@ Chuck - What is sin?
LatterDays
In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
we should (i.e. missing the mark).
Thanks
LDM
----------------
The Latter Days Ministry
http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
::: babe in Christ :::
news:69175b68-710f-4fb2...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
LatterDays <latte...@live.com> typed:
Sin is to put one's trust into someone else but God.
God established the law AFTER the first sin. So sin must be something
else than not keeping the law. The law works like a mirror for us to see
where we do sin.
--
___________________________________________________
http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de
WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS LORD
http://the-beauty-of-the-psalms.blogspot.com
http://jesus-christ-is-my-lord-and-my-god.blogspot.com
LatterDays
wrote:
> Innews:69175b68-710f-4fb2...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
> LatterDays <latter.d...@live.com> typed:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi Chuck,
>
> > In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
> > what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
> > I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
> > omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
> > Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
> > law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
> > we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>
> > Thanks
>
> > LDM
> > ----------------
> > The Latter Days Ministry
> >http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
>
> Sin is to put one's trust into someone else but God.
>
LDM:
I think that could be a valid definition as well.
> God established the law AFTER the first sin.
LDM:
On what are you basing this?
Thanks!
LDM
--------------
The Latter Days Ministry
http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
> So sin must be something
> else than not keeping the law. The law works like a mirror for us to see
> where we do sin.
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________
> http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de
> WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS LORD
> http://the-beauty-of-the-psalms.blogspot.com
> http://jesus-christ-is-my-lord-and-my-god.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
::: babe in Christ :::
news:db1ca8e0-0c20-4d1e...@g38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
LatterDays <latte...@live.com> typed:
> On Dec 14, 2:14 pm, " ::: babe in Christ :::" <veral...@lycos.com>
> wrote:
>> Innews:69175b68-710f-4fb2...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
>> LatterDays <latter.d...@live.com> typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>>> In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding
>>> of what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>>
>>> I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
>>> omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>>
>>> Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
>>> law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
>>> we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>>
>>> Thanks
>>
>>> LDM
>>> ----------------
>>> The Latter Days Ministry
>>> http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Sin is to put one's trust into someone else but God.
>>
>
> LDM:
> I think that could be a valid definition as well.
>
>> God established the law AFTER the first sin.
>
> LDM:
> On what are you basing this?
And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be
there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments
which I have written; that thou mayest teach them. (Exodus 24:12 KJV)
There was no sin in Paradise, and the only law God had given to Adam and
Eve was not to eat any fruits from the tree of knowledge.
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden
thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof
thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17 KJV)
After eating from the tree they were aware of having done something
evil, and felt ashamed for being naked and hid themselves from God.
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were
naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the
cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence
of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. (Genesis 3:7-8 KJV)
> Thanks!
You are welcome!
LatterDays
wrote:
> Innews:db1ca8e0-0c20-4d1e...@g38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
> LatterDays <latter.d...@live.com> typed:
LDM:
Yes, that does show the documentation of the Old Testament law, but
who is to say that the law didn't exist before sin existed? I am not
speaking of the law given to Moses, but spoken of in Romans 8:2, "For
the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from
the law of sin and death."
I believe the law given to Moses was only a shadow of the spiritual
law defined by life in Christ. This law is not a set of rules and
regulations based on touch not/taste not, but is the reality of
hearing from and following the leading of the Spirit of God.
> There was no sin in Paradise, and the only law God had given to Adam and
> Eve was not to eat any fruits from the tree of knowledge.
>
> And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden
> thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and
> evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof
> thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17 KJV)
>
> After eating from the tree they were aware of having done something
> evil, and felt ashamed for being naked and hid themselves from God.
>
> And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were
> naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
> And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the
> cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence
> of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. (Genesis 3:7-8 KJV)
>
LDM:
OK, so I am not syaing this is right, but maybe consider it.
When God created Adam, He breathed life into him and made him a living
soul. Adam then took direction from God by nature via God's Spirit;
he knew nothing else. Neither did he need a law, because the Spirit
guided him in all things. This is what I believe God desired the true
condition of man to be. His Spirit leading and man obeying with no
resistance.
I would say that the sin from Adam and Eve was not just eating
forbidden fruit (which was a manifestation of the sin). The sin was
listening to a voice other than the Spirit of God.
God told them that in the day they ate of the fruit thereof, they
would surely die. Well, they ate the fruit and still had physical
life. However, what they had lost was the internal leading of the
Spirit of God becausde they gave place to Satan and his words
instead. Without God's life-giving spirit, they were spiritually
dead.
God then had to set apart a people whom he could give a shadow of that
law in order to restrain the sin nature. At least until His Son jesus
could come and offer a sacrifice that made it possible once more for
man to be converted and led by the Spirit with no need to rely on a
written set of rules (not to disparage the Old Testament laws).
So, when I refer to sin in part being a transgression of the law, I am
referring primarily to the law of the Spirit.
What are your thoughts?
> > Thanks!
>
> You are welcome!
>
>
>
> > LDM
> > --------------
> > The Latter Days Ministry
> >http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
>
> >> So sin must be something
> >> else than not keeping the law. The law works like a mirror for us to
> >> see where we do sin.
>
> >> --
> >> ___________________________________________________
> >>http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de
> >> WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS LORD
> >>http://the-beauty-of-the-psalms.blogspot.com
> >>http://jesus-christ-is-my-lord-and-my-god.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
pyotr filipivich
<latte...@live.com> wrote on Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:33:22 -0800 (PST)
in alt.christnet.christianlife :
>Hi Chuck,
>
>In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
>what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
>I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
>omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
>Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
>law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
>we should (i.e. missing the mark).
Coming from a different perspective: sin is separating ourselves
from God. When we say "God won't (or can't) ... so I can, or will."
What you do after that is just so much personal preference or taste,
you have befouled the image of God within you, you have stained your
own soul. And no amount of scrubbing by you on your own will change
that.
If you know the story of The Pharisee and The Tax collector, both
had separated themselves in the Temple from the rest of the
congregation. Both were well aware of their situation, they were not
like the rest. But the Pharisee was quite proud of his humility "and
prayed unto himself, saying ...". meanwhile, the tax collector is
humble before God, asking God for mercy.
--
pyotr filipivich
Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
1) There is a God.
2) It's not you.
LatterDays
> I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that LatterDays
> in alt.christnet.christianlife :
>
> >Hi Chuck,
>
> >In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
> >what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
> >I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
> >omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
> >Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
> >law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
> >we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>
> Coming from a different perspective: sin is separating ourselves
> from God.
LDM:
OK. Do you think this is a decision we make at some point in life
which defiles us or do you believe that we are born separated from God
and need reconciliation (or do you believe something else altogether)?
In your estimation, is sin then a conscious decision?
> When we say "God won't (or can't) ... so I can, or will."
> What you do after that is just so much personal preference or taste,
> you have befouled the image of God within you, you have stained your
> own soul. And no amount of scrubbing by you on your own will change
> that.
> If you know the story of The Pharisee and The Tax collector, both
> had separated themselves in the Temple from the rest of the
> congregation. Both were well aware of their situation, they were not
> like the rest. But the Pharisee was quite proud of his humility "and
> prayed unto himself, saying ...". meanwhile, the tax collector is
> humble before God, asking God for mercy.
LDM:
You might also said that the Phasiee was not humble at all, but just
felt that his works and his social position somehow elevated him above
others.
Also, I might dispute that the Pharisee was aware of his situation.
His situation was that he also was a sinner like the publican, but he
was unable to see his situation due to his pride in feeling like he
was God's anointed.
-------------------
The Latter Days Ministry
http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
> --
::: babe in Christ :::
news:b8199795-e895-4233...@17g2000vbf.googlegroups.com,
LatterDays <latte...@live.com> typed:
Sure, but not every spirit that says it comes from God really is from
God. It takes discernment and knowledge which one can get by reading the
Scriptures. God is never closer to me than when I listen to His Words in
the Bible carefully. He talks to me through the Scriptures. That is why
I love them. They come from God when I read them.
God revealed Himself to me through the Scriptures. God is surely not
limited to a book, but the Bible is His Word, and His Spirit allows me
to understand it. So I would say that His Spirit and the Scriptures work
together, and not to forget the direct communication with God: prayer.
If you ignore the Bible and fill yourself up with the Spirit only, you
may fly a little too high and away from reality. If you only read the
Bible without His Spirit, you do not even understand it. If you do not
read the Bible, you do not even know anything about God, who He is, and
what to tell others about Him.
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we
shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him;
for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him
purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin
transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1
John 3:2-4 KJV)
Paul called it a "law of the Spirit" to discern it from the law of the
Jews with its hundreds of regulations. The law - that is the Torah (I
found this, too:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Written_Law.html).
It is a set of regulations and rules. Jesus did not break it, and He
also said that not one jota of it would be abolished. But it was a
curse, because nobody but Jesus could keep it. So Jesus' death
resurrection made it possible that all who believe in Him are set free
from the law, which means they still sin, but they cannot be accused of
sin anymore. Christians are new creatures in Christ, but they are still
in the flesh, and the flesh makes them sinners. I think we probably mean
the same. Jesus accused the Pharisees, those who really knew the law, of
not interpreting it correctly, because they had lost sight of what God
meant by it - namely what Jesus summarized like this:
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first
and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and
the prophets. (Matthew 22:37-40 KJV)
>> There was no sin in Paradise, and the only law God had given to Adam
>> and Eve was not to eat any fruits from the tree of knowledge.
>>
>> And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the
>> garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of
>> good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou
>> eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17 KJV)
>>
>> After eating from the tree they were aware of having done something
>> evil, and felt ashamed for being naked and hid themselves from God.
>>
>> And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were
>> naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves
>> aprons. And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the
>> garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves
>> from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
>> (Genesis 3:7-8 KJV)
>>
>
> LDM:
> OK, so I am not syaing this is right, but maybe consider it.
>
> When God created Adam, He breathed life into him and made him a living
> soul. Adam then took direction from God by nature via God's Spirit;
> he knew nothing else. Neither did he need a law, because the Spirit
> guided him in all things.
But he got ONE law, namely not to eat from that tree... and he was told
about the consequences.
> This is what I believe God desired the true
> condition of man to be. His Spirit leading and man obeying with no
> resistance.
Right! It was the people's disobedience and rebellion against God, and
also their pride to think they would be like God.
> I would say that the sin from Adam and Eve was not just eating
> forbidden fruit (which was a manifestation of the sin). The sin was
> listening to a voice other than the Spirit of God.
That is true. [Actually I do not believe it was not His Spirit leading
them in Paradise, but He lived with them there, and He spoke with them
in person, face to face.]
> God told them that in the day they ate of the fruit thereof, they
> would surely die. Well, they ate the fruit and still had physical
> life.
But for how long? Not forever anymore. They were subject to die. It was
only later through Jesus that they got a second chance - and still most
people do not take it when it is offered to them.
> However, what they had lost was the internal leading of the
> Spirit of God becausde they gave place to Satan and his words
> instead. Without God's life-giving spirit, they were spiritually
> dead.
What do you mean by "internal leading of the Spirit", please?
> God then had to set apart a people whom he could give a shadow of that
> law in order to restrain the sin nature. At least until His Son jesus
> could come and offer a sacrifice that made it possible once more for
> man to be converted and led by the Spirit with no need to rely on a
> written set of rules (not to disparage the Old Testament laws).
I do not see a reason for replacing the law in the Bible by anything
other than Scripture provides. I do not like this idea.
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of
Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their
inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and
they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:33 KJV)
> So, when I refer to sin in part being a transgression of the law, I am
> referring primarily to the law of the Spirit.
If you mean the disobedience to God by that, it is okay with me.
However, one can only obey God if one can hear His voice. For Christians
this becomes clear when Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know
them, and they follow me" (John 10:27 KJV)
> What are your thoughts?
See above. :-) What do you think?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
> In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
> what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
> I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
> omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
> Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
> law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
> we should (i.e. missing the mark).
Sin is simply not doing what GOD wants (WDJW) whether intentionally or
out of ignorance.
May you and other dear friends, brethren, and neighbors have a
blessedly wonderful 2008th year since the birth of our LORD Jesus
Christ as our Messiah, the Son of Man ...
... by being hungrier:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f891e617d10bd689?
Hunger is wonderful ! ! !
It's how we know the answer to the question "What does Jesus
want?" (WDJW):
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f43db72a7c5c1da0?
Yes, hunger is our knowledge of good versus evil that Adam and Eve
paid for with their and our immortal lives:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/52a3db8576495806?
"Blessed are you who hunger NOW...
... for you will be satisfied." -- LORD Jesus Christ (Luke 6:21)
Amen.
Here is a Spirit-guided exegesis of Luke 6:21 given in hopes of
promoting much greater understanding:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/cc2aa8f8a4d41360?
Be hungrier, which is truly healthier:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/991d4e30704307e7?
Marana tha
Prayerfully in the awesome name of our Messiah, LORD Jesus Christ,
Andrew <><
--
"... no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor
12:3)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/188fd2ec63b3ba63?
LatterDays
wrote:
> Innews:b8199795-e895-4233...@17g2000vbf.googlegroups.com,
LDM:
I think we agree that it is the Spirit of God alone which we should
follow (in terms of spirits) and that the Spirit would never conflict
with the words inspired by the same Spirit, the Scriptures. They do
in fact work together.
> Paul called it a "law of the Spirit" to discern it from the law of the
> Jews with its hundreds of regulations. The law - that is the Torah (I
> found this, too:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Written_Law.html).
> It is a set of regulations and rules. Jesus did not break it, and He
> also said that not one jota of it would be abolished. But it was a
> curse, because nobody but Jesus could keep it. So Jesus' death
> resurrection made it possible that all who believe in Him are set free
> from the law, which means they still sin, but they cannot be accused of
> sin anymore. Christians are new creatures in Christ, but they are still
> in the flesh, and the flesh makes them sinners.
LDM:
Now this part I wouldn't agree with and maybe that would be
interesting to discuss given the topic of the post.
Being in Christ does not just mean that we cannot be accused of sin
anymore, it also means that we are expected to be actively moving away
from sin. Part of being a new creature in Christ by necessity entails
not yielding our members unto unrighteousness.
I am not speaking of being sinless. I am speaking of the ovenant in
Christ being able to achieve what the law of Moses could not.
"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer
sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How
much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead
works to serve the living God?" Hebrews 9:13-14
One difference I think the new birth affords us is the ability to have
our consciences purged. The Holy Spirit within not only convicts us
of sin, but empowers us to resist sin should we so choose. This does
not mean that sin no longer exists, but that we are not consciously
choosing sin. I would say that Scripture sets forth the expectation in
Christ that we would not choose to do that which we know is sinful,
but instead choose to obey God.
Christians may have a fleshly body, but they are not to be "in the
flesh" and I don't think God just overlooks such behavior if we are.
"And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
affections and lusts." Galatians 5:24
Do you know of any Scripture where God refers to Christians as
sinners? I do not. From what I read, God makes a distinct difference
between "sinners" and "Christians". He acknowledges that Christians
may sin (and that we have an advocate in Jesus for forgiveness and
cleansing when/if such happens), yet He NEVER calls us sinners. I
think this reflects something significant not only God's attitude
about sinners, but about sin in general.
LDM:
OK, so I don't believe that the first sin was Adam & Eve eating a
physical piece of fruit, but that the "fruit" they partook of were the
words (fruit of the lips) of a being other than God, namely Satan. So
God's instructions to Adam could be summed up by saying that He told
Adam not to listen to any voice other than God's own or he would die.
I am not trying to convince you to see it this way, I am only
explaining so that my post above may be more clear. We know that God
is a spirit and is the Father of spirits. Therefore the law of the
Spirit is nothing more than God and His own inherent righteousness. So
what you see as God's "one law" given to Moses I see as God confirming
once again that He is the only source of righteousness and life for
Adam.
> > This is what I believe God desired the true
> > condition of man to be. His Spirit leading and man obeying with no
> > resistance.
>
> Right! It was the people's disobedience and rebellion against God, and
> also their pride to think they would be like God.
>
LDM:
Yes, and even that they would not need God or His leading anymore.
They could decide things for themselves.
> > I would say that the sin from Adam and Eve was not just eating
> > forbidden fruit (which was a manifestation of the sin). The sin was
> > listening to a voice other than the Spirit of God.
>
> That is true. [Actually I do not believe it was not His Spirit leading
> them in Paradise, but He lived with them there, and He spoke with them
> in person, face to face.]
>
LDM:
OK. Where do you see the support for this? I don't think I have
heard it before. The one issue that comes to mind is Jesus saying
that no man has seen the Father, but maybe I am missing something
here.
> > God told them that in the day they ate of the fruit thereof, they
> > would surely die. Well, they ate the fruit and still had physical
> > life.
>
> But for how long? Not forever anymore. They were subject to die. It was
> only later through Jesus that they got a second chance - and still most
> people do not take it when it is offered to them.
>
LDM:
Yes, but I believe that God was speaking of more than physical death
(which clearly was part of their punishment). I think He was also
speaking of spiritual death, i.e. no longer having the indwelling of
God's Spirit to lead and guide them. For example, Christians don't
get a chance not to physially die. What Christ offers is a rebirth
via the Spirit of God, which is what was lost in th efall (IMO).
> > However, what they had lost was the internal leading of the
> > Spirit of God becausde they gave place to Satan and his words
> > instead. Without God's life-giving spirit, they were spiritually
> > dead.
>
> What do you mean by "internal leading of the Spirit", please?
>
LDM:
I believe that they had living and indweeling in them the Spirit of
God.
> > God then had to set apart a people whom he could give a shadow of that
> > law in order to restrain the sin nature. At least until His Son jesus
> > could come and offer a sacrifice that made it possible once more for
> > man to be converted and led by the Spirit with no need to rely on a
> > written set of rules (not to disparage the Old Testament laws).
>
> I do not see a reason for replacing the law in the Bible by anything
> other than Scripture provides. I do not like this idea.
>
> But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of
> Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their
> inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and
> they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:33 KJV)
>
LDM:
This Scripture illustrates what I was trying to say. The law of the
Spirit in Christ is the righteousness of God. It is imparted to us in
salvation and allows us to do what we could not before, namely crucify
the works of the flesh. When the flesh is crucified, we obey God by
nature because His Spirit lives within us and His desires are in our
hearts.
> > So, when I refer to sin in part being a transgression of the law, I am
> > referring primarily to the law of the Spirit.
>
> If you mean the disobedience to God by that, it is okay with me.
> However, one can only obey God if one can hear His voice. For Christians
> this becomes clear when Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know
> them, and they follow me" (John 10:27 KJV)
>
LDM:
Yes, I mean disobedience to God. The law of the Spirit being the
innate righteousness of God means that whenever we violate the
righteousness of God, we transgress that law.
I do believe that hearing God's voice is critical. However, I believe
that even those newer in the faith who do not hear His voice directly
can find solace in that the Scriptures provide a solid foundation upon
which to define what it means to obey God.
> > What are your thoughts?
>
> See above. :-) What do you think?
LDM:
Well, me thinks this is a fun conversation...and "TAG" you're
it! :-)
>
> >>> Thanks!
>
> >> You are welcome!
>
> >>> LDM
> >>> --------------
> >>> The Latter Days Ministry
> >>>http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
>
> >>>> So sin must be something
> >>>> else than not keeping the law. The law works like a mirror for us
> >>>> to
> >>>> see where we do sin.
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________
> http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de
> WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS LORD
> http://the-beauty-of-the-psalms.blogspot.com
LatterDays
wrote:
> LatterDays wrote:
>
> > Hi Chuck,
>
> > In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
> > what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
> > I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
> > omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
> > Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
> > law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
> > we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>
> Sin is simply not doing what GOD wants (WDJW) whether intentionally or
> out of ignorance.
>
[snip]
LDM:
I agree that sin is not doing what God wants. So how do you apply that
on a practical day-to-day level?
You know, I have never liked the whole WWJD genre. To me, it seemed
such an insufficient way of expressing the Gospel.
Whenever I heard this, I used to think, "The last thing we need are a
bunch of people running around in their own power and minds trying to
"do" like Jesus." Not because there is not could intent behind that
sentiment, but because the carnal man cannot "do" like Jesus. It is
impossible to do what Jesus would do apart from being born again by
the Spirit of God through a living faith in Jesus as our Savior.
Once that has happened, you don't have to worry about "trying" to do
what Jesus would do because His Spirit living within you will guide
you on what to do. Then it is not a matter of us thinking it up or
trying to emulate Jesus because His actual life resides within us.
This is not directed at you at all, just my own musings. :-)
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> LatterDays wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Chuck,
>>
>> > In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
>> > what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>>
>> > I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
>> > omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>>
>> > Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
>> > law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
>> > we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>>
>> Sin is simply not doing what GOD wants (WDJW) whether intentionally or
>> out of ignorance.
>>
>
>[snip]
>
>LDM:
>I agree that sin is not doing what God wants. So how do you apply that
>on a practical day-to-day level?
"See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen
to you." -- LORD Jesus Christ (John 5:14)
Amen.
>You know, I have never liked the whole WWJD genre.
WWJD is wrong.
WDJW is right:
Love in Jesus,
LatterDays
wrote:
> LatterDays wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> LatterDays wrote:
>
> >> > Hi Chuck,
>
> >> > In another conversation, you asked me to offer my own understanding of
> >> > what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>
> >> > I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
> >> > omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>
> >> > Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
> >> > law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
> >> > we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>
> >> Sin is simply not doing what GOD wants (WDJW) whether intentionally or
> >> out of ignorance.
>
> >[snip]
>
> >LDM:
> >I agree that sin is not doing what God wants. So how do you apply that
> >on a practical day-to-day level?
>
> "See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen
> to you." -- LORD Jesus Christ (John 5:14)
>
> Amen.
>
> >You know, I have never liked the whole WWJD genre.
>
> WWJD is wrong.
>
> WDJW is right:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/WDJW
>
LDM:
Ooops! Sorry! I didn't notice the different order of the letters you
used. LOL Thanks for the correction. :-)
> Love in Jesus,
>
> Andrew <><
> --
> "... no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor
> 12:3)
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/188fd2ec63b3ba63?- Hide quoted text -
pyotr filipivich
in alt.christnet.christianlife :
>On Dec 14, 4:51 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that LatterDays
>> <latter.d...@live.com> wrote on Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:33:22 -0800 (PST)
>> in alt.christnet.christianlife :
>> >what sin is in a general sense as it applies to all mankind.
>>
>> >I once heard someone talk about sins of commission and sins of
>> >omission. That is the simplest way I can think to describe it.
>>
>> >Sins of commission representing ways in which we transgress God's
>> >law. Sins of omission representing ways in which we fail to do what
>> >we should (i.e. missing the mark).
>>
>> Coming from a different perspective: sin is separating ourselves
>> from God.
>
>LDM:
>OK. Do you think this is a decision we make at some point in life
>which defiles us or do you believe that we are born separated from God
>and need reconciliation (or do you believe something else altogether)?
Yes.
I will begin by saying that I do not believe in the doctrine of
Original Sin. I do believe that there was The Original Sin, by both
Adam and Eve, which was a decision by them to ignore the fasting rule
God had given them, and then deciding to pass the buck, rather than
admit their decision and asking forgiveness. As a result of their
choices, we are born in a fallen world, and it is very difficult to
not separate our self by, essentially, repeating that same choice to
pass the buck and not ask forgiveness. That struggle is one for each
of us, and we, unfortunately, usually fail.
When that happens, varies for each individual. Sometimes it is a
deliberate choice, sometimes it is something we just sort of drift
into. There are things we do, or don't do, knowingly or unknowingly,
which break the relationship with God and our fellow men. For
example, in the Orthodox Church, Wednesdays and Fridays are fast days
- no meat, milk, eggs, oil or wine. Now, if you order chili "hold the
cheese" but it is included, that is one thing, unknowingly you have
not kept the fast . OTOH, you can't say "unknowingly" if you got the
cheese out of the fridge, unwrapped it, sliced it, and added it to the
chili.
>In your estimation, is sin then a conscious decision?
"Yes." Except when it is a habit, or is a failure to rightly
respond. We will react "emotionally" to things, but then what? As
the saying goes, you can't stop a bird from landing on your head, but
you can keep it from building a nest up there.
You can 'slander' someone because you know they are wrong, even if
you never say anything to another person. The worse thing is when you
then discover you have been accusing the wrong person, completely. (I
hate it when I do that.)
It does not really matter, though. We missed the mark, that is
the crucial part. Why we missed it is secondary. We either aimed at
the wrong place, or we did not "do" everything correctly to ensure
hitting the mark. Either way, we missed. So, we have our choices:
despair "I'll never get it right!" or repentance - which is 'turning
away', turning from the dark to the light, asking forgiveness and
trying again.
>> When we say "God won't (or can't) ... so I can, or will."
>> What you do after that is just so much personal preference or taste,
>> you have befouled the image of God within you, you have stained your
>> own soul. And no amount of scrubbing by you on your own will change
>> that.
>> If you know the story of The Pharisee and The Tax collector, both
>> had separated themselves in the Temple from the rest of the
>> congregation. Both were well aware of their situation, they were not
>> like the rest. But the Pharisee was quite proud of his humility "and
>> prayed unto himself, saying ...". meanwhile, the tax collector is
>> humble before God, asking God for mercy.
>
>LDM:
>You might also said that the Phasiee was not humble at all, but just
>felt that his works and his social position somehow elevated him above
>others.
>
>Also, I might dispute that the Pharisee was aware of his situation.
>His situation was that he also was a sinner like the publican, but he
>was unable to see his situation due to his pride in feeling like he
>was God's anointed.
I was taught, years ago, that Pride is the desire to be known for
what you are not. Humility is the desire to be known for what you
really are. Thus if you were to ask the Pharisee, he would no doubt
reply that he was humble. He fasted twice a week, he gave alms, he
did all the _things_ which were signs of humility. If he wasn't
humble, who was? It was very important for him to be seen as humble.
And because he was obviously so humble, of course he was better than
other men, like that tax collector.
On the other hand, if you were to ask Jesus "Are you the anointed
one of God?", in all humility, he would say "Yes." To pretend any
less, would be pride.
At the other end, there is a story of the monk who was widely
considered by all, to be very humble. One day, he was visited by an
angelic being, and was told that his humility had come to the
attention of God, and he was to be rewarded with a special blessing.
This monk, who really was humble, immediately said "Oh, the most
humble you say? You must have the wrong monk, it must be someone
else." and straightway the angelic being shrieked and was revealed as
a devil spirit, and immediately left.
There is the story of the two religious who are busy saying "Oh
God, we are nothing!" when a novice joins them. And one of the older
ones says to his companion "Look who thinks he is nothing."
pyotr
LatterDays
> I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that LatterDays
LDM:
Alright. Then how do you understand the following:
"For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they
which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness
shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)" Romans 5:17
> When that happens, varies for each individual. Sometimes it is a
> deliberate choice, sometimes it is something we just sort of drift
> into. There are things we do, or don't do, knowingly or unknowingly,
> which break the relationship with God and our fellow men. For
> example, in the Orthodox Church, Wednesdays and Fridays are fast days
> - no meat, milk, eggs, oil or wine. Now, if you order chili "hold the
> cheese" but it is included, that is one thing, unknowingly you have
> not kept the fast . OTOH, you can't say "unknowingly" if you got the
> cheese out of the fridge, unwrapped it, sliced it, and added it to the
> chili.
>
LDM:
Got it! And love the example. :-)
LDM:
Interesting. You know, I am familiar with trying to be known for what
you are not instead of what you are. Having been in that position, I
have to say that I honestly knew in my heart I wasn't what I made
myself to be. This is what makes the reliance on works so critical,
because deep inside, YOU know the truth about yourself. So I
understand what you are saying, and I agree. That is a good point.
> On the other hand, if you were to ask Jesus "Are you the anointed
> one of God?", in all humility, he would say "Yes." To pretend any
> less, would be pride.
> At the other end, there is a story of the monk who was widely
> considered by all, to be very humble. One day, he was visited by an
> angelic being, and was told that his humility had come to the
> attention of God, and he was to be rewarded with a special blessing.
> This monk, who really was humble, immediately said "Oh, the most
> humble you say? You must have the wrong monk, it must be someone
> else." and straightway the angelic being shrieked and was revealed as
> a devil spirit, and immediately left.
>
> There is the story of the two religious who are busy saying "Oh
> God, we are nothing!" when a novice joins them. And one of the older
> ones says to his companion "Look who thinks he is nothing."
>
LDM:
LOL!!!! That is pretty funny. Thanks for sharing. :-)
LDM
----------
The Latter Days Ministry
http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
> pyotr
>
> --
> pyotr filipivich
> Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
> 1) There is a God.
> 2) It's not you.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >
> >
>
> LDM:
> Ooops! Sorry!
We remain forgiven :-)
http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven
> I didn't notice the different order of the letters you
> used. LOL Thanks for the correction. :-)
Laus Deo :-)
Love in Jesus,
Andrew <><
--
"... no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor
12:3)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/035c93540862751c?
::: babe in Christ :::
news:2486483c-7586-4c2d...@v4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com,
LatterDays <latte...@live.com> typed:
In fact. The Word of God is the Word of God.
>> Paul called it a "law of the Spirit" to discern it from the law of
>> the
>> Jews with its hundreds of regulations. The law - that is the Torah (I
>> found this,
>> too:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Written_Law.html).
>> It is a set of regulations and rules. Jesus did not break it, and He
>> also said that not one jota of it would be abolished. But it was a
>> curse, because nobody but Jesus could keep it. So Jesus' death
>> resurrection made it possible that all who believe in Him are set
>> free
>> from the law, which means they still sin, but they cannot be accused
>> of
>> sin anymore. Christians are new creatures in Christ, but they are
>> still
>> in the flesh, and the flesh makes them sinners.
>
> LDM:
> Now this part I wouldn't agree with and maybe that would be
> interesting to discuss given the topic of the post.
>
> Being in Christ does not just mean that we cannot be accused of sin
> anymore, it also means that we are expected to be actively moving away
> from sin. Part of being a new creature in Christ by necessity entails
> not yielding our members unto unrighteousness.
I think that we automatically move away from Christ if we are in Him,
because being in Christ excludes sin. But there is always the flesh, so
we are not completed yet.
> I am not speaking of being sinless. I am speaking of the ovenant in
> Christ being able to achieve what the law of Moses could not.
I see.
> "For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer
> sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How
> much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
> offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead
> works to serve the living God?" Hebrews 9:13-14
>
> One difference I think the new birth affords us is the ability to have
> our consciences purged. The Holy Spirit within not only convicts us
> of sin, but empowers us to resist sin should we so choose. This does
> not mean that sin no longer exists, but that we are not consciously
> choosing sin. I would say that Scripture sets forth the expectation in
> Christ that we would not choose to do that which we know is sinful,
> but instead choose to obey God.
Yes, that is true.
> Christians may have a fleshly body, but they are not to be "in the
> flesh" and I don't think God just overlooks such behavior if we are.
> "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
> affections and lusts." Galatians 5:24
Yes, but to say it with Martin Luther, commenting on the fact that the
'Old Adam' is drowned when people are baptized, "The beast can swim".
> Do you know of any Scripture where God refers to Christians as
> sinners? I do not. From what I read, God makes a distinct difference
> between "sinners" and "Christians". He acknowledges that Christians
> may sin (and that we have an advocate in Jesus for forgiveness and
> cleansing when/if such happens), yet He NEVER calls us sinners. I
> think this reflects something significant not only God's attitude
> about sinners, but about sin in general.
I would like to refer to Paul who said:
"What then? are we better than they [the Jews]? No, in no wise: for we
have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none
that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all
gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is
none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre;
with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under
their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet
are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And
the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before
their eyes. Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith
to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all
the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the
law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is
the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law
is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the
righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon
all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned,
and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth
to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his
righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the
forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness:
that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in
Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works?
Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is
justified by faith without the deeds of the law." (Romans 3:9-28 KJV)
But you are right, because God does not see us as sinners anymore
through the blood of Jesus Christ, yet we are still sinners.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it
is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are
his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath
before ordained that we should walk in them. Wherefore remember, that ye
being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision
by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise,
having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye
who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ."
(Ephesians 2:8-13 KJV)
If we were no sinners, repentance would be vanity. John warns us of
making God a liar if we think we have not sinned:
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship
one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us
from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and
the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just
to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If
we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not
in us." (1 John 1:7-10 KJV)
We cannot justify ourselves by any means but the blood of Jesus Christ.
It is dangerous for the churches to pretend they were people of sinless
creatures who would not sin, because they rob the people from confessing
their sins, from repentance and forgiveness. Why else did Jesus say we
should pray like this:
"After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it
is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our
debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but
deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the
glory, for ever. Amen." (Matthew 6:9-13 KJV)
Why should we ask the Lord to forgive us our debt if we did not sin?
No way will we ever overcome sin by our own efforts. Only God can free
us from sin. But our sin is forgiven and buried at the cross, and this
is why we are not called "sinners" anymore.
Actually I prefer it literally and see no reason to interpret something
into Genesis that is not there. You see, the Lord revealed Himself to me
when I was reading Genesis after decades of looking for Him. If Genesis
is not true, my faith is fake. But my faith is strong. Just because we
cannot imagine that facts were this simple does not give us the right to
change them. Jesus' story of redemption is as incredible and could be
interpreted as if it only took place symbolically and the like [we can
see the bad results from such twisting in the gospels of the "Pastor"
Dave's of this word].
> I am not trying to convince you to see it this way, I am only
> explaining so that my post above may be more clear.
You could not convince me, so do not worry.
> We know that God
> is a spirit and is the Father of spirits.
But when Jesus ascended to heaven, He had a body, right?
> Therefore the law of the
> Spirit is nothing more than God and His own inherent righteousness. So
> what you see as God's "one law" given to Moses I see as God confirming
> once again that He is the only source of righteousness and life for
> Adam.
Amen.
>>> This is what I believe God desired the true
>>> condition of man to be. His Spirit leading and man obeying with no
>>> resistance.
>>
>> Right! It was the people's disobedience and rebellion against God,
>> and
>> also their pride to think they would be like God.
>>
>
> LDM:
> Yes, and even that they would not need God or His leading anymore.
> They could decide things for themselves.
>
>>> I would say that the sin from Adam and Eve was not just eating
>>> forbidden fruit (which was a manifestation of the sin). The sin was
>>> listening to a voice other than the Spirit of God.
>>
>> That is true. [Actually I do not believe it was not His Spirit
>> leading
>> them in Paradise, but He lived with them there, and He spoke with
>> them
>> in person, face to face.]
>>
>
> LDM:
> OK. Where do you see the support for this? I don't think I have
> heard it before. The one issue that comes to mind is Jesus saying
> that no man has seen the Father, but maybe I am missing something
> here.
Right.
It is there:
"After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it
is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our
debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but
deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the
glory, for ever. Amen." (Matthew 6:9-13 KJV)
I am a German, and the German Bibles, the Luther version inclusively,
translate the term "presence" by the term "face", and I have always read
it like that. Let us have a look at it by the "Strong Number" (sorry if
the Hebrew letters of the word are not transmitted due to technical
reasons):
H6440
???? / ?????
pa^ni^ym / pa^neh
BDB Definition:
1) face
1a) face, faces
1b) presence, person
1c) face (of seraphim or cherubim)
1d) face (of animals)
1e) face, surface (of ground)
1f) as adverb of loc/temp
1f1) before and behind, toward, in front of, forward, formerly, from
beforetime, before
1g) with preposition
1g1) in front of, before, to the front of, in the presence of, in the
face of, at the face or front of, from the presence of, from before,
from before the face of
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H6437
Same Word by TWOT Number: 1782a
This is taken from the "Literal Translation of the Holy Bible"
And they heard the sound of Jehovah God walking up and down in the
garden at the breeze of the day. And the man and his wife hid themselves
from the face of Jehovah God in the middle of the trees of the garden.
(Genesis 3:8 LITV)
In addition, Moses was an exception who had even dined with God.
>>> God told them that in the day they ate of the fruit thereof, they
>>> would surely die. Well, they ate the fruit and still had physical
>>> life.
>>
>> But for how long? Not forever anymore. They were subject to die. It
>> was
>> only later through Jesus that they got a second chance - and still
>> most
>> people do not take it when it is offered to them.
>>
>
> LDM:
> Yes, but I believe that God was speaking of more than physical death
> (which clearly was part of their punishment). I think He was also
> speaking of spiritual death, i.e. no longer having the indwelling of
> God's Spirit to lead and guide them. For example, Christians don't
> get a chance not to physially die. What Christ offers is a rebirth
> via the Spirit of God, which is what was lost in th efall (IMO).
Amen. They were kicked out of Paradise, and told they would die -
physically and Spiritually. And the Lord is faithful, trustworthy and
just. The punishment for sin is death.
But Jesus Christ could overcome death.
>>> However, what they had lost was the internal leading of the
>>> Spirit of God becausde they gave place to Satan and his words
>>> instead. Without God's life-giving spirit, they were spiritually
>>> dead.
>>
>> What do you mean by "internal leading of the Spirit", please?
>>
>
> LDM:
> I believe that they had living and indweeling in them the Spirit of
> God.
Sure, everybody has some of the Spirit of God indwelling in him by
birth, because it was the Lord's breathe that made him alive:
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
(Genesis 2:7 KJV)
>>> God then had to set apart a people whom he could give a shadow of
>>> that law in order to restrain the sin nature. At least until His
>>> Son jesus could come and offer a sacrifice that made it possible
>>> once more for man to be converted and led by the Spirit with no
>>> need to rely on a written set of rules (not to disparage the Old
>>> Testament laws).
>>
>> I do not see a reason for replacing the law in the Bible by anything
>> other than Scripture provides. I do not like this idea.
>>
>> But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of
>> Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their
>> inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God,
>> and
>> they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:33 KJV)
>>
>
> LDM:
> This Scripture illustrates what I was trying to say. The law of the
> Spirit in Christ is the righteousness of God. It is imparted to us in
> salvation and allows us to do what we could not before, namely crucify
> the works of the flesh. When the flesh is crucified, we obey God by
> nature because His Spirit lives within us and His desires are in our
> hearts.
I think I explained it above what I think about it already, but I would
like to add something from my own experience. When I became a believer,
I did not notice a change at once, but after a while many things of the
world became very uninteresting to me. I guess this is the Lord working
in us. It was not hard to do, though, and still is not - while there may
be situations where the devil gets a hold and where we show a certain
weakness of the flesh. Of course we should not accept it and do our
best, and also take the decision to leave sin behind us, but if we
confess our sin, He will forgive us as promised in John 1:9, "If we
confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to
cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
>>> So, when I refer to sin in part being a transgression of the law, I
>>> am referring primarily to the law of the Spirit.
>>
>> If you mean the disobedience to God by that, it is okay with me.
>> However, one can only obey God if one can hear His voice. For
>> Christians
>> this becomes clear when Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice, and I
>> know
>> them, and they follow me" (John 10:27 KJV)
>>
>
> LDM:
> Yes, I mean disobedience to God. The law of the Spirit being the
> innate righteousness of God means that whenever we violate the
> righteousness of God, we transgress that law.
In other words, and to express it more simply, we sin.
> I do believe that hearing God's voice is critical. However, I believe
> that even those newer in the faith who do not hear His voice directly
> can find solace in that the Scriptures provide a solid foundation upon
> which to define what it means to obey God.
I doubt that anyone is a believer who does not hear His voice, no matter
how long he has been in the faith. I believe that it is a condition for
becoming a believer in the first place. From my own experience I can
only say that I first heard His voice, and then I surrendered, drawn by
His attraction, by His call.
>>> What are your thoughts?
>>
>> See above. :-) What do you think?
>
> LDM:
> Well, me thinks this is a fun conversation...and "TAG" you're
> it! :-)
Yes, it is a pleasure to talk with you. But please explain to me what
you mean by "TAG"? :-)
>>>>> Thanks!
>>
>>>> You are welcome!
>>
>>>>> LDM
>>>>> --------------
>>>>> The Latter Days Ministry
>>>>> http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/
--
::: babe in Christ :::
In news:6r4kf6F...@mid.individual.net,
::: babe in Christ ::: <vera...@lycos.com> typed:
Correction: not from "Christ", but from "sin", of course.