Comments on: The Fork in the Road: Moral vs. Positive Law: Background

By: One In Jesus » Is the “Plan of Salvation” Arbitrary? Part 2

One In Jesus » Is the “Plan of Salvation” Arbitrary? Part 2 — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:02:17 +0000

[...] See this article by John Mark Hicks giving some examples. Here’s another example from a sermon by Benjamin Franklin (the Restoration preacher, not the Revolutionary [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:58:25 +0000

If someone is facing a difficult situation and they have faith that God is going to provide help for them, I think that shows great faith.

By: Hank

Hank — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:39:58 +0000

Royce,

If what you believe is true…

Then Abraham doesn't deserve the credit that the Bible gives him. Because, if he knew that God did not actually want him to kill his son (if he knew God was not going to allow it), then what was so special abot his faith? The fact of the matter is that even though God said to kill him… Abraham was willing to obey. While he may have believed that God would raise him again, he still was prepared to kill him.

You say:

"God never intended that Abraham would kill his son and Abraham never expected he would have to kill him. "

If so, what was so faithfull about him? The truth is that he DID intend to kill is son (as God had commanded), even thogh he believed that God would make it all right in the end. If he (as you suggest) believed that God was merely kidding…what would have made him so faithful?

Again, it seems as though you are guilty of reading into the text.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:22:59 +0000

Abraham believed that God would provide a sacrifice in place of his son, he also knew if it did come to that he had to kill him God could raise him from the dead.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:59:28 +0000

Royce, your comment is what has been revealed to you and there is nothing wrong with wanting others to see it too. I want people to see it also, but sometimes they simply just don't want to. Abraham did say of himself and his son "we will return” and Abraham did tell Isaac, "God will provide”, Abraham believed God who had promised to bless the nations through that son. You are right and the Scripture provide the proof.

By: pilgrim

pilgrim — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 08:35:47 +0000

Royce, will all due respect, you are completely undercutting the most beautiful obedience ever offered by a human. Abraham had EVERY INTENTION of plunging his knife through the throat of his own son. God told him to do it and he was obeying God. Despite whatever moral ideas Abraham had about God, he knew God's voice and obeyed. In the same way, we can hear and obey.

Hebrew writer confirms:
Hebrews 11:17-19
By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises WAS ABOUT TO SACRIFICE HIS ONE AND ONLY SON, even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” Abraham reasoned that God could raise the DEAD, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.

By: Royce Ogle

Royce Ogle — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:38:14 +0000

Alan, You said "But God has done that at least once — when he commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son. In fact, that command fits all three of the qualifications Franklin mentions. I understand Franklin to say that when God is explicitly clear about what he expects us to do (I’m not talking about arguments from silence), then we have an obligation to obey even if we don’t understand"

God never intended that Abraham would kill his son and Abraham never expected he would have to kill him. He said of himself and his son after saying they were going to the mountain to worship "we will return". He also said "God will provide…" Abraham believed God who had promised to bless the nations through the same son.

By: Jay Guin

Jay Guin — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:37:53 +0000

Pilgrim and Jody,

I think Pilgrim is spot on.

Baptism comes closest to being positive, but it's not a command to Christians — only non-Christians get baptized (except in Churches of Christ, of course, where we re-baptize the saved with regularity).

And I'm not sure it's properly characterized as a command in the sense that a failure to be baptized would be a sin. After all, those who are lost are lost because of their other sins, not because of their failure to be baptized.

By: pilgrim

pilgrim — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:29:51 +0000

Jody: Is the marriage ceremony a rule on HOW to live in a marriage? No, it is the way we enter covenant, but not a term of the agreement or covenant itself. I am not justified by that act, but born again IN that act. Not of works but necessary obedience nonetheless.

Is physical intimacy a rule in marriage? No, it is an expression of love between those who are married? Is the Lord's supper a rule in the New Covenant? No, it is an expression of love and devotion and remembrance to Him and with each other.

By: Jody B

Jody B — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:49:46 +0000

Baptism, anyone? I can't see the purpose of a symbolic burial, but it is commanded. This is why I agree with Ben Franklin's sermon.

However, when positive interpretations of scriptural silence and approved apostolic example became tests of fellowship, the movement became the worst kind of bad.