My People

Not sure but maybe it's the other way around, Maybe the church should be on the streets saying repent.

 

In answer to the question, I think this is one of the most important messages to the church of our time. How can we evangelize the lost if our relationship with God isn't right?

 

Is God bringing a people always dependant on us being right with him?

We ar all sinners striving to maintain a relationship with God. The message preached to a lost world helps to bring those saved back into a relationship with him.

 

I do agree if our relationship is not right with God how can we be a witness for him, Yes revival does start in the church, but with each person. I am not tring to start a fight but I believe the problem is that to many churchs are full of lost people calling themselves christians.

 

I'm confused by exactly what you mean by "right with God." There of lots of people God used that weren't always "right" with him. David comes to mind...and if you read the genealogy of Jesus, you will find many others that weren't always right with God, but they were still used by God. Does right with God mean saved, not sinning, reading the Bible and praying daily....the list could go on.

I agree that our relationship with God should be in order, but it seems that I can only define this for myself. I cannot know the motives and intentions of other people's hearts.

 

There are two observed ways to approach God upon initial salvation.

there are also two classes of believers who fulfill a predescribed role in Gods election.

remember those "vessels of wrath" and mercy" in Romans. (ch 9-11)

well, upon approaching God, we will either possess a prideful attitude or one of humility.
either we play god, or follow God.

mature believers can tell the difference!.
we follow the law and never deny ourselves before God.
or we humble ourselves before him and receive our just judgement. whatever we receive. we know we can earn it or deserve it.

interesting thing is it is God who chooses Who will follow which role.

as adam in the Garden. He TOOK what he thought was his "salvation". receiving for his own personal gain.

compared this with Jesus and mary in the tombs.
John 20:16

Jesus told mary not to "touch" him. not to reach out "to grasp". not to hold on to for personal gain. God deals with his children in a generous fashion.
He gives salvation. to the humble.

opposed to those who reaches out and grabs for themselves. they think they can "choose" whether they will accept salvation. or even to think they can or cant, will, or wont follow a "Lord".

those are the vessels or wrath and mercy within the walls of our churches.
those who grab after God to gain something for themselves. and those who wait on the lord until HE GIVES FREELY OF HIMSELF TO US.

be careful if your one of those "whosoevers" and reaches out to take before its your time. you might enter into Gods family, yet be one of the wrong "vessels". serving God in "another fashion".

many called, few chosen....hhmmm.

Me2

 

For myself having a right relationship with God is being a christian 24/7 not just on sunday,be a christian first everday by your action, then if you have to use words. Im not tring to judge anyone but there are people I know who go to church sunday morning, then they go home put there bibles up and never touch them agin until next sunday.Also there action during the week are not anywhere near being christian like, are the saved, I dont know. But if you look at the fruit they produce I would have to say no, and again Im not judging but how can that person have a right relationship with God.
Am I perfect, Not by a long shot, but when I mess up I have no problem asking for forgiveness, Right or Wrong.Dont you think an in order relationship would be right with God.

 

If you are saved you are a christian 24/7, even on those days you do not act like it. You do not stop being a christian just because you aren't living like one today.
So is right with God mean being a christian, or constantly up to date on repenting, which means none of us is right with God.
I personally think it is being a christian. There is no one who does not mess up.

 

Walls, I think so far pelple are discussing who the My people are in your bible verse. I believe they have to be christians. To revive something is to bring it back, so revival has to be for the church, God's people(christians).

re·vive
(r-vv)
v. re·vived, re·viv·ing, re·vives
v. tr.
To bring back to life or consciousness; resuscitate.
To impart new health, vigor, or spirit to.
To restore to use, currency, activity, or notice.
To restore the validity or effectiveness of.
To renew in the mind; recall.
To present (an old play, for example) again

v. intr.
To return to life or consciousness.
To regain health, vigor, or good spirits.
To return to use, currency, or notice.
To return to validity, effectiveness, or operative condition.


re·viva·ble adj.
re·viver n.
Synonyms: revive, restore, resuscitate, revivify
These verbs mean to give renewed well-being, vitality, or strength to

 

"My people" says it all.

The lost get offended when shown their sin and aren't easily won. (I speak as experienced)

They know they're sinners, or should know, but then sin has to be preached against so they will come to the knwoledge of sin to be accountable, not that we hold them accountable, but they are accountable to God and need to know the truth so they won't face Him in ignorance. But then the ideal is propigated by the likes of Ozzy Osburn to that degree/ "mind over nmatter", if I can keep it off my mind, it don't matter".

When made accountable to God, and Him only, then they can be led to the place of finding mercy and repentence due to godly sorrow, but failing to tell them is in allegiance with satan and becoming a stumblingblock that they may trip over and right into hell.

I don't believe the Lord would have us constantly reminded of particular sin except to warn us of it's damage done and to withdraw from it's snare. But that would go for the lost as well.

There is the "two-fold" application of these scriptures to the saved as well as to the lost. All are God's people, he created all men, but then all aren't become His children, because they've never been adopted. So God does adopt those who aren't following Him as dear children, instead they follow their "father" the devil.

Not trying to lean over "there" in the C/A debate, (there is none really), but in truth we are all the children of the devil according to his influence upon us to sin, but then when adopted we have the inward influence to depart from temptation and thus avoid sin: "Be angry, and sin not".

The devils "children" get angry and seek revenge, feeling they are justified in so doing, but "adopted" children look for ways to restore in the spirit of meekness and will even offer their heads on the choppingblock of the wicked king standing for what is right/ "John the Baptist and Herod"

John preached on Herod's sin. Herod wasn't a child of God. I do belive this applies to the question.

Interpeted: the O.T. is written to the Jews/ God's chosen, but not only them, because we see the mention of the "stranger"/Gentiles.

This could lead to a good edifying discussion, even if it is in a debate section.

 

This passage has NOTHING to do with the church. So many well meaning Christians try to use this because they complain about the state of affairs.

This is reality:

America was just as wicked in the 1700s, 1800s, and 1900s. A moral society is still going to HELL.

The church is not promised ANY earthly blessing or safety.

In fact, Christ said that since they hated him, they will hate us. In contrast, Israel WOULD enjoy peace and safety if they obeyed the Mosaic covenant.

This is so basic. Unfortunately, too many ignorant preachers get up sunday after sunday and preach on the events of the day instead of a word from God. How sad.

 

Walls, who is the audience of II Chr. 7:17?

Did you read the rest of what I said?

 

DD, What are you trying to say? Do you think that the passage is obsolete that it was directed to Solomon and has no principle to be applied to God's people today?

Is God unjust that if His people, by the principle laid out in regards to Solomon, humble themselves and pray, that He won't still heal their land?

Are you saying that the O.T. in this particualr passage is irrelevant, including the principle as well, because it only deals with Israel and in that specific time frame?

What is it you are trying to say?

 

The promise of a healed LAND is given to Israel ONLY.

The church does not inhabit a LAND, does not have any promises of material blessing, and has been promised that she will face persecution.

Now, if you all can work that into 2 Cor. 7:14, have at it. It just won't be correct exegesis.