My quote (above) is still a valid one. I agree with giving honor where honor is due, but when is "too long", to where it becomes a monotony millenia after millenia TO God? This is a hypothetical question, of course. Those of you, who are parents, . . . I know that you appreciate being honored and loved by your kids. BUT, . . . what if they continually told you how great you are, all the time, the same words, phrases, and actions . . . . how would you start feeling about it?
And I would have to say, under the definition of "what is it to be of the Christian religion", that I am not "born again" any more. . . . . . . which is a really weird concept since one can't help it if they have been born first. Just thought of that right now.
Anyway, for the record, I am not, nor plan on being involved in witchcraft.
we are to give all honor, glory, and praise to God, about everything in our life.
We are His servants.
Parents are not God, therefore it is useless to use that as an example.
God is so high above anything you or I can think of, we have no real way of making a GOOD decision apart from Jesus.
Everything good is from God. Everything bad is sin, and comes from fleshly lusts that war against the soul, and from the devil, our enemy. The devil is the father of all lies.
Ever feel confused? That's from the devil, too.
Okay, . . . . . so then let's stop calling him "Father"! :-?
Are we going to be praising and worshipping around the "throne of God" (as if God is actually sitting on some big chair. . . ) . . . . for all eternity? Don't misread my words as sarcasm, but the fact that we (humans) place so many human characteristics on God which are unlikely to be true.
As for "Everything good is from God. Everything bad is sin" . . . .isn't that a bit generalistic. Is a person, who gets cancer (an obviously bad thing), getting the disease based upon sin? No.
Let's take the story of the Prodigal son, for a moment. Did anywhere in that story indicate that anyone was worshipping this father? Who was the one who was praised? It was the son who returned home, . . to a very grateful father. This story is one where I can feel comfortable with, . . the entirety of it, as well.
Again, there is nothing wrong with giving honor where honor is due, and the father certainly deserved honor, though he placed himself in a place of dishonor even at through the action of running to his son, his actions were honorable. But in the end, the party WAS for the son, even though the son DID recognize the authority. Seems as though the "eternal praise around the throne of God" is least likely as what God would want.
If you have a problem with "Father" then you have a problem with Christ, not us. For He taught to call God as such even in prayer.
I don't have the room nor the time to quote Christ every time He mentioned "Father". Everything comes from the "Father" through His will of Creation. He said "Let there be light" and there was.
Jesus Christ said:
Matthew 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
John 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
John 17:25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
Maybe "Father" doesn't fit the PC trend toward an all-inclusive alternative family unit. Maybe certain people don't like the term "Father"... or "mother" for that matter. But that's not going to change the idea of "Father" being used as the head of His household, His creation, within scripture regardless if political correctness dictates that no gender be recognised for some alternative reason or not concerning family.
You've missed the point entirely.
It's about repentance, not honor.
It's about being honest enough to admit sin against the Father, rebellion toward God. It's about humbling oneself, letting go of ego to seek mercy and forgiveness. All the son had came from the Father. All the son had he squandered away in sin. The son admits his error to the Father and the Father forgives him for the son denies "self" and comes to the Father with a repentant heart.
Are we to be praised for repentance? Hardly.
If one seeks honor then one will be sorely disappointed.
Why not praise God for mercy and forgivess unto eternal life? Why not praise His name for a life given? And why not praise Him while in His presence forever? If it wasn't for Him fulfilling His promises, being faithful while we are not then we'd be apart from God, separated from all his goodness and rest.
Some chose to praise Him forever while others chose to curse Him.
By God's will he came to us through Christ, Emmanuel, for we are not worthy to go to Him, we don't earn our place in His presence. He came to us, in the flesh. Does that make God dishonorable? Does Christ represent dishonor for the Father?
If you are living eternally, then I suppose you'd be living it with thanksgiving in your heart towards God for allowing you to exist, sure. But you don't think it will be a 24/7/365 praise meeting though, right?
If forever is timelessness then how can time measure forever?
I don't know forever. I can't concieve it. Not even a small slice of forever since there can be no half of forever or a tenth or a thousandth of forever. I can't answer your question because both of us are locked solidly in time. Now. This present. Whatever that's supposed to mean because again now is reference to time.
If it's to be a gigayear or a terayear or 2 of those or 10 or a thousand, then so be it. I'll praise Him with joy! Every minute and with every part of me. It's much better than cursing Him every minute and with every part of me... forever. Unimaginably better.
What do you think you'll be doing? More of what you do here or the things you wish you could do here? This place, this earth, this universe will be gone. So you want to do what you used to do in the past? Or what you wish you could do in the past?
The Father's love is so powerful nobody can stand within it in the flesh and live. It's far too overwhelming. What are you going to do in that presence of power? Play video games? Take a walk to the river?
What are you going to do if you're NOT in that presence? Have you ever thought about that?
I have faith whatever is in store will be good. And if I'm not in His presence then things won't be so good. I'll chose the former and take my chances. :
In the meantime I'll praise Him with my heart and soul, every day.
Practice makes perfect. 8-)
Here's how I look at your statement. When I hear things like that, it really does make me wonder how it would all be FOR the one receiving eternal praise. A being, such as God, may BE worthy of it, but would it be what God really wants? Again, from the prodigal son story, there is much more evidence of a loving relation between a father and son, with a father that doesn't apparently let the son drone on about how bad he is, or how good the father is, but immediately grabs him in his arms, gives him a robe and a ring, kills the fatted calf, and has a party.
Just because there is obvious worthiness of a being to be worshipped, . . . from the story, it doesn't appear that it is what God wants.
Well, from the story, it appears that the father wants his son to come home, though never really knowing if it would happen, yet he still looks out past the village hoping to see him each day.
When the son comes home, the father runs (an act of potential dishonor from the towns folk), grabs his son, hugs him, brings him back to his land, gives him a ring, and throws a party for the son. Not much is said about what happens after this event, other than the other son becoming angry that the father would do this. I wonder who, in the story, the "other son" would be?
Anyway, it seems obvious that the father's joy was not in "having another worker for the lands", he had his other son, and hired hands (I also wonder who the hired hands represent). So, the father's joy came from his son being back home.
The story has always been told from the aspect of the son, . . . .but I think it is of equal (if not greater) importance to see the actions of the father.
Ok, seems you understand the parable. There's a lot there and yes the father ran after his son to save him the shame from others.
Back then the custom would have been pretty much the same as we would expect today. The son seeks to come back to the father but has lain disgrace and dishonor upon the father. He squandered a good portion of the family's resources on wine, women and song so to speak. But when the money was gone so were the friends and the son's "partying". He hit bottom and went back to the father.
So what was expected was that the father would make him sit outside the gate for a few days so those in the village could lay shame and ridicule upon him, a form of revenge. Retribution had to be paid one way or another. By expectation the father would have made the son work for reconciliation until the very last penny was paid back to the father, the family. And even then the son would have to be chastened in some way to completely atone for the shame before being fully reunited with the family. In other words, he had to suffer humiliation... and that without rebellion, he had to take it no matter what the family laid before him to do.
So yes, in the eyes of the villagers the father would have made a "sinful reception" by running after the son, taking him in immediately and saving the son from the humiliation, shame and retribution expected. Instead the father would have taken all that on his shoulders.
But remember, that's in the eyes of others. That's from the hearts of those around who know and understand the circumstances that don't know Christ or His teachings. Theirs is a human reaction by nature... revenge and retribution to be paid for dishonoring the family. Much the same as we know or expect to have happen today in the secular world.
But that's not the christian response, that's not what our Father would have us do and that's not what the Father did to us. Instead he "ran" to us taking the shame, mockery and humiliation upon His shoulders on the cross. He did more than forgive our sins, He protected us from the ridicule expected by an unbelieving world for seeking reconciliation of any kind. It goes against the nature of the world.
So the son's father may have suffered dishonor among the villagers but in the eyes of God the father upheld that which is good. To that end the father didn't please the world but pleased God and would be viewed as doing a righteous act, completely opposite from that of world view. From a christian point of view then there would be no dishonor due the father.
Agreed. . . . regardless of the culture's view on a man running, it was an act of love from the father to save his son from the shame and possible bodily damage from those of the village. It's one of the best parables one can find in the Bible.