Support NeoGAF

[JDSN]

Hahaha

 

[Wynnebeck]

I find this current surge of religious topics involving Christianity and GAF interesting. Even if the overall tone is antagonistic, you never know when the discussions might have someone look more into it and actually come to the kingdom.

 

[Khronico]

I find this current surge of religious topics involving Christianity and GAF interesting. Even if the overall tone is antagonistic, you never know when the discussions might have someone look more into it and actually come to the kingdom.

One can hope, although, considering the general opinion of GAF on religion and specifically Christianity, it's hard not to be pessimistic. I'm glad that this thread exists, even though it may be a bit lean on discussion for the most part.

 

[legend166]

I find this current surge of religious topics involving Christianity and GAF interesting. Even if the overall tone is antagonistic, you never know when the discussions might have someone look more into it and actually come to the kingdom.

I find it sad to be honest. The amount of ignorance regarding orthodox Christian doctrine is pretty mind boggling, and a judgement on the church (particularly the church in the US).

And you can also see the massive problems caused by the prosperity gospel - the world now thinks Christianity is about a God who is just there for people to call upon when they want some material thing or to get a promotion or to win a football game or whaetever.

Similarly, the church's unwillingness to talk about sin (in a complete, holistic sense, not just the sin of gay people and abortions) destroys the entire context of salvation. You see the outcome of that in that thread about Biblical protagonists, with so many people saying God is evil, etc. And they base that on the idea that humanity somehow deserves to be treated well by God, rather than Him treating us well purely because of His mercy (i.e. undeserved). If we did deserve to be treated well, then God would be evil because His actions wouldn't be justified. But we don't because we're sinners. But that's the thing - if you remove sin from Christian teachings, everything else falls down.

So you've got people like Joel Osteen removing sin from Christian teachings (or downplaying its seriousness) and preaching the prosperity gospel. And now the world is starting to think that's what Christianity is all about.

 

[Red Mage]

I find it sad to be honest. The amount of ignorance regarding orthodox Christian doctrine is pretty mind boggling, and a judgement on the church (particularly the church in the US).

And you can also see the massive problems caused by the prosperity gospel - the world now thinks Christianity is about a God who is just there for people to call upon when they want some material thing or to get a promotion or to win a football game or whaetever.

Similarly, the church's unwillingness to talk about sin (in a complete, holistic sense, not just the sin of gay people and abortions) destroys the entire context of salvation. You see the outcome of that in that thread about Biblical protagonists, with so many people saying God is evil, etc. And they base that on the idea that humanity somehow deserves to be treated well by God, rather than Him treating us well purely because of His mercy (i.e. undeserved). If we did deserve to be treated well, then God would be evil because His actions wouldn't be justified. But we don't because we're sinners. But that's the thing - if you remove sin from Christian teachings, everything else falls down.

So you've got people like Joel Osteen removing sin from Christian teachings (or downplaying its seriousness) and preaching the prosperity gospel. And now the world is starting to think that's what Christianity is all about.

Yep. Prosperity Gospel + Emergent Theology is a cancer to the Church in America. I'd also argue that the YEC who are actively hostile to OEC, Theistic Evolutionists, and science in general is a large blemish upon our witnessing. Whether someone believes that God took 6 literal days or 6 epochs shouldn't affect our fellowship with other believers.

9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

1 Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

5 One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. 8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.
10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:

“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will acknowledge God.’”
12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. 15 If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

It seems to me that, while we should not be wishy-washy in our views, that we should be respectful of each other and to not condemn fellow Christians on something that is a relatively unknown matter. I fully believe that when Scripture uses the word Yom in Genesis, it's meant in the sense of an era or epoch. To some of my fellow believers in America, however, this makes me a heretic of the worst sort and they will proclaim that one cannot believe in both
scripture and the universe being billions of years old. This saddens me, not for my own sake, but for those who may be struggling with their inability to resolve these two contradictary things. Similarly, the hostility to the Big Bang confuses me, as it's very inline with what Scripture says in Genesis 1:1.

 

[SeventhSon]

I fully believe that when Scripture uses the word Yom in Genesis, it's meant in the sense of an era or epoch. To some of my fellow believers in America, however, this makes me a heretic of the worst sort and they will proclaim that one cannot believe in both
scripture and the universe being billions of years old.

Was there death before sin?

 

[Chaplain]

I find it sad to be honest. The amount of ignorance regarding orthodox Christian doctrine is pretty mind boggling, and a judgement on the church (particularly the church in the US).

And you can also see the massive problems caused by the prosperity gospel - the world now thinks Christianity is about a God who is just there for people to call upon when they want some material thing or to get a promotion or to win a football game or whaetever.

Similarly, the church's unwillingness to talk about sin (in a complete, holistic sense, not just the sin of gay people and abortions) destroys the entire context of salvation. You see the outcome of that in that thread about Biblical protagonists, with so many people saying God is evil, etc. And they base that on the idea that humanity somehow deserves to be treated well by God, rather than Him treating us well purely because of His mercy (i.e. undeserved). If we did deserve to be treated well, then God would be evil because His actions wouldn't be justified. But we don't because we're sinners. But that's the thing - if you remove sin from Christian teachings, everything else falls down.

So you've got people like Joel Osteen removing sin from Christian teachings (or downplaying its seriousness) and preaching the prosperity gospel. And now the world is starting to think that's what Christianity is all about.

Let me say that you are not the only one who sees what is going on. Deceivers are running amok in God's church:

Victoria Osteen - when we obey God, we're not doing it for God, it's for our SELF

This doesn't mean God doesn't have people exposing exposing them:

John MacArthur Rebukes Joel Osteen

What many us see is the following scripture come to pass at an alarming rate:

"You should know this, Timothy, that in the last days there will be very difficult times. For people will love only themselves and their money. They will be boastful and proud, scoffing at God, disobedient to their parents, and ungrateful. They will consider nothing sacred. They will be unloving and unforgiving; they will slander others and have no self-control. They will be cruel and hate what is good. They will betray their friends, be reckless, be puffed up with pride, and love pleasure rather than God. They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that!" (1 Timothy 3)

That being said, much of the church is now apostate. This is why you are seeing "the church's unwillingness to talk about sin." This is the period that much of the church has moved into.

"But now I find that I must write about something else, urging you to defend the faith that God has entrusted once for all time to his holy people. I say this because some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches, saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives. The condemnation of such people was recorded long ago, for they have denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." (Jude 3)

Much of the teachings preached in the Emergent church and through the prosperity Gospel are nothing new though. They were exposed by the early church fathers and were of Gnostic origin (among others). Here is a Bible conference that occurred a few weeks ago and discussed the historical writings that these false teachings are based on.

(right click/save as)

Ancient Manuscripts (Simple Truths Conference)
Church Fathers (Simple Truths Conference)
Agnostic Deception (Simple Truths Conference)
The Reliability of Scripture (Simple Truths Conference)

I will just say that if you read God's Word you will learn that God said all of this would happen. Jesus said that the world hated Him and that His true followers would also be hated. I encourage each you to keep your eyes on Jesus, share His Gospel and live a holy life. Salt and light will continue to draw people to Jesus regardless of what happens in our culture as it continues to crumble.

 

[Chaplain]

Doing God's work with that blog, friend.

Each of us has been entrusted with certain skills that God wants us to use for Him. The blog is just one of the things I enjoy doing for God. One of the others is my soundcloud page.

Main Link
Sets Link

 

[Wynnebeck]

It's interesting you Game Analyst and Red Mage are discussing Prosperity Gospel as my mother (who is a prophetess) has been talking to me about it recently. She feels that with the way the world is going nowadays, the end times is quickly approaching. Instead of preaching prosperity, why aren't more pastors condemning sin and doing more to win people to God in these perilous times? Seeing you guys bring that up is just confirmation for me that other people are seeing it as well. I pray for the deliverance of those who blaspheme or condemn God, so even with all of the hate and antagonism that we receive (here being on GAF included), I have hope in my heart that they will turn their hearts before it is too late.

 

[Chaplain]

Instead of preaching prosperity, why aren't more pastors condemning sin and doing more to win people to God in these perilous times?

From what I see, hear from the pastors at my church, and on the net, a big problem is that there is big money to be made off of God's flock who are not grounded in God's Word. As well as many pastors have not been called by God, and are in it for the financial gain and power it brings (as Peter wrote in his writings).

Seeing you guys bring that up is just confirmation for me that other people are seeing it as well. I pray for the deliverance of those who blaspheme or condemn God, so even with all of the hate and antagonism that we receive (here being on GAF included), I have hope in my heart that they will turn their hearts before it is too late.

Many people see it like you and others have mentioned. A huge problem right now in churches that have preached God's Word Biblically from their beginning is that they have allowed emergent church teaching to creep in. One pastor recently saw what was happening and asked to be removed as an afflicate from Calvary chapel. Here is the letter:

This is why its extremely important to know God's Word, to make a conscious effort to verify what we are being taught from the pulpit, and to call out (in a loving manner) unbiblical teaching that they espouse. That is what the Pastor asks us to do at our church and to not take his word on what is said (since he can make mistakes).

 

[Red Mage]

Was there death before sin?

Unless animals gained sustenance from the sun, yes there was.

 

[Chaplain]

Unless animals gained sustenance from the sun, yes there was.

The problem with this assumption, and a good one at that, is that Paul says Death entered creation once Adam sinned:

"Therefore, as sin came into the world through one man, and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men, [no one being able to stop it or to escape its power] because all men sinned." (Romans 5:12 AMP)

"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—" (Romans 5:12 NKJV)

"For since [it was] through a man that death [came into the world, it is] also through a Man that the resurrection of the dead [has come]." (1 Corinthians 15:21 AMP)

"For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead." (1 Corinthians 15:21 NKJV)

Dr. Henry Morris discusses the implications of both views:

Perhaps the most serious problem is theological. If we accept the geological ages at all, in effect we are saying that God used the methods and processes which exist in the present world to finally bring into the world the goal and culmination of His creative activity—man. This means, therefore, that at least a billion years of struggle, suffering, disorder, disease, storm, convulsions of all kinds, and, above all, death troubled the world before man ever entered the world and before any sin appeared in the world. The Bible, on the other hand, teaches quite emphatically that there was no suffering or death in the world until after sin came in. Romans 5:12 declares, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”

Death by sin—there was no death in the world until sin was introduced. The present groaning, struggling creation of which we read in Romans dates Biblically from the time of the great curse God put on creation because of Adam’s sin. So the whole creation now is under the bondage of corruption and decay and death because of man’s sin. But if the concept of the geological ages is correct, there were geological ages and over a billion years of death in the world before any sin entered the world. Therefore, God must have used the principle of decay, suffering, and disorder. This is not the God revealed in the Bible—a merciful God, a gracious God, a God of order and power, not a God of confusion, random change and chance (1973, 3:72-73, emp. added).

Rendle-Short wrote:

Sin entered the world through one man, Adam. Death also entered the world through Adam. There had been no sin or death previously.... It may even be argued that the plants did not die before Adam. Eating the fruit or foliage of plants does not kill them.... [T]he death of a plant is of a different order from death of an animal.... [P]lants are on a par with the basic earth, of lesser worth than animals.... [P]lants are not “living” and so cannot die as an animal does. That they were eaten by animals and man before the Fall is quite consistent with the statement that there was no death.... Death and dying are always against nature, the God-given order of things. Especially would this have been so before the Fall, at a time when God declared everything to be ”very good” (1984, pp. 139,148,149, first emp. added, last emp. in orig.). (Man: Ape or Image—The Christian’s Dilemma)

More can be read at this link.

Just something to think about. ^_^

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 12 (Samuel's Speech at Saul's Coronation) verses 1-12.

Things discussed:

Samuel's integrity & Israel's rebellious history:

Introduction to chapter 12
Samuel talks about his leadership over Israel.
Samuel reminds Israel that they rejected God in wanting a king.
Samuel keeps his word by removing his sons from service to Israel.
What characteristics does true shepherd have?
Israel affirms the blameless character of Samuel.
What does it mean that God had a witness against Israel?
Why does Samuel give a brief history lesson to Israel?
Why does God discipline His children?
Israel's history shows that they loved carnality (indulging their human nature) more than God.
Why did Israel want a earthly king instead of God as their king?

 

[Chaplain]

A good apologetics article on whether or not Christianity is arrogant...

ISN’T CHRISTIANITY ARROGANT?

One of the most common accusations flung at Christians is that they are arrogant. “How can you believe that you’re right and Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims—all the thousands of other religions—are wrong?” Isn’t it the height of arrogance to claim that Jesus is the way to God? A way, possibly. But the way?

This issue haunts many Christians and makes us reluctant to talk about our faith. We don’t want to appear arrogant, bigoted, or intolerant. This pluralistic view of religions thrives very easily in places like Canada or Europe where tolerance is valued above everything else. It’s very easy slip from the true claim—”all people have equal value”—to the false claim that “all ideas have equal merit.” But those are two very different ideas indeed.

Let’s take a brief look at the “all religions are essentially the same” idea. Suppose I say that I’ve just got into literature in a big way. This last year, I’ve read William Shakespeare, Virginia Woolf and Tolkien, but also Harry Potter and The Very Hungry Caterpillar—and I’ve concluded that every author is identical. Would you conclude that: (a) this is the most profound statement on literature you’ve ever heard? Or would you conclude (b) that I don’t have the first clue what I’m talking about? I suggest that you’d probably choose (b). Now, what about the statement “all religions are the same”? Doesn’t it likewise suggest that the person making it hasn’t actually looked into any of them? Because once you do, you realize it’s not that most religions are fundamentally the same with superficial differences but the reverse is the case: most religions have superficial similarities with fundamental differences.

A further problem with the idea that all religions are essentially the same is that it ignores a fundamental truth about reality: ideas have consequences. What you believe matters, because it will effect what you do. To claim that all religions are essentially the same is to say that it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you’re sincere—and this neglects the fact that you can believe something sincerely and be sincerely wrong. Hitler held his beliefs with sincerity—that doesn’t make them true.

However, truth, by its very nature, is exclusive. If it is true, as Christianity claims, that Jesus was crucified, died, and rose from the dead, then it is not true, as Islam claims, that Jesus never died in the first place and that somebody else was killed in his place. Both claims cannot be true. Truth is exclusive.

But just because truth is exclusive, that doesn’t make truth cold and uncaring. Truth for the Christian is personal. The Jesus who said “I am the only way” also said “I am the truth.” In other words, ultimate truth is not a set of propositions but a person. As the Bible says in 2 Timothy 2:12, “I know whom I have believed.” Not what I have believed or experienced but whom. Jesus Christ.

To ask why we think that Jesus Christ is the only way is to miss the point entirely. Jesus does not compete with anybody. Nobody else in history made the claims he did; nobody else in history claimed to be able to deal with the problems of the human heart like he did. Nobody else in history claimed, as he did, to be God with us. To say that we believe Jesus is the only way should have nothing to do with arrogance and everything to do with introducing people to him.

 

[Red Mage]

The problem with this assumption, and a good one at that, is that Paul says Death entered creation once Adam sinned

Paul doesn't say that. He says death spread to mankind.

http://www.comereason.org/death-before-sin.asp

 

[Chaplain]

Paul doesn't say that. He says death spread to mankind.

http://www.comereason.org/death-before-sin.asp

That is not what the verses that I gave said.

"Therefore, as sin came into the world through one man, and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men, [no one being able to stop it or to escape its power] because all men sinned." (Romans 5:12 AMP)

"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—" (Romans 5:12 NKJV)

Sin enters creation, death follows, that is the context.

Ty for the link that you shared.

 

[Red Mage]

That is not what the verses that I gave said.



Sin enters creation, death follows, that is the context.

Ty for the link that you shared.

The type of death that is spoken about is Spiritual. Otherwise, when he mentions the second Adam, it would suggest that people who are Christian would not die physically.

Any who, this is pretty much what I was talking about before. I don't mind discussing or debating scripture, but I do not want to be involved in an endless cycle of arguing. This doesn't mean I don't think that one cannot know what scripture means, but I hesitant to be drawn into a long discussion which will not resolve anything.

 

[Chaplain]

The type of death that is spoken about is Spiritual. Otherwise, when he mentions the second Adam, it would suggest that people who are Christian would not die physically.

Any who, this is pretty much what I was talking about before. I don't mind discussing or debating scripture, but I do not want to be involved in an endless cycle of arguing. This doesn't mean I don't think that one cannot know what scripture means, but I hesitant to be drawn into a long discussion which will not resolve anything.

I disagree and end the discussion at your request.

 

[SeventhSon]

The type of death that is spoken about is Spiritual. Otherwise, when he mentions the second Adam, it would suggest that people who are Christian would not die physically.

Jesus is sinless, and couldn't be forced to die by anything in creation. He willingly gave up his ghost on the cross after pronouncing "it is finished." Death has no power over the sinless, neither physical nor spiritual.

 

[Red Mage]

Jesus is sinless, and couldn't be forced to die by anything in creation. He willingly gave up his ghost on the cross after pronouncing "it is finished." Death has no power over the sinless, neither physical nor spiritual.

I was talking about Christians, not Christ Himself. ; )

 

[Chaplain]

A weekly UK radio show that is focused on debates that offer both viewpoints on a particular issue.

Unbelievable? Abortion: A woman's choice or a baby's life? (Right Click/Save As)

The abortion debate reared its head again this summer after controversial tweets by Richard Dawkins made the news.

Justin hosts a discussion between Mara Clarke of the Abortion Support Network and Scott Klusendorf of the Life Training Institute. Mara believes women need to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy, but Scott says that all depends on whether we are dealing with a human life in the womb.

Debating the history of atheism - Nick Spencer & Julian Baggini (Right Click/Save As)

Nick Spencer is the author of Atheists: The Origin of the Species. He explains the origins of various strands of atheism and why the New Atheism of today is constructed on a myth of its own.

Julian Baggini is an atheist philosopher and writer. He engages Spencer on whether atheism was a significant factor in Communist regimes and what the future of atheism may hold.

Do we need to reclaim the Jewish Jesus? (Right Click/Save As)

A discussion on whether the Western church has lost the Hebraic roots of its faith and why anti semitism has been a factor in the church.

Salim Munayer directs Musalaha – a charity focused on trying to bring reconciliation between young Jews and Palestinian Arabs. Steve Maltz is a messianic Jew, author and blogger.

The Unbelievers Movie - Gus Holwerda & Graham Veale (Right Click/Save As)

The Unbelievers is a film documentary following atheists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss on a world speaking tour. We hear some clips from the film as its atheist producer Gus Holwerda interacts with Christian guest Graham Veale. They debate atheism's 'rock stars' and whether their arguments against religion stand up.

A French atheist-turned-theologian discusses his conversion

Guillaume Bignon was a French man living a happy and godless life until recently when a series of events led him on an intellectual journey towards Christianity. Today he is a theologian.

He discusses his story with Wade Padgett, who went in the other direction, becoming an atheist after years as a Christian. What role does evidence and experience play in conversion, and is belief in God 'properly basic' as Guillaume claims?

Os Guinness & the ex-Christian

Os Guinness is an international Christian speaker, author and social critic. He is a keynote speaker at Unbelievable? The Conference 2014.

Ed Atkinson was a Christian for a number of years before he lost his faith after failing to 'experience' God. He interacts with Os who questions whether Ed's new found atheism is a more reliable worldview than the Christianity he has abandoned.

Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus - Nabeel Qureshi & Nazam Gufoor

Nabeel Qureshi grew up in a Muslim family but converted to Christianity after investigating the historical case for Christ.

He debates Muslim Nazam Gufoor on whether the truth of Christianity or Islam is best supported by the evidence.

William Lane Craig & Sean Carroll debate God & Cosmology

Leading Christian philosopher William Lane Craig and leading atheist scientist Sean Carroll recently participated in a debate on "The existence of God in the light of contemporary cosmology" at the Greer-Heard forum. In an extended podcast we hear the debate and audience Q&A.

Richard Dawkins debates Old Testament morality

Richard Dawkins has described the God of the Old Testament as (among other things) a "capriciously malevolent bully". The world's best known atheist joins Justin Brierley to discuss the morality of the Old Testament in light of the Bible TV series airing in the UK on Channel 5.

Rabbi Josh Levy and Christian lecturer Chris Sinkinson discuss with Dawkins whether the events of the Old Testament are historical and how to interpret the so-called "terror" passages. What about the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, or of Abraham nearly sacrificing Isaac?

Darwin's Doubt - Stephen C Meyer & Charles Marshall debate ID

Stephen C Meyer is the world's leading Intelligent Design proponent. His new book Darwin's Doubt claims that the Cambrian fossil record, which saw an "explosion" of new life forms in a short space of time, is evidence for ID.

Evolutionary biologist Charles Marshall of the University of California, Berkeley has written a critical review of the book. He debates Meyer on whether Darwinian evolution can explain the diversity of life in the Cambrian rocks.

Lawrence Krauss vs John Lennox - Science, the universe & The God Question

New DVD documentary series The God Question explores whether advances in science are undermining or supporting belief in God. Christian thinker Prof John Lennox and atheist physicist Lawrence Krauss debate some of the issues raised by the video series..

Alongside audio clips from the film they discuss the Big Bang, purpose, fine-tuning and the possibility of a universe "from nothing".

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 12 (Samuel's Speech at Saul's Coronation) verses 13-25.

Things discussed:

Samuel challenges Israel to serve God under their new king:

Does God always give people a choice?
Is it possible to escape the consequences of living a selfish life?
Why did Samuel and God take so long in showing Israel that they committed evil?
What is the difference between sorrow and repentance?
Why did Israel ask Samuel to pray for them?
Israel finally sees their sin of desiring a king.
What is the solution to stop dwelling on the past?
What happens to a person when they reject God?
Are there consequences for rejecting the Truth?
Does God give up on us when we sin?
What does the Bible say about prayerlessness?
What is the foundation for all ministry?
Samuel exhorts Israel to walk right with the LORD today.
Is it possible to avoid reaping what we sow?

 

[av2k]

I'm glad I caught this thread, my faith has been fading quite a bit and I really need a boost to reconnect with God. It'll be interesting to read about Christianity from fellow gaffers.

(subscribes.. )

 

[SeventhSon]

I've been following the blog, it is excellent Bible study.

Is there a front page/index of each entry? I can't find it to review past entries.

 

[Chaplain]

I've been following the blog, it is excellent Bible study.

Is there a front page/index of each entry? I can't find it to review past entries.

Good question. This is the easiest solution that I have found:

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 13 (Saul's Disobedience) verses 1-8.

Things discussed:

The Philistine threat:

Saul assembles Israel's first standing army.
Jonathan initiates conflict with the Philistines.
How does Satan's crew view Christians who make compromises in their walks?
Why did Saul take credit for his son's victory?
What is the root cause in taking credit for someone else's work?
The Philistines prepare their army against Israel.
Why did Israel scum to fear?

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 13 (Saul's Disobedience) verses 8-14.

Things discussed:

Saul's unlawful sacrifice:

Saul becomes impatient waiting for Samuel to arrive.
Saul sins in multiple ways by offering the burnt offering.
Saul acts like he did nothing wrong when he meets Samuel.
Samuel gives Saul a chance to admit his sins.
Saul sins more by making excuses and blaming Samuel for his disobedience.
Saul's excuses teaches us what not to do when we disobey God.
Why does Samuel call Saul a fool (morally and spiritually lacking)?
Samuel proclaims God's judgment upon Saul's household.
What is the difference between King Saul and King David?
What does it mean to be a man or woman after God's heart?

 

[Chaplain]

Characteristics of Man or Woman of God (10-3-2014)

 

[Empyrean Heaven]

I couldn't think of any better place to ask this question, so apologies if it does not fall within the original confines of the topic. But it is a question that rattled around in my head whenever I'm depressed for some reason.

I guess I should start with my testimony. First off, I'm a dirty, filthy Roman Catholic. Sorry if that's looked down upon here.

So, here's my question. There's a family, a husband, a wife, and a son. The son is a good, God-fearing Christian boy. However, his parents are sinners, but they treat and show love to their son with love and affection.

So there's an accident, and all three die and are brought before the Lord. God says he will cast the parents into hell, but the boy gets to go to heaven.

This leads to two problems.

1. The Bible says you will love God more than anything.

2. The Bible also says to honor thy father and mother.

So the boy is left with a conundrum. Spend eternity in heaven surrounded by strangers and people he doesn't know, or go to hell, where he will suffer eternal torment, but be with the two people that love him, and in turn, he loves more than anything.

Honestly, as much of a man I am, and as crazy as most of you think of me, this would be a very tough decision.

 

[legend166]

I couldn't think of any better place to ask this question, so apologies if it does not fall within the original confines of the topic. But it is a question that rattled around in my head whenever I'm depressed for some reason.

I guess I should start with my testimony. First off, I'm a dirty, filthy Roman Catholic. Sorry if that's looked down upon here.

So, here's my question. There's a family, a husband, a wife, and a son. The son is a good, God-fearing Christian boy. However, his parents are sinners, but they treat and show love to their son with love and affection.

So there's an accident, and all three die and are brought before the Lord. God says he will cast the parents into hell, but the boy gets to go to heaven.

This leads to two problems.

1. The Bible says you will love God more than anything.

2. The Bible also says to honor thy father and mother.

So the boy is left with a conundrum. Spend eternity in heaven surrounded by strangers and people he doesn't know, or go to hell, where he will suffer eternal torment, but be with the two people that love him, and in turn, he loves more than anything.

Honestly, as much of a man I am, and as crazy as most of you think of me, this would be a very tough decision.

Biblically speaking, it's a very easy decision. You're looking at it from the perspective of the connections we make here on earth rather than then connection we will have with God after death for eternity.

Also, the son is a sinner too.

 

[Chaplain]

I couldn't think of any better place to ask this question, so apologies if it does not fall within the original confines of the topic. But it is a question that rattled around in my head whenever I'm depressed for some reason.

I guess I should start with my testimony. First off, I'm a dirty, filthy Roman Catholic. Sorry if that's looked down upon here.

So, here's my question. There's a family, a husband, a wife, and a son. The son is a good, God-fearing Christian boy. However, his parents are sinners, but they treat and show love to their son with love and affection.

So there's an accident, and all three die and are brought before the Lord. God says he will cast the parents into hell, but the boy gets to go to heaven.

This leads to two problems.

1. The Bible says you will love God more than anything.

2. The Bible also says to honor thy father and mother.

So the boy is left with a conundrum. Spend eternity in heaven surrounded by strangers and people he doesn't know, or go to hell, where he will suffer eternal torment, but be with the two people that love him, and in turn, he loves more than anything.

Honestly, as much of a man I am, and as crazy as most of you think of me, this would be a very tough decision.

I will do my best to answer your question.

1. You are a sinner like the rest of us. A person made in the image of God with intrinsic value and worth. If you put your faith and trust in what Jesus did on your behalf, you are our brother in Christ.

2. You are bringing in presumptions that people in Heaven do not know each other. This is not what the Bible teaches. It alludes to the fact that everyone will know each other and a person will know God as perfectly as they can.

3. Hell would not be an option for the child the way I understand Scripture. People that die who rejected God's pardon for their sins go directly to hell to await their court date with God (at The Great White Throne Judgment). The child would go directly to Heaven to be with Jesus and the believers (some being: Abraham, Moses, Peter, etc.) if he was under the age of accountability or if he had accepted God's pardon for his sins..

4. I do not think you are crazy. ^_^

 

[legend166]

Well this is going to open a can of worms:

GameAnalyst, would you mind explaining your position on children going to heaven?

It's something that I genuinely don't have a strong position on - I've heard good arguments in both camps.

From my perspective (believing in the doctrine of election), both outcomes can fit into that theological framework. If we think they are going to hell you can say that if a child died before the 'age of accountability', they were not part of the elect anyway, so it wouldn't have mattered if they lived until the age of 100, they were never going to accept Christ. Alternatively you can say that all children that die under the age of accountability are part of the elect.

But I'm not sure how you can approach it from an Arminian perspective. If we believe that all children under the age of accountability go to heaven, is it not a better outcome for children to die young? An eternity in heaven is better than 80 years on earth.

I guess I often have this issue with several Arminian positions, like those who believe you can lose your salvation (though I know not all Arminians hold to a conditional security doctrine). Wouldn't it be better to immediately kill yourself the moment you are saved so you never have the opportunity to lose your salvation?

Sorry, got a bit sidetracked there.

 

[Red Mage]

I couldn't think of any better place to ask this question, so apologies if it does not fall within the original confines of the topic. But it is a question that rattled around in my head whenever I'm depressed for some reason.

No need to apologize. You're welcome here to ask questions.

I guess I should start with my testimony. First off, I'm a dirty, filthy Roman Catholic. Sorry if that's looked down upon here.

Why would it be?

So, here's my question. There's a family, a husband, a wife, and a son. The son is a good, God-fearing Christian boy. However, his parents are sinners, but they treat and show love to their son with love and affection.

So there's an accident, and all three die and are brought before the Lord. God says he will cast the parents into hell, but the boy gets to go to heaven.

This leads to two problems.

1. The Bible says you will love God more than anything.

2. The Bible also says to honor thy father and mother.

So the boy is left with a conundrum. Spend eternity in heaven surrounded by strangers and people he doesn't know, or go to hell, where he will suffer eternal torment, but be with the two people that love him, and in turn, he loves more than anything.

Honestly, as much of a man I am, and as crazy as most of you think of me, this would be a very tough decision.

The argument is presuming a lot of incorrect information. First of all, none of us are "good." Those of us who are saved are not saved because of some virture within ourselves, we're saved because of Christ, our Lord. All of us are murderers, liars, and thieves; in mind and spirit if not actuality. The difference between the boy and his parents is not to be found in the intrinsic "goodness: or "badness" of the individual, but whether the evil within them has been healed or not.

Secondly, the child doesn't really have a choice at this point, the same way the parents no longer do. As for how fair it is to send the parents to hell, you should think of sin as a disease, and Christ the great Physician. All three had a terminal illness, and only the child was willing to accept the cure and make the changes need to cure it. If a doctor does all they can to cure a person, but the patient still dies, we don't (if we're being rational) blame the doctor for the person's death. How then can we blame the doctor when the patient refuses the cure?

Lastly, the idea that the child would spend eternity "loving and being loved" is problematic. It's basically a different form of the "Party in Hell" fallacy. One needs to understand how scripture describes hell.

The word Christ often uses for the final destination of sinners is "Gehenna" in Greek. This is derived from the Hebrew word "Ge-Hinnom" which translates as Valley or Canyon of Hinnom. This was the location in which Israel once worshipped Moloch, which included child sacrifice. When this and other idolaltries were abolished the idols and other instruments of worshipped were burned there. Afterwards it became a dump where the residents of Jerusalem and outlying areas would burn their trash using sulfur. This became associated with the final destination for the wicked.

Finally, the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is often used in association with hell. Those who want to soften what hell is like will tell you that this means the sinners are experiencing extreme remorse, but that's not right at all. When used elsewhere in Scripture, the term for gnashing/grinding of teeth is only used in the context of extreme rage or pain.

Why is all of that important? Because helps refute those who wish to say that the description of darkness and eternal torment used elsewhere in Scripture is more symbolic. If you're trapped in a perpetually burning trash heap in a valley, you'd be unable to see and in extreme agony. The child would never see their parents and the parents would never want the child to experience this torment.

 

[Emwitus]

No need to apologize. You're welcome here to ask questions.



Why would it be?



The argument is presuming a lot of incorrect information. First of all, none of us are "good." Those of us who are saved are not saved because of some virture within ourselves, we're saved because of Christ, our Lord. All of us are murderers, liars, and thieves; in mind and spirit if not actuality. The difference between the boy and his parents is not to be found in the intrinsic "goodness: or "badness" of the individual, but whether the evil within them has been healed or not.

Secondly, the child doesn't really have a choice at this point, the same way the parents no longer do. As for how fair it is to send the parents to hell, you should think of sin as a disease, and Christ the great Physician. All three had a terminal illness, and only the child was willing to accept the cure and make the changes need to cure it. If a doctor does all they can to cure a person, but the patient still dies, we don't (if we're being rational) blame the doctor for the person's death. How then can we blame the doctor when the patient refuses the cure?

Lastly, the idea that the child would spend eternity "loving and being loved" is problematic. It's basically a different form of the "Party in Hell" fallacy. One needs to understand how scripture describes hell.

The word Christ often uses for the final destination of sinners is "Gehenna" in Greek. This is derived from the Hebrew word "Ge-Hinnom" which translates as Valley or Canyon of Hinnom. This was the location in which Israel once worshipped Moloch, which included child sacrifice. When this and other idolaltries were abolished the idols and other instruments of worshipped were burned there. Afterwards it became a dump where the residents of Jerusalem and outlying areas would burn their trash using sulfur. This became associated with the final destination for the wicked.

Finally, the phrase "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is often used in association with hell. Those who want to soften what hell is like will tell you that this means the sinners are experiencing extreme remorse, but that's not right at all. When used elsewhere in Scripture, the term for gnashing/grinding of teeth is only used in the context of extreme rage or pain.

Why is all of that important? Because helps refute those who wish to say that the description of darkness and eternal torment used elsewhere in Scripture is more symbolic. If you're trapped in a perpetually burning trash heap in a valley, you'd be unable to see and in extreme agony. The child would never see their parents and the parents would never want the child to experience this torment.

This sort of leads into what i was going to ask. What are your view on eternal damnation? Over the years i've come to believe hell as being a place where or all evil will be eternally vanquished. I don't believe there will be eternal damnation but eternal death.

 

[Red Mage]

This sort of leads into what i was going to ask. What are your view on eternal damnation? Over the years i've come to believe hell as being a place where or all evil will be eternally vanquished. I don't believe there will be eternal damnation but eternal death.

Spirits are eternal. I'm not quite sure what you're talking about when it comes to eternal death, but I tend to agree with C.S. Lewis in regards to hell:

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, in the end, 'Thy will be done.'

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 13 (Saul's Disobedience) verses 15-23.

Things discussed:

The Philistine threat to Israel:

God tests Saul by using the Philistines.
How did the Philistines amass technological superiority over Israel?
Israel is kept in a subservient place by the Philistines.
How does Satan keep believes in a subservient place?

 

[StaffyManasse]

Just joined GAF and wanted to drop in and say it is a good thing this thread exists.

 

[Chaplain]

Well this is going to open a can of worms:

GameAnalyst, would you mind explaining your position on children going to heaven?

It's something that I genuinely don't have a strong position on - I've heard good arguments in both camps.

From my perspective (believing in the doctrine of election), both outcomes can fit into that theological framework. If we think they are going to hell you can say that if a child died before the 'age of accountability', they were not part of the elect anyway, so it wouldn't have mattered if they lived until the age of 100, they were never going to accept Christ. Alternatively you can say that all children that die under the age of accountability are part of the elect.

But I'm not sure how you can approach it from an Arminian perspective. If we believe that all children under the age of accountability go to heaven, is it not a better outcome for children to die young? An eternity in heaven is better than 80 years on earth.

I guess I often have this issue with several Arminian positions, like those who believe you can lose your salvation (though I know not all Arminians hold to a conditional security doctrine). Wouldn't it be better to immediately kill yourself the moment you are saved so you never have the opportunity to lose your salvation?

Sorry, got a bit sidetracked there.

This is how I view scriptures view on it.

1. The Bible is silent about the age of accountability.
2. David wrote about his child that died who was conceived out of wedlock: "Can I bring him back again? I will go to him one day, but he cannot return to me.” (2 Samuel 12:23)
3. We can infer from David's comments that he would be reunited with his baby in heaven some day.
4. In the Old Testament God says children are not guilty in his eyes (see Jeremiah 19:4). However, we know they still have their sin nature (see Psalm 51:5).
5. In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit wrote through Paul that children are coverd by the faith of the parents: who ever is a believer in the marriage (see 1 Cor 7:14). A short analysis of Paul's statement...

If the children of non-Christian parents are saved, and do go to heaven - even some of them - it is important to understand that it is not because they are innocent. As sons and daughters of guilty Adam, we are each born guilty. If such children do go to heaven, it is not because they are deserving innocents, but because the rich mercy of God has been extended to them as well.

What do you think?

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 14 (Victory Over the Philistines) verses 1-5.

Things discussed:

Jonathan's adventure in faith: (Part 1)

Jonathan and his armor partner-up to attack an entire army together.
The differences between Saul and Jonathan's character.
Why did God mention that Ichabod was with Saul?
Jonathan finds a strategic position to attack the Philistines.
One of the ways God guides believers.

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 14 (Victory Over the Philistines) verses 6-10.

Things discussed:

Jonathan's adventure in faith: (Part 2)

Jonathan's bold proposal centered in faith that works.
Can God's will be restrained by unbelief?
Countering discouragement with encouragement.
Did Jonathan lack faith by asking God for a sign?

Ravi Zacharias - The Prophet Marries a Prostitute EP 1
Ravi Zacharias - The Prophet Marries a Prostitute EP 2

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 14 (Victory Over the Philistines) verses 11-23.

Things discussed:

Jonathan's adventure in faith: (Part 3)

Jonathan and his armor bearer attack the Philistines.
Why did God attack the Philistines on Jonathan's behalf?
More of Saul's character is revealed as he learns of the battle.
Saul finally decides to fight in the battle.
God saves Israel because Jonathan (not Saul) dared to venture in faith.

Here is a four part series on Abraham by Christian Oxford professor John Lennox. His analysis, explanation and application of Abraham and his life is spot on.

John Lennox - Abraham's Call
John Lennox - Abraham's Journey
John Lennox - Abraham's Faith
John Lennox - Abraham's Triumph

Download and stream are both available at each of the links.

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 14 (Victory Over the Philistines) verses 24-35.

Things discussed:

Reasons why we shouldn't make foolish oaths:

Why did Saul compel the army of Israel to his obey foolish oath?
Did Saul have any authority to curse Israel's enemies?
Saul's foolish vow affects Israel immediately.
Saul's foolish oath stops Israel's soldiers from receiving nutrition from God.
Jonathan unknowingly breaks his father's oath.
Was Jonathan honoring his father by talking behind his back?
Why did Saul's oath lead Israel's army into legalism?
Saul blames others for his foolish oath.
Saul also attempts to fix his mistake with another mistake.

 

[Chaplain]

A few new episodes of the UK debate show are now online.

Abortion: A woman's choice or a baby's life? (Right Click/Save As)

Justin hosts a discussion between Mara Clarke of the Abortion Support Network and Scott Klusendorf of the Life Training Institute. Mara believes women need to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy, but Scott says that all depends on whether we are dealing with a human life in the womb.

Is atheism a fool's bet? Rethinking Pascal's Wager (Right Click/Save As)

Blaise Pascal was a 17th century Christian philosopher and mathematician who said that we all bet our life on the existence of God. So, you are better off believing in God because you've everything to gain if it's true and little to lose if it's not. But you've plenty to lose if you bet on God not existing and it turns out that He does.

Kevin Moore is a young philosopher whose new book 'Untrumpable' revisits Pascal's classic argument in terms of 'wisdom'. He makes the case that Atheism is a foolish bet and we ought to live as if God existed. He even says his argument makes the best sense of Psalm 14 (The fool has said in his heart "there is no God").

Norman Bacrac, of the Conway Hall Ethical Society disagrees with Kevin and says that believing in God wouldn't make him change the way he lives as an atheist anyway.

What's got evangelicals interested in the Orthodox Church? (Right Click/Save As)

Several high profile evangelicals have converted to The Orthodox Church in recent decades. Is it just for the cool beards and robes? In this discussion we find out about the history of the Orthodox Church and some of its distinctive features.

Justin is joined by Bishop Angaelos of the Coptic Orthodox Church, evangelical theologian Elaine Storkey and Andrew Walker, a convert to Eastern Orthodox Church.

Animal suffering and God - Michael Murray vs Phil Harper (Right Click/Save As)

Christian Philosopher Michael Murray wrote a book in 2008 making a defence of God in the face of millennia of animal suffering. He presents his arguments to atheist Phil Harper (aka Skydivephil).

They also discuss the contentious issue of whether animals experience pain differently to humans, after William Lane Craig ignited a debate on the subject after quoting Michael Murray's work in a debate.

Abort it and try again? Ann Furedi & James Mumford debate abortion and disability (Right Click/Save As)

When Richard Dawkins tweeted 'abort it and try again' to a follower who raised a question about pregnancy and Downs Syndrome, there was a public outcry. Yet each year over 1000 pregnancies are terminated in the UK because of screening for Downs Syndrome.

Ann Furedi is head of BPAS, the UK's largest independent abortion provider. She believes parents should be able to choose to abort for any reason, including disability, gender and even (hypothetically) sexual orientation.

James Mumford is a fellow at the University of Virginia’s Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture and the author of Ethics at the Beginning of Life. He wrote an article stating that Dawkin's tweet is a sign of a new eugenics towards disabled people.

Here are some recent Biblical sermons and one lecture.

10/19 Paul's Confidence - Philippians 1:1-8
10/19 The Nature of God (Selected Scriptures)
10/18 Ravi Zacharias - Is There Not a Cause?
10/15 Distinct Within And Without (Leviticus 19:19-20:27)

Here are 22 sermons that discuss various Christian teachings.

Answers to important questions (Stream or download available at link)

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 14 (Victory Over the Philistines) verses 36-52.

Things discussed:

Reasons why we shouldn't make foolish oaths (Part 2):

Saul asks God for direction.
What is the Urim and Thummim?
Why did God not answer Saul's prayer for direction?
Saul makes another foolish oath that threatens his son's life.
Why did Saul and Jonathan cast lots?.
What is the best way to deal with conflict?
Saul chooses to kill his son instead of admitting that his vow was foolish.
The people of Israel rescue Jonathan from Saul's evil execution.
Saul's many wars and his family.
Saul shows us the consequences of not loving God with all of our heart.

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 15 (God Rejects Saul as King) verses 1-5.

Things discussed:

Battle against the Amalekites (Part 1):

Samuel gives Saul a message from God.
How can a loving God command genocide in the Old Testament?
Are there any reasons why God gives repeated warnings about living a self-willed life?
Why did God order the execution of the Amalekites?
Why are the Amalekites a picture of our human nature?
Is it possible to escape the consequences of our selfish actions and decisions?
Why does God not use Christians for his judgment against nations?
Has God stopped judging nations?
Saul prepares for the attack on the Amalekites.

Videos from a Apologetics conference:

Bethinking 1/6: William Lane Craig on Dawkins' Objections to Theistic Arguments
Bethinking 2/6: John Lennox on Stephen Hawking's "The Grand Design"
Bethinking 3/6: Peter J Williams on New Atheists & Old Testament (incl. The Canaanites)
Bethinking 4/6: Gary Habermas on Resurrection Evidence from Critical Scholars
Bethinking 5/6: William Lane Craig on Secularism & Islam (The Apologetic Task)
Bethinking 6/6: Questions & Discussion (WL Craig, G Habermas, PJ Williams, PS Williams)

 

[Chaplain]

Four new Apologetics Bible Studies.

Daniel: Standing Strong for God in a Secular Society - John Lennox
Daniel 1-2: Identity and Integrity - John Lennox
Daniel 3-5: Revelation and Reason - John Lennox
Daniel 6-12: Power and Truth - John Lennox

 

[Khalifa Jayy]

Open question to all: What are your thoughts on Moses, the rock, crevice, and God's glory being a type (or foreshadowing) of Jesus Christ? Have you ever considered it?

 

[Chaplain]

Open question to all: What are your thoughts on Moses, the rock, crevice, and God's glory being a type (or foreshadowing) of Jesus Christ? Have you ever considered it?

Are you referring to Paul's commentary on the event Old Testament event you described?

"And all [of them] ate the same spiritual (supernaturally given) food, And they all drank the same spiritual (supernaturally given) drink. For they drank from a spiritual Rock which followed them [produced by the sole power of God Himself without natural instrumentality], and the Rock was Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:3-5 Amplified Bible)

Is that what you meant?

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 15 (God Rejects Saul as King) verses 6-11.

Things discussed:

Battle against the Amalekites (Part 2):

Why did Saul disobey God by sparing King Agag's life?
Are there logical reasons why God wanted all of the Amalekites and their king killed?
What is God's opinion of human nature?
Were there future consequences for Israel for Saul refusing to kill King Agag?
Why did Saul disobey God by sparing Agag best animals?
Does God enjoying judging people?
Does God hurt when we compromise and hurt ourselves?
What does anthropomorphism mean and why we should know what it means?
A seemingly simple answer to a supposed Bible contradiction
How do we know when our hearts are aligned with God's heart?

A good lecture on present bio-ethical issues in the medical field from a christian perspective:

John Lennox - Bioethics: Challenges In The 21st Century (9-10-2014)

The lecture was given to doctors in South Africa last month.

 

[Chaplain]

New blog is up: 1 Samuel chapter 15 (God Rejects Saul as King) verses 12-13.

Things discussed:

Battle against the Amalekites (Part 3):

Samuel goes to Saul to discipline.
What does it mean if we aren't grieved over our sins?
Is it possible for a believers conscience to die or become dull?
Why would Saul build a monument for himself?
Why does God resist proud people?
What is a solution to dealing with pride?
Does pride always lead to self-deception?
Saul uses spiritual language to lie to Samuel.

Three new apologetic lectures:

Michael Ramsden: God Of Love; God Of Judgement (Jonah 4)
Michael Ramsden: Conversational Apologetics
John Lennox: 1 Peter 3 & Apologetics

 

[Khalifa Jayy]

Are you referring to Paul's commentary on the event Old Testament event you described?

"And all [of them] ate the same spiritual (supernaturally given) food, And they all drank the same spiritual (supernaturally given) drink. For they drank from a spiritual Rock which followed them [produced by the sole power of God Himself without natural instrumentality], and the Rock was Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:3-5 Amplified Bible)

Is that what you meant?

That is actually a well-researched type, but what I'm referring to is this...

Moses tells God to show him his glory. God reminds him that nobody can fully see his glory and live, or more importantly His face. He then tells Moses:

Go stand on the rock (Jesus)
I will put you into the crevice or cleft of the rock (Jesus' wounds are represented by a cleft in the rock)
You will see my glory pass by (You will see God's glory when you come "into" THE Rock that is Jesus).