Jesus is the Reason for the Season

Of course, Christ's birth is the reason for Christmas. Man fell, God loved us anyway and sent His dear Son into the world to redeem us. But actually, that's not the upcoming holiday I had in mind.



Consider this passage from Colossians 1:



14In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.



That's right, Christ's who provided salvation and redemption by coming into the world on Christmas day, actually created the world. He spoke and the world came into being. Creation is ex nihilo, which means out of nothing. On Christmas, we celebrate the aniversery of Christ's birth. On New Years, consider celebrating the aniversery of Christ's creating us!



Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Comments

The Seeking Disciple said…
Amen and I thank God for his Son. Without him, I would be lost in my sins.
December 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Anonymous said…
Did you do that work found at: (http://www.geocities.com/freewilltheology/arminiusonregeneration.html)?

I didn't get the chance to read all of it -- perhaps three quarters of it -- but if you did do that work, then Wow! Way to go. That must have taken quite a bit of research and time. Thank you for doing it. I have been wondering what in the world Arminius was getting at with his progressive regeneration/preventing grace thing.

If you didn't do that work, oh well, I enjoy your blog just the same!

Your bro in Christ

Billy
December 28, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Godismyjudge said…
Yep, that was me. I was trying to figure out why Arminius and the Remonstrants at times seemed to be saying regeneration comes before faith, but Arminians today say faith comes before regeneration.

I am glad you enjoyed it and I share your enthusiasm for the Works of Arminius.

God be with you,
Dan
December 29, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Responsibility - Evaluation of Arminian Grounds for LFW

Outline of Edwards Arguments in part V.I Arminians say if something causally predetermines our choices, we are not responsible. But responsibility is not the cause of choices, it’s in the nature of choices If responsibility is in the cause of choices, we search through an infinite regression of causes, and nothing is ever responsible. My Response Point 1 is close, but not quite accurate. While our actions can be predetermined, our choices cannot be. Choice cannot be predetermined, else it’s not choice. Predeterminism leave us with only one possible action, but choice requires alternatives (i.e. more than one). A “predetermined choice” is self-contradictory, implying we can choose something we can’t choose. So we think Calvinists are inconsistent for saying we can choose. Also, Arminians agree that we are responsible for our choices. Even though we deny we are responsible for things we are causally predetermined to do, we are not saying responsibility lies in the cause of choices,...
Read more

Calvinism’s problems with Total Depravity

This post will be an attempt to add some detail to earlier comments about problems reconciling Calvinism and total depravity, using John Hendryx post as an example ( here ). To my knowledge, it’s a new argument against Calvinism. Most Arminians are quick to agree with Calvinists on total depravity to avoid being called semi-Pelagian. However, this in my opinion is a mistake, not because Arminians disagree with total depravity, but because Calvinists have some definitional and consistency problems with affirming total depravity. Here's the basic argument: Premise 1: Per Calvinists, total depravity is a problem with man’s desires, it is a moral and spiritual problem. However, the depraved person is not physically or mentally handicapped or under coercion. The depraved still choose, they just always choose wrong when it comes to faith in Christ and pleasing God. Premise 2: Calvinists are compatible determinists. God’s decrees determines all things but we remain free in some sens...
Read more

Scripture and the Common Man

Paul seems to missunderstand my view on scripture. He states: Crucial to Dan’s argument is the claim that “common man” are all, each and every, libertarians. If Dan claims that some “common men” are not indeterminist, but determinist, then he defeats one of his premises, or makes the Bible speak in contradictions. To spell this point out, recall that Dan says, “The Bible is written by and to the common man, it means what they mean, since they mean certain words libertarianly, then the Bible so means those words.” Yet if we allow some (even one?) of the “common men” to whom the Bible was written to be determinists, then it must mean what they mean by the words that are the topic of our discussion. However, since there are indeterminist “common men”, then the Bible must also mean what they mean by the words we are discussing! Therefore, Dan must assume that each and every “common man” is a libertarian, which I find highly implausible. ( link ) It was not said what was said I said. The b...
Read more