Dig Deeper in the Hebrew Holy Bible for Its Truth in Your Life

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Dec 8, 2010 at 19:12

Thank you for proving my point of not having the Holy Spirit guiding you as you try to subvert the truth of the Holy Bible to fit your perception of world Christianity. That is the first paragraph.

Next, I did say that I have not read Calvin for a specific reason, that I have not read Calvin. But let us take it one step further, that in specific response to what I have been told about 'purist' Calvinism, I would not espouse its non-Biblical assertions any more than anything else that is found to be inconsistent with the WORD of the LORD. In that context, it is not Calvin that one needs to look at to understand that 'grace alone' comes from the mouth of Jesus Christ; that ANYONE who makes out that the GRACE of ALMIGHTY GOD is not sufficient alone to save is reading from some other unreliable source. The 'extension' you refer to is NOT Biblically supported and is in error: 2 Peter 1:20) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

We can advance this further by saying that Calvinism in its 'puritanical' form has been largely marginalized by a truer reading of the Holy Bible in which the words of Jesus Christ are to be followed, and not some form of expositional rendition composed to accentuate a personal agenda. Of this I say that if it cannot be demonstrated by the Holy Spirit that the WORD of the LORD is being truly portrayed, then it must be set aside until the truth is revealed in the LORD's time.

As to your contention of betrayal, my words may have a tendency to be a characterization of how I think, but there is no betrayal in the power that governs my life in every way, every breathe, and every heartbeat; that of the power of the Holy Spirit.

So, are you contending that the Hebrew Holy Bible has condoned the puritan killing of indigenous peoples? Or do you extend the antagonist's argument that tries to abrogate the truth of the Gospel love of Jesus Christ by making a blasphemous assertion that Almighty God does things outside the confines of His WORD? Your attempt, not mine, makes this erroneous assertion.

Now you still try to infuse other philosophical references (last time Nietzsche, this time Marx) in a potential attempt to confuse the issue, ("as per my reading of HOLY BIBLE"-your words) and one wonders – why? Have you not found enough confusion in the world that you need to stir up old and very old contentions of the Holy Bible to lead you astray from the power of Jesus Christ that can be yours by the power of His Name?

As I said before, Nietzsche failed; and died without Christ in his life. You now resurrect Marx, and I'm sorry, he did not get it done either. Worse for him, he did have a Christian beginning and could have found Christ if in his studies he received Jesus Christ as LORD and set a new course for life, instead of the darkened one that the world worships today.

So now you try to assign a post modernist-colored view of the Biblical prophetical observations of Isaiah, and maybe you hope that in doing so, somehow it will fit some convention or form of humanists' logic that could fit into a humanists' worldview of the failing world we live in. For you, I wonder of your own worldview, whether post Islamic or other non-Biblical form, how you might try for it to be easily absorbed in some philosophical fashion. I tried that decades ago, and found that all else, short of the Biblical truth of the WORD of the LORD, failed.

My advice is extended here: stop trying to find out why the Hebrew Holy Bible does not seem to fit any human logic and look for how Jesus Christ does not seek the approval of men, but desires to embrace those who seek Him in truth and faith. Seek Him in the Holy Bible, and find out why millions believe that by His grace, they have their salvation, as do I. After all, if salvation was such a bad thing for mankind, ask yourself why Almighty God even thought of sending Jesus Christ in the first place. Come on, why do you think it is so.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".