61-65

[1100010724.livejournal.com]

"Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you-—they are full of the Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

God's Word offends people. For those who are Christians, it's something to accept. God will manifest Himself to those who desire it by accepting Jesus, since no one can know the Father except through the Son. Separating science and God is absurd, as God is the most ingenious and creative scientist that ever existed or will exist. Everything on Earth is logical, ordered, and has a process; it makes sense. Look a building, you will know that there was an architect because of the complex intricacies and physics involved in erecting the building, and it certainly did not build itself. Looking at your own reflection in the mirror is no different. Those who do not accept this truth simply do not accept it. No matter of human argument or logic will change that, only God can turn a person's heart.