Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Rule of Faith Irenaeus of Lyons
41 views
Skip to first unread message
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 2, 2012, 10:49:19 AM11/2/12
to
http://thepocketscroll.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/the-rule-of-faith/
The Rule of Faith Irenaeus of Lyons
Throughout his works, Irenaeus of Lyons (born in Asia Minor, d. c.
200) has many statements that could be termed ‘credal’. For a
discussion of many of them, check out JND Kelly, Early Christian
Creeds, pp. 76 ff. Here’s the most famous:
For the Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to
the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their
disciples this faith: in one God, the Father Almighty, who made the
heaven and the earth and the seas and all things that are in them; and
in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our
salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets
the dispensations and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and
the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the incarnate
ascension into heaven of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and his
future manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to sum up
all things and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole huiman race in
order that . . . he should execute just judgement towards all; that he
may send spiritual wickednesses, and the angels who transgressed and
came into a state of rebellion together with the ungodly, and
unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into the everlasting
fire; but may, as an act of Grace, confer immortality on the righteous
and holy, and those who have kept his commandments, and have
persevered in his love, some from the beginning, and others from their
repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory. (Against the
Heresies 1.10.1, in A New Eusebius, pp. 111-112)
The basic outline of the creeds, Apostles‘ and Nicene, is here, as
Irenaeus combines the old baptismal-type formulae of, say, the Didache
with 1 Corinthians 8:6:
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things,
and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and
we by him. (KJV)
Irenaeus proclaims that the whole church throughout the world believes
this regula fidei, or ‘rule of faith’ (the Greek is lost). A regula is
a rule as in a straight line or a ruler. The regula is a guide to the
content of the faith. His multiple statements vary in wording and in
how much Irenaeus puts in, but they never differ. This, for Irenaeus,
is Apostolic orthodoxy, handed down to the churches through the
Apostolic Succession (we looked at this here); it runs counter to his
great opponents, the Marcionites and the Gnostics.
Some may wonder how widespread Irenaeus’ orthodoxy really was; I would
wager it was common enough in Gaul (France) for him to be elected
bishop of Lyons, common enough in Asia Minor for him to think it
traditional. It was common enough in Rome for Justin’s regula to be
about the same, as well as for Tertullian’s Carthaginian regula. It
looks like earlier and contemporaneous eastern baptismal formulae as
well.
What this means, friends, is that something that looks very much like
orthodoxy pre-dates Constantine. It may not be as precise as Nicene
orthodoxy, but it is part of the journey that leads through Nicaea to
Chalcedon. Yes, there were competing ‘orthodoxies’ or ‘Christianities’
such as the various forms of ‘Gnosticism’ and the Montanists of last
week and the Marcionites and the ‘Judaising’ elements (‘Ebionites’ and
‘Quartodecimans’) and, later on, Donatists and Meletians and Paul of
Samosata.
It also reminds us that the Church has ever sought to keep itself
aligned with Scripture and that lenses such as Creeds exist to help us
read the Bible well. Some claim, ‘No Creed but Christ!’ But the
Gnostics read many of the same Scriptures as us, as did the Arians,
and they came to very different conclusions. How can we know what is
the true deposit of the faith, how can we know our reading of
Scripture is faithful?
Irenaeus, with his rule of faith, shows us. If we believe these
things, we are on the right path. If you remain unconvinced, I
recommend works by Baptist scholar DH Williams; the introduction to
Scripture, Tradition, and Interpretation is the quickest, accessible
route to his thought.
If you are convinced, I hope you will not discard the creeds and their
content, even if you tire of their exact wording. They help preserve
an unbroken line of teaching that brings us to the very feet of the
Apostles who walked with our Lord Christ.
The Rule of Faith Irenaeus of Lyons
Throughout his works, Irenaeus of Lyons (born in Asia Minor, d. c.
200) has many statements that could be termed ‘credal’. For a
discussion of many of them, check out JND Kelly, Early Christian
Creeds, pp. 76 ff. Here’s the most famous:
For the Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to
the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their
disciples this faith: in one God, the Father Almighty, who made the
heaven and the earth and the seas and all things that are in them; and
in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our
salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets
the dispensations and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and
the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the incarnate
ascension into heaven of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and his
future manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to sum up
all things and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole huiman race in
order that . . . he should execute just judgement towards all; that he
may send spiritual wickednesses, and the angels who transgressed and
came into a state of rebellion together with the ungodly, and
unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into the everlasting
fire; but may, as an act of Grace, confer immortality on the righteous
and holy, and those who have kept his commandments, and have
persevered in his love, some from the beginning, and others from their
repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory. (Against the
Heresies 1.10.1, in A New Eusebius, pp. 111-112)
The basic outline of the creeds, Apostles‘ and Nicene, is here, as
Irenaeus combines the old baptismal-type formulae of, say, the Didache
with 1 Corinthians 8:6:
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things,
and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and
we by him. (KJV)
Irenaeus proclaims that the whole church throughout the world believes
this regula fidei, or ‘rule of faith’ (the Greek is lost). A regula is
a rule as in a straight line or a ruler. The regula is a guide to the
content of the faith. His multiple statements vary in wording and in
how much Irenaeus puts in, but they never differ. This, for Irenaeus,
is Apostolic orthodoxy, handed down to the churches through the
Apostolic Succession (we looked at this here); it runs counter to his
great opponents, the Marcionites and the Gnostics.
Some may wonder how widespread Irenaeus’ orthodoxy really was; I would
wager it was common enough in Gaul (France) for him to be elected
bishop of Lyons, common enough in Asia Minor for him to think it
traditional. It was common enough in Rome for Justin’s regula to be
about the same, as well as for Tertullian’s Carthaginian regula. It
looks like earlier and contemporaneous eastern baptismal formulae as
well.
What this means, friends, is that something that looks very much like
orthodoxy pre-dates Constantine. It may not be as precise as Nicene
orthodoxy, but it is part of the journey that leads through Nicaea to
Chalcedon. Yes, there were competing ‘orthodoxies’ or ‘Christianities’
such as the various forms of ‘Gnosticism’ and the Montanists of last
week and the Marcionites and the ‘Judaising’ elements (‘Ebionites’ and
‘Quartodecimans’) and, later on, Donatists and Meletians and Paul of
Samosata.
It also reminds us that the Church has ever sought to keep itself
aligned with Scripture and that lenses such as Creeds exist to help us
read the Bible well. Some claim, ‘No Creed but Christ!’ But the
Gnostics read many of the same Scriptures as us, as did the Arians,
and they came to very different conclusions. How can we know what is
the true deposit of the faith, how can we know our reading of
Scripture is faithful?
Irenaeus, with his rule of faith, shows us. If we believe these
things, we are on the right path. If you remain unconvinced, I
recommend works by Baptist scholar DH Williams; the introduction to
Scripture, Tradition, and Interpretation is the quickest, accessible
route to his thought.
If you are convinced, I hope you will not discard the creeds and their
content, even if you tire of their exact wording. They help preserve
an unbroken line of teaching that brings us to the very feet of the
Apostles who walked with our Lord Christ.
John Cooper
Nov 2, 2012, 3:22:09 PM11/2/12
to
<jwshe...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:377728c9-7956-4fed...@y8g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> http://thepocketscroll.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/the-rule-of-faith/
> his future manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to sum up
> all things and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole huiman race in
> order that . . . he should execute just judgement towards all; that he
> may send spiritual wickednesses, and the angels who transgressed and
> came into a state of rebellion together with the ungodly, and
> unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into the everlasting
> fire; but may, as an act of Grace, confer immortality on the righteous
> and holy, and those who have kept his commandments, and have
> persevered in his love, some from the beginning, and others from their
> repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory.
One can't help noticing that the religion of Jesus puts emphasis on the
world to come, in stark contrast to the religion of many Christians today.
If we are not heavenly-minded, we shall never be of any earthly use.
The doctrine of the Second Coming is an essential part of the Christian's
creed. I note from Irenaeus' words, that he believed that the whole human
race would be resurrected from the dead to be judged. He correctly
identifies the everlasting fire as the place prepared for the Devil and his
angels first, and then for those humans who have followed them, the ungodly,
the unrighteous, the wicked, and the profane.
Irenaeus sees no contradiction in God conferring salvation *as an act of
grace* on the righteous and the holy, on those who have kept his
commandments, and on those who have persevered in his love. How refreshing!
Nowadays, it is often implied that God is gracious to all those who 'accept
salvation', but who are transgressors and rebels, who live ungodly,
unrighteously, and even wickedly and profanely.
I note also that he does not expect every Christian to have had a conversion
experience. For some have been brought up in the faith, and continue in it,
whilst others come to the faith, from an initial position of rebellion and
unbelief. But for both, who are righteous and holy, who keep Christ's
commandments, and persevere in his love, they are granted in the end to
share in his glory.
John Cooper
news:377728c9-7956-4fed...@y8g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> http://thepocketscroll.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/the-rule-of-faith/
> his future manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to sum up
> all things and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole huiman race in
> order that . . . he should execute just judgement towards all; that he
> may send spiritual wickednesses, and the angels who transgressed and
> came into a state of rebellion together with the ungodly, and
> unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into the everlasting
> fire; but may, as an act of Grace, confer immortality on the righteous
> and holy, and those who have kept his commandments, and have
> persevered in his love, some from the beginning, and others from their
> repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory.
world to come, in stark contrast to the religion of many Christians today.
If we are not heavenly-minded, we shall never be of any earthly use.
The doctrine of the Second Coming is an essential part of the Christian's
creed. I note from Irenaeus' words, that he believed that the whole human
race would be resurrected from the dead to be judged. He correctly
identifies the everlasting fire as the place prepared for the Devil and his
angels first, and then for those humans who have followed them, the ungodly,
the unrighteous, the wicked, and the profane.
Irenaeus sees no contradiction in God conferring salvation *as an act of
grace* on the righteous and the holy, on those who have kept his
commandments, and on those who have persevered in his love. How refreshing!
Nowadays, it is often implied that God is gracious to all those who 'accept
salvation', but who are transgressors and rebels, who live ungodly,
unrighteously, and even wickedly and profanely.
I note also that he does not expect every Christian to have had a conversion
experience. For some have been brought up in the faith, and continue in it,
whilst others come to the faith, from an initial position of rebellion and
unbelief. But for both, who are righteous and holy, who keep Christ's
commandments, and persevere in his love, they are granted in the end to
share in his glory.
John Cooper
Message has been deleted
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Nov 3, 2012, 5:04:57 AM11/3/12
to
"Pete" wrote in message news:
> God gives grace to anyone that comes who also
> believe in His son Jesus. From the meanest to the sweetest and none of us
> have any righteousness of value on our own.
We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
saved according to Jesus.
"20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven."
Matt 5:20 (KJV)
Jeff...
> God gives grace to anyone that comes who also
> believe in His son Jesus. From the meanest to the sweetest and none of us
> have any righteousness of value on our own.
We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
saved according to Jesus.
"20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven."
Matt 5:20 (KJV)
Jeff...
Message has been deleted
John Cooper
Nov 3, 2012, 11:07:28 AM11/3/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>> saved according to Jesus.
>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>
> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
> showed us.
In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works
would be the actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because he
washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all his
possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However he might be an
extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and filthy-minded to
boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness, both in deeds and in the
heart, without which there can be no entry into the kingdom of heaven.
John Cooper
news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>> saved according to Jesus.
>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>
> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
> showed us.
In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works
would be the actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because he
washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all his
possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However he might be an
extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and filthy-minded to
boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness, both in deeds and in the
heart, without which there can be no entry into the kingdom of heaven.
John Cooper
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 3, 2012, 11:42:16 AM11/3/12
to
Mat 13:24 ¶ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying,
The kingdom of heaven is likened
unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Mat 13:25 But while men slept,
his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat,
and went his way.
Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up,
and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto
him,
Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field?
from whence then hath it tares?
Mat 13:28 He said unto them,
An enemy hath done this.
The servants said unto him,
Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay;
lest while ye gather up the tares,
ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest:
and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers,
Gather ye together first the tares,
and bind them in bundles to burn them:
but gather the wheat into my barn.
The kingdom of heaven is likened
unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Mat 13:25 But while men slept,
his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat,
and went his way.
Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up,
and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto
him,
Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field?
from whence then hath it tares?
Mat 13:28 He said unto them,
An enemy hath done this.
The servants said unto him,
Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay;
lest while ye gather up the tares,
ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest:
and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers,
Gather ye together first the tares,
and bind them in bundles to burn them:
but gather the wheat into my barn.
John Cooper
Nov 3, 2012, 11:47:22 AM11/3/12
to
<jwshe...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:b0a16006-dc98-4f1b...@h15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> [quote from Matthew 13:24-30]
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=487698987924316&set=a.329906680370215.92926.167938346567050&type=1&theater
John Cooper
news:b0a16006-dc98-4f1b...@h15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> [quote from Matthew 13:24-30]
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=487698987924316&set=a.329906680370215.92926.167938346567050&type=1&theater
John Cooper
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Nov 3, 2012, 4:06:47 PM11/3/12
to
"Pete" wrote in message news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 09:04:57 -0000, 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
wrote:
> You would have to have the ability to
> have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ.
Just like St. John tells the faithful.
"7 My little children, let no man lead you astray: he that doeth
righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous:"
1 John 3:6-7 (ASV)
Jeff...
"And those who are wise--the people of God-- shall shine as brightly as the
sun's brilliance, and those who turn many to righteousness, will GLITTER
like STARS forever"
Daniel 12:3 (TLB)
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 09:04:57 -0000, 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
wrote:
> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag)
No he wasn't, Pete, he never mentioned any filthy rags!
> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag)
> You would have to have the ability to
> have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ.
"7 My little children, let no man lead you astray: he that doeth
righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous:"
1 John 3:6-7 (ASV)
Jeff...
"And those who are wise--the people of God-- shall shine as brightly as the
sun's brilliance, and those who turn many to righteousness, will GLITTER
like STARS forever"
Daniel 12:3 (TLB)
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Nov 3, 2012, 4:15:34 PM11/3/12
to
"Pete" wrote in message news:x_dls.8729$kP4...@newsfe15.iad...
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:47:22 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> <jwshe...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
> the
> believer. Past, present, future.
Only if an immersed AFTER belief endures to the end, and myriads don't.
"13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall
endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."
Mark 13:13 (KJV)
>. Jesus the High Priest and sole mediator, says,
< It's covered under the blood. I see no sin impugned to their account.
Unless we sin wilfully and do not seek repentance.
"26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the
truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27 But a certain fearful
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the
adversaries."
Heb 10:26-27 (KJV)
Jeff...
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:47:22 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> <jwshe...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
>>> [quote from Matthew 13:24-30]
>>
>> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?>fbid=487698987924316&set=a.329906680370215.92926.167938346567050&type=1&theater
>>
>> John Cooper
> John, it is all covered under the blood of Jesus. All sin, forgiven for
>>
>> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?>fbid=487698987924316&set=a.329906680370215.92926.167938346567050&type=1&theater
>>
>> John Cooper
> the
> believer. Past, present, future.
Only if an immersed AFTER belief endures to the end, and myriads don't.
"13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall
endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."
Mark 13:13 (KJV)
>. Jesus the High Priest and sole mediator, says,
< It's covered under the blood. I see no sin impugned to their account.
Unless we sin wilfully and do not seek repentance.
"26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the
truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27 But a certain fearful
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the
adversaries."
Heb 10:26-27 (KJV)
Jeff...
Michael Christ
Nov 3, 2012, 5:04:06 PM11/3/12
to
On Nov 4, 2:07 am, "John Cooper" <bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
The want comfortability in their sin by claiming a theology for
salvation.
Jesus is able to make a man righteous, not theologically, but really
righteous. But the vast majority don't want that; they do not want to
change.
When if they were truly serious about God they would be tortured and
anguished and racked with discontent by their sin against Him.
Instead they walk around in self-righteousness.
God is no fool.
Michael Christ
wrote:
> "Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>
> news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>
> >> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
> >> saved according to Jesus.
> >> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
> >> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
> >> into the kingdom of heaven."
> >> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>
> > Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
> > rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
> > to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
> > gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
> > showed us.
>
> news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>
> >> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
> >> saved according to Jesus.
> >> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
> >> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
> >> into the kingdom of heaven."
> >> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>
> > Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
> > rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
> > to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
> > gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
> > showed us.
John wrote:
> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
> not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
> imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
> by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works
> would be the actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
They don't understand that.
> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
> not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
> imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
> by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works
> would be the actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
The want comfortability in their sin by claiming a theology for
salvation.
Jesus is able to make a man righteous, not theologically, but really
righteous. But the vast majority don't want that; they do not want to
change.
When if they were truly serious about God they would be tortured and
anguished and racked with discontent by their sin against Him.
Instead they walk around in self-righteousness.
God is no fool.
Michael Christ
John Cooper
Nov 3, 2012, 5:13:55 PM11/3/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:x_dls.8729$kP4...@newsfe15.iad...
>>> [quote from Matthew 13:24-30]
>>
>> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=487698987924316&set=a.329906680370215.92926.167938346567050&type=1&theater
> John, it is all covered under the blood of Jesus. All sin, forgiven for
> the believer. Past, present, future. Bought and paid for. Yes, Satan is
> the accuser before the Father. Jesus the High Priest and sole mediator,
> says, It's covered under the blood. I see no sin impugned to their
> account.
Another antinomian. They're everywhere. The churches are riddled with
> account.
them.
Christ died for our sins. Sins are forgiven to us if we repent of them. If
we do not repent of our sins, but hold on to them, we shall not be forgiven
them. Our future sins will be forgiven if, after having become conscious of
them, we then repent of them. Only a fool would deliberately commit a sin
on the understanding that it had already been forgiven. There is no
scripture to support this position, at all. The Holy Spirit convicts us of
sin, which conviction brings us to repentance. If Christians sin, then sin
lies on their account, until it is confessed, forsaken, and forgiven.
'Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be
not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the
kingdom of God.' (1.Corinthians 6:9,10)
'Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery,
fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred,
variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders,
drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I
have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not
inherit the kingdom of God.' (Galatians 5:19-21)
'For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous
man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and
of God.' (Ephesians 5:5)
'He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he
shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and
murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars,
shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone:
which is the second death.' (Revelation 21:7,8)
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 3, 2012, 5:36:19 PM11/3/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:4Dels.14892$mC....@newsfe16.iad...
>>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>>> showed us.
>>
>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>> not theological righteousness.
>
> Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
> Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
> the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
> Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come
> by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
We're not talking about seeking righteousness through the Mosaic Law, but
through faith in Christ. If you believe in Jesus, you will believe his
words. And if you believe his words, you will make a sincere effort to put
them into practice. And if you don't, you are building on the sand, and
will lose your soul - Matthew 7:26,27.
___________________________________________________________
>> The Bible does teach that righteousness is imputed to those who have
>> faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined by the Bible) always
>> leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works would be the
>> actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
>
Christ's sacrifice is perfect, but it only applies to those who believe in
him. If you don't do what he says, how can you say that you believe his
words? If you don't believe in Jesus, then his sacrifice will not save you.
______________________________________________________________
>> So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because he
>> washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all his
>> possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However he might be
>> an extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and
>> filthy-minded to boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness, both
>> in deeds and in the heart, without which there can be no entry into the
>> kingdom of heaven.
>
Read Matthew 7:21 to the end.
John Cooper
Michael Christ
Nov 3, 2012, 5:49:35 PM11/3/12
to
On Nov 4, 7:07 am, "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
<jnhickling[remove]@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> "Pete" wrote in messagenews:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
Your context is different from Pete's, Jeff.
However, you are right, St. John is telling the truth, and Daniel
prophesied the truth.
Michael Christ
<jnhickling[remove]@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> "Pete" wrote in messagenews:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
However, you are right, St. John is telling the truth, and Daniel
prophesied the truth.
Michael Christ
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 3, 2012, 8:35:00 PM11/3/12
to
On Nov 3, 4:13 pm, "John Cooper" <bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
"Another antinomian. They're everywhere. The churches are riddled
with
them."
Philipp Melanchthon's
The three uses of the law
'The first is the pedagogical or civil use, for God wills that all men
be compelled by the discipline of the Law, even the unregenerate, not
to commit outward sins'.
'it is a second and very important use of the law of God to show our
sin and to accuse, to terrify, and to condemn all men in this misuse
of human nature. For the law of God which has been revealed to men is
a perpetual judgment which condemns sin in the entire human race'
'The third use of the Law pertains to the regenerate. Insofar as the
regenerate have been justified by faith they are free from the Law...
that is, from the curse and condemnation and the wrath of God which is
set forth in the Law ...[Yet] the law must be preached to the
regenerate to teach them certain works in which God wills that we
practice obedience. For God does not will that we by our own wisdom
set up works or worship'.
All quotes from Philipp Melanchthon's Loci Communes (1543) translated
by JAO Preus, pp. 72-74.
http://the48files.blogspot.com/2009/06/three-uses-of-law.html
see also
http://reformedreader.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/the-uses-of-the-law/
wrote:
"Another antinomian. They're everywhere. The churches are riddled
with
them."
The three uses of the law
'The first is the pedagogical or civil use, for God wills that all men
be compelled by the discipline of the Law, even the unregenerate, not
to commit outward sins'.
'it is a second and very important use of the law of God to show our
sin and to accuse, to terrify, and to condemn all men in this misuse
of human nature. For the law of God which has been revealed to men is
a perpetual judgment which condemns sin in the entire human race'
'The third use of the Law pertains to the regenerate. Insofar as the
regenerate have been justified by faith they are free from the Law...
that is, from the curse and condemnation and the wrath of God which is
set forth in the Law ...[Yet] the law must be preached to the
regenerate to teach them certain works in which God wills that we
practice obedience. For God does not will that we by our own wisdom
set up works or worship'.
All quotes from Philipp Melanchthon's Loci Communes (1543) translated
by JAO Preus, pp. 72-74.
http://the48files.blogspot.com/2009/06/three-uses-of-law.html
see also
http://reformedreader.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/the-uses-of-the-law/
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
John Cooper
Nov 4, 2012, 6:32:23 AM11/4/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:dlnls.4118$ND1....@newsfe08.iad...
>>>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real
>>>> righteousness, not theological righteousness.
>>>
>>> Well that is a first!
>>> Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I,
>>> but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I
>>> live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for
>>> me.
>>> Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come
>>> by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
>>
>> We're not talking about seeking righteousness through the Mosaic Law, but
>> through faith in Christ. If you believe in Jesus, you will believe his
>> words. And if you believe his words, you will make a sincere effort to
>> put them into practice. And if you don't, you are building on the sand,
>> and will lose your soul - Matthew 7:26,27.
> verses above? It seems so as afar as I am concerned or do you see the
> verses arguing with you?
What are you wittering about, my friend? Do you think there is a
contradiction in the Bible between what Jesus said in Matthew 5:20 and what
Paul wrote in Galatians 2:20,21 ? If so, could you please elaborate? If
you don't see a contradiction, then what's your problem?
__________________________________________________________
>>>> The Bible does teach that righteousness is imputed to those who have
>>>> faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined by the Bible) always
>>>> leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works would be the
>>>> actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
>>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
>>>
>>> See the above. It is impossible to add to that which is perfect.
>>
>> Christ's sacrifice is perfect, but it only applies to those who believe
>> in him. If you don't do what he says, how can you say that you believe
>> his words? If you don't believe in Jesus, then his sacrifice will not
>> save you.
> Again, just what is your argument about? Are you not aware that the born
>>>> The Bible does teach that righteousness is imputed to those who have
>>>> faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined by the Bible) always
>>>> leads to works of righteousness by us. And these works would be the
>>>> actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
>>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
>>>
>>> See the above. It is impossible to add to that which is perfect.
>>
>> Christ's sacrifice is perfect, but it only applies to those who believe
>> in him. If you don't do what he says, how can you say that you believe
>> his words? If you don't believe in Jesus, then his sacrifice will not
>> save you.
> again believer has the righteousness of God? That this righteousness is
> far above anything we can see or do.
The person who believes Jesus' teachings, will surely seek to obey them.
Hence they will live righteously. If they were not brought up in a
Christian environment, then the change between their old way of living and
their new way of living, can be quite dramatic. Almost like having a new
life. This is what 'born again' means.
_____________________________________________________________
> Are you under some assumption that people are born again and have no
> repentance for their past sin?
Unless people repent of their past sins and are born again, they have no
chance of entering the kingdom of heaven.
___________________________________________________________
>>>> So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because
>>>> he washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all
>>>> his possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However he
>>>> might be an extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and
>>>> filthy-minded to boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness,
>>>> both in deeds and in the heart, without which there can be no entry
>>>> into the kingdom of heaven.
>>>
>>> See the verses above, then read the full chapter.
>>
>> Read Matthew 7:21 to the end.
> Why the contentiousness?
>>>> So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because
>>>> he washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all
>>>> his possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However he
>>>> might be an extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and
>>>> filthy-minded to boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness,
>>>> both in deeds and in the heart, without which there can be no entry
>>>> into the kingdom of heaven.
>>>
>>> See the verses above, then read the full chapter.
>>
>> Read Matthew 7:21 to the end.
Was it too difficult?
John Cooper
duke
Nov 4, 2012, 9:45:52 AM11/4/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 12:45:59 -0700, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
>Not quite sure what you mean. God gives grace to anyone that comes who also
somewhere between tying his shoes to living on your knees in prayer.
>From the meanest to the sweetest and none of us
>have any righteousness of value on our own.
Yet it was credited to Abraham because he believed God. But you don't even
follow the teachings of Jesus. Abraham had an easier time in salvation than you
will.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
A vote for obama is a vote for the end of
democracy in America as we know it. Let the
rolling thunder guide your decision at the
ballot box to put an end to Imperial Obama.
May God bless America.
********************************************
>believe in His son Jesus.
Please define said limits in what you mean by "believe in" Shirley it is
somewhere between tying his shoes to living on your knees in prayer.
>From the meanest to the sweetest and none of us
>have any righteousness of value on our own.
follow the teachings of Jesus. Abraham had an easier time in salvation than you
will.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
A vote for obama is a vote for the end of
democracy in America as we know it. Let the
rolling thunder guide your decision at the
ballot box to put an end to Imperial Obama.
May God bless America.
********************************************
duke
Nov 4, 2012, 9:51:33 AM11/4/12
to
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:07:28 -0000, "John Cooper"
<bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>
>>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>>> saved according to Jesus.
>>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>>
>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>> showed us.
>
>In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
>imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
>by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us.
You're close to destroying pete's entire belief system. He doesn't get it.
<bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>
>>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>>> saved according to Jesus.
>>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>>
>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>> showed us.
>
>In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>not theological righteousness. The Bible does teach that righteousness is
>imputed to those who have faith in Christ, but faith in Christ (as defined
>by the Bible) always leads to works of righteousness by us.
> And these works
>would be the actual righteousness which surpasses the mere letter-of-the-law
>righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.
Mark 12:28-31 (New International Version)
The Greatest Commandment
28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that
Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments,
which is the most important?”
29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The
Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart
and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[b] 31
The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c] There is no commandment
greater than these.”
>So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because he
>washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of all his
>possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath.
> However he might be an
>extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow, and filthy-minded to
>boot. Jesus was talking about real righteousness, both in deeds and in the
>heart, without which there can be no entry into the kingdom of heaven.
>
>John Cooper
duke
Nov 4, 2012, 9:52:34 AM11/4/12
to
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 12:53:29 -0700, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
>On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:07:28 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
>
>> "Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>> news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>>
>>>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>>>> saved according to Jesus.
>>>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>>>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>>>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>>>
>>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>>> showed us.
>>
>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>> not theological righteousness.
>
>Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
>Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
>the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
>Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by
>the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
>On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 15:07:28 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
>
>> "Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>> news:EE9ls.67190$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
>>
>>>> We must indeed have 'righteousness of value on our own' if we wish to be
>>>> saved according to Jesus.
>>>> "20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
>>>> righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
>>>> into the kingdom of heaven."
>>>> Matt 5:20 (KJV)
>>>
>>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>>> showed us.
>>
>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>> not theological righteousness.
>
>Well that is a first!
That's only because you don't know the bible.
>Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
>Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
>the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
>Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by
>the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
duke
Nov 4, 2012, 9:53:32 AM11/4/12
to
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 21:36:19 -0000, "John Cooper"
<bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>news:4Dels.14892$mC....@newsfe16.iad...
>
>>>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>>>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>>>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>>>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>>>> showed us.
>>>
>>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>>> not theological righteousness.
>>
>> Well that is a first!
>> Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
>> Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
>> the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
>> Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come
>> by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
>
>We're not talking about seeking righteousness through the Mosaic Law, but
>through faith in Christ. If you believe in Jesus, you will believe his
>words. And if you believe his words, you will make a sincere effort to put
>them into practice. And if you don't, you are building on the sand, and
>will lose your soul - Matthew 7:26,27.
SWOOSH - Pete is more Jewish than Christian.
<bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
>news:4Dels.14892$mC....@newsfe16.iad...
>
>>>> Jesus was tring to tell anyone that all our righteousness is as filthy
>>>> rags. (Actual wording. menstrual rag) You would have to have the ability
>>>> to have the same righteousness as Jesus Christ. No one can, except He
>>>> gives it as a gift. On our own, we'd never make it. That is what the Law
>>>> showed us.
>>>
>>> In the context of the passage, Jesus is talking about real righteousness,
>>> not theological righteousness.
>>
>> Well that is a first!
>> Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
>> Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
>> the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
>> Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come
>> by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
>
>We're not talking about seeking righteousness through the Mosaic Law, but
>through faith in Christ. If you believe in Jesus, you will believe his
>words. And if you believe his words, you will make a sincere effort to put
>them into practice. And if you don't, you are building on the sand, and
>will lose your soul - Matthew 7:26,27.
duke
Nov 4, 2012, 9:54:15 AM11/4/12
to
Message has been deleted
John Cooper
Nov 4, 2012, 2:11:41 PM11/4/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:bMwls.4293$ND1...@newsfe08.iad...
>> What are you wittering about, my friend? Do you think there is a
>> contradiction in the Bible between what Jesus said in Matthew 5:20 and
>> what Paul wrote in Galatians 2:20,21 ? If so, could you please
>> elaborate? If you don't see a contradiction, then what's your problem?
> you balk. The question was simple, and even in the original post of mine
> you responded as if you were scripturally affronted.
A time-waster as well. They're everywhere these days.
_____________________________________________________________
>>>> Christ's sacrifice is perfect, but it only applies to those who believe
>>>> in him. If you don't do what he says, how can you say that you believe
>>>> his words? If you don't believe in Jesus, then his sacrifice will not
>>>> save you.
>>
>>> Again, just what is your argument about? Are you not aware that the born
>>> again believer has the righteousness of God? That this righteousness is
>>> far above anything we can see or do.
>>
>> The person who believes Jesus' teachings, will surely seek to obey them.
>> Hence they will live righteously. If they were not brought up in a
>> Christian environment, then the change between their old way of living
>> and their new way of living, can be quite dramatic. Almost like having a
>> new life. This is what 'born again' means.
> skipped over, not twice, to the fact that a born again believe
> automatically has the righteousness of God attributed to their spirit. If
> you are not aware of this, then you are missing major portions of Gods
> Grace to us. It is Gods righteousness, in us, that justifies our going
> directly to God in prayer. Since the best we can do is pitiful works which
> amounts to a filthy rag.
I am 52 years old, raised in a conservative evangelical environment. I am
perfectly aware of what you believe, and also why I don't. Like many, your
view of what being 'born again' means, is culturally determined, and is not
in accordance with the word of God.
Those who are 'born again' are born again by the word of God - 1.Peter
1:23 - and that word is the gospel - 1.Peter 1:25. The gospel is the
teachings of Jesus, which we find in the four books called, appropriately
enough, the four Gospels.
We are born again by this word of truth - James 1:18 - if we turn from our
sins and humbly receive that word of truth, for it can save our souls -
James 1:21. But we must be doers of that word, and not hearers only, for
then we would be deceiving ourselves - James 1:22. But if we are doers of
the gospel, and not merely hearers only, then we shall be blessed - James
1:25. And if we follow the gospel's teaching, we shall live a new life.
And this is what it means to be born again.
Those who believe in Jesus, that is to say, who believe the gospel, that is
to say, who believe his message, these are justified by their faith in him,
and God forgives their sins, and will continue to do so, as long as they
continue to believe in his Son, that is to say, as long as they continue to
believe the gospel.
_____________________________________________________________
>>> Are you under some assumption that people are born again and have no
>>> repentance for their past sin?
>>
>> Unless people repent of their past sins and are born again, they have no
>> chance of entering the kingdom of heaven.
> Are you aware that God gives us the faith to believe first? Then once the
>>> Are you under some assumption that people are born again and have no
>>> repentance for their past sin?
>>
>> Unless people repent of their past sins and are born again, they have no
>> chance of entering the kingdom of heaven.
> light comes in we see our sin and shame and repent? Repent is nothing more
> than turning away from that which is undesirable, and asking for the
> forgiveness that has already been established for each person since Jesus
> died for the sins of every person on this planet or will be on this
> planet.
Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead to
good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also invariably
leads to good works, so those who are born again will definately have good
works. Those who don't have good works are not born again. And those who
are born again, are justified by their faith in Christ.
________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> So for example, the Pharisee might think that he is righteous because
>>>>>> he washes every day, rattles off his prayers, and gives a tenth of
>>>>>> all his possessions to the Temple, and rests on the Sabbath. However
>>>>>> he might be an extortioner, a hard-hearted landlord to a poor widow,
>>>>>> and filthy-minded to boot. Jesus was talking about real
>>>>>> righteousness, both in deeds and in the heart, without which there
>>>>>> can be no entry into the kingdom of heaven.
>>>>>
>>>>> See the verses above, then read the full chapter.
>>>>
>>>> Read Matthew 7:21 to the end.
>>
>>> Why the contentiousness?
>>
>> Was it too difficult?
>>
>
> the chapter?
Like I said, a time-waster.
John Cooper
Michael Christ
Nov 4, 2012, 3:46:52 PM11/4/12
to
John Cooper wrote:
> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead to
> good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also invariably
> leads to good works, so those who are born again will definately have good
> works. Those who don't have good works are not born again. And those who
> are born again, are justified by their faith in Christ.
Have...have been justified by faith in Christ.
> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead to
> good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also invariably
> leads to good works, so those who are born again will definately have good
> works. Those who don't have good works are not born again. And those who
> are born again, are justified by their faith in Christ.
But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
what God says faith is!
THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
Michael Christ
John Cooper
Nov 4, 2012, 4:03:43 PM11/4/12
to
"Michael Christ" <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5892e79e-234f-44fe...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
>> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead
>> to good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also
>> invariably leads to good works, so those who are born again will
>> definately have good works. Those who don't have good works are not born
>> again. And those who are born again, are justified by their faith in
>> Christ.
> Have...have been justified by faith in Christ.
Do I understand you correctly? There are scriptures which speak of
justification in the past, present and future tenses. Similarly, there are
scriptures which speak of forgiveness in the exactly the same way.
If we repent and believe, we shall be forgiven. Whenever we pray the Lord's
Prayer, we receive forgiveness for our sins. If we have confessed our sins
to God, then we have been forgiven.
_____________________________________________________
> But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> what God says faith is!
> THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
John Cooper
news:5892e79e-234f-44fe...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
>> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead
>> to good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also
>> invariably leads to good works, so those who are born again will
>> definately have good works. Those who don't have good works are not born
>> again. And those who are born again, are justified by their faith in
>> Christ.
> Have...have been justified by faith in Christ.
justification in the past, present and future tenses. Similarly, there are
scriptures which speak of forgiveness in the exactly the same way.
If we repent and believe, we shall be forgiven. Whenever we pray the Lord's
Prayer, we receive forgiveness for our sins. If we have confessed our sins
to God, then we have been forgiven.
_____________________________________________________
> But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> what God says faith is!
> THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
John Cooper
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 4, 2012, 5:22:03 PM11/4/12
to
http://www.presenttruthmag.com/7dayadventist/AwakeningPart2/3.html
Looking at Both Sides of the Paradox
Truth is of such a nature that very often it can only be expressed by
two statements which appear to be antithetical. We call these
statements paradoxes.
Let us take some examples of great truths which are expressed by
paradoxical statements:
1. The Human Nature of Christ: ". . . in all points tempted like as we
are; yet without sin", is a tremendous and mysterious paradox. How
could the One who was sinless in His human nature be tempted in all
points like us? "It is a mystery that is left unexplained . . ." 5
B.C. 1128-9.
Inspiration presents us with two groups of statements on the human
nature of Christ. One group of statements show how Christ's human
nature was just like ours. He was born of a woman, of our flesh and
blood, of the seed of David according to the flesh, was encompassed by
infirmities, was subject to the laws of heredity, and took our human
faculties after they had been weakened by 4,000 years of sin. The
other group of statements warn us against making Christ's human nature
altogether the same as ours—He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born
without a taint of sin, had no sinful propensities, was without the
passions of our fallen natures, had no sin in Him, knew no sin, and
was separate from sinners.
Now God has given us two eyes to see both sides of the paradox. If we
only see one side or emphasize one side, we shall distort the gospel.
We need to recognize both sides of the truth and allow each side to
have full weight.
2. A Christian's Relation to God: Isaiah commends those who tremble at
God's Word (Isa. 66:5). The Revelator commands us to "fear God" Rev.
14:7. And Paul exhorts us, "work out your own salvation with fear and
trembling" Phil. 2:12.
On the other hand the writer to the Hebrews invites us, "Let us
therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace.. ." "Having therefore,
brethren boldness to enter..." Heb. 4:16; 10:19.
Now are we to live before God with fear or with boldness? If we only
emphasize "fear and trembling", we may rob our souls of the confidence
we may have in the free access into God's grace. If we only consider
those statements which exhort us to have boldness we may fall into the
opposite error of presumption. As Luther says, the Christian must live
in the paradox of "desperate confidence".
3. The Nature of a Christian Man: Is the believer in Jesus a saint or
a sinner, righteous or unrighteous? Luther battled with this question
until he came up with the famous formula which was the foundation of
Protestant doctrine—simul justus et peccator, which means, "at the
same time righteous and sinful".
This is a great paradox, but the more it is examined, the more it
shines with light. A believer in Jesus is righteous because God
declares him justified, cleansed of all sin. Moreover, he is a new
creature, old things are passed away and all things have become new.
Yet he cannot claim to be without sin, must confess the sinfulness of
his nature, continues to fall short even when he does good, has need
of daily repentance, and must confess that he is an unprofitable
servant who defiles his best endeavours and holiest duties with his
corrupt channel of human imperfection (See 1 S.M. 344).
Consider the paradox of both saint and sinner in these statements:
"The closer you come to Jesus (saint), the more faulty you will appear
in your own eyes (sinner)." S.C. 64
"No deep-seated love for Jesus (righteous) can dwell in the heart that
does not realize its own sinfulness (unrighteous)." Ibid.
"Are you in Christ? (saint) Not if you do not acknowledge yourselves
erring, helpless, condemned sinners (sinner)". 5T 48
It is not as necessary to harmonize a paradox as it is to recognize
both statements as equally true. Suppose a sincere soul gathers those
statements together which speak of the righteous standing of the
saints and the victory over sin which they experience in their renewed
lives. Then the recognition of any sin or sinfulness in his life may
convince him that he is not a Christian. He would thus be robbed of
his shield of faith. Or if he is not in this way driven to
discouragement, he will be driven to hypocrisy by refusing to
recognize how much sin is still left in him. But consider the
consequences of the opposite error of those who only emphasize the
sinfulness of believers. If these statements are gathered together and
dwelt upon the impression may easily be given that overcoming sin is
not to be a reality in the life of a Christian.
4. Law and Gospel: Law commands us to run the way of God's
commandments, to labour and to fulfill all of its holy requirements.
But the gospel proclaims, "Stand ye still, and see the salvation of
the Lord", "Be still, and know that I am God." 2 Chron. 20:17; Ps.
46:10.
It is not an easy thing for the human mind to keep law and gospel in
proper tension. If law overshadows the gospel, people fall off the
path on the side of legalism. If gospel is presented to lessen the
tension of the law, people fall off the path on the side of
permissiveness.
The constant danger is that people will become "lazy through the
continual preaching of grace" (Bezzel) or pharisaical through the
urging of law. Luther said that some of his own people reminded him of
trying to get a drunken German peasant onto a horse — as soon as he
was pushed up on one side he would fall off on the other.
Law and gospel must not be "mingled and strewed together" in such a
way that one will lessen the force of the other. Both need to be
proclaimed in full strength. People must be as earnestly exhorted to
labour as to rest, to run as to stand still. The truth can only be
expressed by the two statements which appear to be opposite, "Come
unto Me...I will give you rest...Take My yoke...ye shall find rest."
"Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest." Matt. 11:28,29;
Heb. 4:11
5. Faith and Works: "While good works will not save even one soul, yet
it is impossible for even one soul to be saved without good works." 1
S.M. 377 And because this is a paradox, the servant of the Lord adds,
"It is hard for the mind to comprehend this point." Ibid, 378-379
It was Melancthon who said: "We are justified by faith alone; but the
faith which justifies us is never alone." And Luther declared: "Since
we are preaching faith in Christ, papists come on and slander us by
saying we forbid good works, that we preach too sweetly, that people
become lax and lazy through such preaching. And in a sense this is
true. There are many among us who understand the message of the gospel
in such a way as to imagine that they now need do no good, suffer
nothing, and give nothing... If one preaches the comfort of faith,
people become coarse and wanton; but if one does not preach it, there
is nothing but fear and trembling in the poor consciences." What
Luther Says (Ewald M. Plass) Vol.11, p.742.
6. Justification and Sanctification: We cannot speak without paradoxes
when we deal with the relation between justification and
sanctification. The whole of Church history has been a struggle to
hold them in proper tension.
We are justified solely by a work outside of ourselves, but we are
sanctified by His Spirit within us. The essence of Roman Catholic
legalism is to depend on the work of inward renewal for acceptance
with God. But the essence of Protestant antinomianism is to suppose
that we can be sanctified and fitted for heaven by Christ's work
outside of us.
No amount of sanctification can secure one's admittance to the kingdom
of grace; but a failure to pursue sanctification can result in one
being cast out. Justification is always endangered if sanctification
is not exercised. The blessing of justification cannot be sustained by
good works, but unless the believer is careful to maintain good works,
he will not retain his justification. Obedience cannot secure the
blessing of forgiveness; but by disobedience the blessing can be lost.
But now we must look at the other side of the picture. Sanctification
is endangered if it is not based on justification. There must be a
constant return to justification, to the word of forgiveness if
sanctification is to be preserved from Pharisaism and self-
righteousness. Prayer and service are only good by gracious
acceptance. The truth of justification calls all that we do in
question. True Christian growth can only exist where there is a
growing appreciation of justification. We can never reach a point in
our progress in sanctification where our acceptance with God does not
rest entirely on forgiveness of sins.
The constant need of justification by faith means that sin is
inescapable—for there is no man on earth that does not sin (Eccles.
7:20), and all continue to fall short of God's glory (Rom.3:23). But
sanctification teaches us of our positive duty to avoid sin. On one
hand we are called to repose, on the other to a life of fervent
activity.
Justification gives us perfection and sanctification urges us to press
on toward it. Through justifying faith the heart is cleansed of all
sin; yet are we called to go on purifying our souls by obeying the
truth. And so we could go on to enumerate many aspects of the
paradoxical relation between justification and sanctification. It is
the paradox of present possession and future hope, to be pure and yet
impure; to possess all things yet have nothing (2 Cor. 6:10); to rest
in faith yet labour in love; to be made free by faith yet to be made a
servant of all by love; to be consoled yet to be admonished. And we
think of the paradoxical experience of the great apostle:
"We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed,
but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not
destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord
Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.
For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake,
that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal
flesh." 2 Cor. 4:8-11
Wrongly Relating to the Paradox
There are two things that we must not do with a paradox—yet in our
immaturity we are very inclined to make these two mistakes:
1. Bending one side of the paradox to fit the other: We are inclined
to accept one side of the paradox as the pre-eminent truth.
Consequently, we then proceed to bend the statements on the other side
to fit the opposite side of the paradox. Let us illustrate:
Suppose we take those statements of inspiration which show that Christ
was separate from sinners, and make that our major thesis. The danger
is that we do not let that other group of statements about Christ
sharing our hereditary infirmities have full weight. In fact, we might
try to explain them away by saying that such weaknesses were not an
inherent part of His human nature, but were only imputed to Him just
as the sins of the world were imputed to Him. Or supposing we make the
opposite group of statements our major premise; then when we read "We
should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the
human nature of Christ" (5 B.C. 1131), we start to do some fancy
theological footwork, and say, "Oh, that is not talking about the
human nature which He took at birth but to the human nature which He
revealed in His life."
Let us take another illustration of trying to bend one side of the
paradox to fit the other. Protestantism is divided between the
Calvinistic and Arminian streams of thought. Actually either side is
the result of an exaggerated emphasis on divine predestination on the
one hand and human responsibility on the other. The Calvinists seize
certain statements about predestination—and let's face it, they are in
the Bible. But instead of looking at the other side of the paradox and
giving it equal weight, the Calvinists proceed to bend the Bible
statements about universal atonement to fit their concept of
predestination. They labour hard and long to explain away those
specific Bible passages which declare that Christ died for all men.
This pinpoints the danger of so-called Systematic Theology—and the
greatest systematic theologians are the Calvinists. It was the German
theologian, H. Bezzel who said, "Extreme views have the advantage of
remarkable consistency." p.64. That statement is worth thinking about.
Instead of accepting one side of the paradox as the essential truth,
and then trying to bend the other side to fit (this is often called
the art of "harmonizing the apparent contradictions of the Bible") we
must allow both sides of the paradox to have full weight and to stand
in their undiluted strength. It is the mark of maturity to accept the
fact that infinite truth is often expressed to the finite mind in two
antithetical statements.
2. Resolving the paradox: Trying to resolve a paradox may be even
worse than bending one side to fit the other. Let us take a familiar
illustration:
The Christian man is simul justus et peccator — at the same time
righteous and sinful. The nearer he comes to Christ, the more sinful
he sees himself to be. Now a "final atonement experience" as we once
conceived of it would certainly resolve the paradox. After that the
saints would supposedly keep drawing nearer to Christ, but they would
no longer be "troubled" by the humbling consciousness of their own
sinfulness. Certain of our ideas on the final atonement were an
attempt to resolve the paradox of the demand for perfection of
Christian character and the need for continual confession of human
sinfulness; of the necessity and obligation of complete victory over
sin on the one hand, and constant repentance on the other hand.
Any resolving of the paradox in this life can only end in a distorted,
or at best, partial view of the truth. "Extreme views have the
advantage of remarkable consistency."
Consider also what this call to holiness and confession of abiding sin
means in our concept of the Church as a whole. Inspiration speaks of a
church without spot or wrinkle in the last days, a church going forth
conquering and to conquer. But this is only one side of the paradox.
Unless we give the other side equal weight, we will end up with an
exaggerated picture of the "loud cry church". We are also told that
evils will exist in the church till the end of time. If one then says,
"How can it be a pure church?", we will reply, "If a Christian still
has sin in him, how can he be said to be cleansed from all
unrighteousness?" (1 John 1:8,9) If the single believer is certainly
the aggregate of believers are simul justus et peccator.
How to Relate to the Paradox
In this life we must live by accepting and living with the paradox of
having and not having, of being righteous and unrighteous, of being
complete and incomplete, of rest and activity, of believing and
working, of confidence and fear, of being able to do all things
through Christ and not being able to do the things that we would, of
avoiding sin and confessing its inevitability, of victory over sin and
mourning that when we would do good evil is present with us, of
advancement and repentance, of freedom and subjection, and so on. It
is the mark of immaturity, we repeat, to emphasize only one side of
the paradox, especially so as to cancel out the truth of the other
side.
Law and gospel, faith and works, justification and sanctification and
all the great paradoxes need to be kept in proper tension. If we
proclaim the glory of His justifying grace and imagine that this alone
will motivate people to earnestly pursue sanctification, it will not
be long before we shall realize that people need to be warned and
sharply admonished in the pathway of obedience. But lest the language
of Christian experience become all too loud and confident, there must
be a return to the critical sternness of justification otherwise
sanctification will turn into romanticism or dangerous "holiness"
pretensions.
Think of flying a plane. There are two antithetical forces — gravity
and speed. One must not cancel out the other, but the secret of flying
is to keep both in proper tension. If the tension of speed against
gravity is not maintained you come crashing down. If gravity ceases
you go off into orbit somewhere.
Now think of gravity as the power of indwelling sin, and speed as the
power of sanctifying grace. Human "wisdom" may lead us to think we
could make better spiritual flight if we could find some way to do
away with the limiting pull of "gravity". But as long as we are in
this world we need this "gravity"—it is part of the curse that God
uses to bless us (Gen. 3:17). How can a curse bless us? Well, that is
another paradox.
Looking at Both Sides of the Paradox
Truth is of such a nature that very often it can only be expressed by
two statements which appear to be antithetical. We call these
statements paradoxes.
Let us take some examples of great truths which are expressed by
paradoxical statements:
1. The Human Nature of Christ: ". . . in all points tempted like as we
are; yet without sin", is a tremendous and mysterious paradox. How
could the One who was sinless in His human nature be tempted in all
points like us? "It is a mystery that is left unexplained . . ." 5
B.C. 1128-9.
Inspiration presents us with two groups of statements on the human
nature of Christ. One group of statements show how Christ's human
nature was just like ours. He was born of a woman, of our flesh and
blood, of the seed of David according to the flesh, was encompassed by
infirmities, was subject to the laws of heredity, and took our human
faculties after they had been weakened by 4,000 years of sin. The
other group of statements warn us against making Christ's human nature
altogether the same as ours—He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born
without a taint of sin, had no sinful propensities, was without the
passions of our fallen natures, had no sin in Him, knew no sin, and
was separate from sinners.
Now God has given us two eyes to see both sides of the paradox. If we
only see one side or emphasize one side, we shall distort the gospel.
We need to recognize both sides of the truth and allow each side to
have full weight.
2. A Christian's Relation to God: Isaiah commends those who tremble at
God's Word (Isa. 66:5). The Revelator commands us to "fear God" Rev.
14:7. And Paul exhorts us, "work out your own salvation with fear and
trembling" Phil. 2:12.
On the other hand the writer to the Hebrews invites us, "Let us
therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace.. ." "Having therefore,
brethren boldness to enter..." Heb. 4:16; 10:19.
Now are we to live before God with fear or with boldness? If we only
emphasize "fear and trembling", we may rob our souls of the confidence
we may have in the free access into God's grace. If we only consider
those statements which exhort us to have boldness we may fall into the
opposite error of presumption. As Luther says, the Christian must live
in the paradox of "desperate confidence".
3. The Nature of a Christian Man: Is the believer in Jesus a saint or
a sinner, righteous or unrighteous? Luther battled with this question
until he came up with the famous formula which was the foundation of
Protestant doctrine—simul justus et peccator, which means, "at the
same time righteous and sinful".
This is a great paradox, but the more it is examined, the more it
shines with light. A believer in Jesus is righteous because God
declares him justified, cleansed of all sin. Moreover, he is a new
creature, old things are passed away and all things have become new.
Yet he cannot claim to be without sin, must confess the sinfulness of
his nature, continues to fall short even when he does good, has need
of daily repentance, and must confess that he is an unprofitable
servant who defiles his best endeavours and holiest duties with his
corrupt channel of human imperfection (See 1 S.M. 344).
Consider the paradox of both saint and sinner in these statements:
"The closer you come to Jesus (saint), the more faulty you will appear
in your own eyes (sinner)." S.C. 64
"No deep-seated love for Jesus (righteous) can dwell in the heart that
does not realize its own sinfulness (unrighteous)." Ibid.
"Are you in Christ? (saint) Not if you do not acknowledge yourselves
erring, helpless, condemned sinners (sinner)". 5T 48
It is not as necessary to harmonize a paradox as it is to recognize
both statements as equally true. Suppose a sincere soul gathers those
statements together which speak of the righteous standing of the
saints and the victory over sin which they experience in their renewed
lives. Then the recognition of any sin or sinfulness in his life may
convince him that he is not a Christian. He would thus be robbed of
his shield of faith. Or if he is not in this way driven to
discouragement, he will be driven to hypocrisy by refusing to
recognize how much sin is still left in him. But consider the
consequences of the opposite error of those who only emphasize the
sinfulness of believers. If these statements are gathered together and
dwelt upon the impression may easily be given that overcoming sin is
not to be a reality in the life of a Christian.
4. Law and Gospel: Law commands us to run the way of God's
commandments, to labour and to fulfill all of its holy requirements.
But the gospel proclaims, "Stand ye still, and see the salvation of
the Lord", "Be still, and know that I am God." 2 Chron. 20:17; Ps.
46:10.
It is not an easy thing for the human mind to keep law and gospel in
proper tension. If law overshadows the gospel, people fall off the
path on the side of legalism. If gospel is presented to lessen the
tension of the law, people fall off the path on the side of
permissiveness.
The constant danger is that people will become "lazy through the
continual preaching of grace" (Bezzel) or pharisaical through the
urging of law. Luther said that some of his own people reminded him of
trying to get a drunken German peasant onto a horse — as soon as he
was pushed up on one side he would fall off on the other.
Law and gospel must not be "mingled and strewed together" in such a
way that one will lessen the force of the other. Both need to be
proclaimed in full strength. People must be as earnestly exhorted to
labour as to rest, to run as to stand still. The truth can only be
expressed by the two statements which appear to be opposite, "Come
unto Me...I will give you rest...Take My yoke...ye shall find rest."
"Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest." Matt. 11:28,29;
Heb. 4:11
5. Faith and Works: "While good works will not save even one soul, yet
it is impossible for even one soul to be saved without good works." 1
S.M. 377 And because this is a paradox, the servant of the Lord adds,
"It is hard for the mind to comprehend this point." Ibid, 378-379
It was Melancthon who said: "We are justified by faith alone; but the
faith which justifies us is never alone." And Luther declared: "Since
we are preaching faith in Christ, papists come on and slander us by
saying we forbid good works, that we preach too sweetly, that people
become lax and lazy through such preaching. And in a sense this is
true. There are many among us who understand the message of the gospel
in such a way as to imagine that they now need do no good, suffer
nothing, and give nothing... If one preaches the comfort of faith,
people become coarse and wanton; but if one does not preach it, there
is nothing but fear and trembling in the poor consciences." What
Luther Says (Ewald M. Plass) Vol.11, p.742.
6. Justification and Sanctification: We cannot speak without paradoxes
when we deal with the relation between justification and
sanctification. The whole of Church history has been a struggle to
hold them in proper tension.
We are justified solely by a work outside of ourselves, but we are
sanctified by His Spirit within us. The essence of Roman Catholic
legalism is to depend on the work of inward renewal for acceptance
with God. But the essence of Protestant antinomianism is to suppose
that we can be sanctified and fitted for heaven by Christ's work
outside of us.
No amount of sanctification can secure one's admittance to the kingdom
of grace; but a failure to pursue sanctification can result in one
being cast out. Justification is always endangered if sanctification
is not exercised. The blessing of justification cannot be sustained by
good works, but unless the believer is careful to maintain good works,
he will not retain his justification. Obedience cannot secure the
blessing of forgiveness; but by disobedience the blessing can be lost.
But now we must look at the other side of the picture. Sanctification
is endangered if it is not based on justification. There must be a
constant return to justification, to the word of forgiveness if
sanctification is to be preserved from Pharisaism and self-
righteousness. Prayer and service are only good by gracious
acceptance. The truth of justification calls all that we do in
question. True Christian growth can only exist where there is a
growing appreciation of justification. We can never reach a point in
our progress in sanctification where our acceptance with God does not
rest entirely on forgiveness of sins.
The constant need of justification by faith means that sin is
inescapable—for there is no man on earth that does not sin (Eccles.
7:20), and all continue to fall short of God's glory (Rom.3:23). But
sanctification teaches us of our positive duty to avoid sin. On one
hand we are called to repose, on the other to a life of fervent
activity.
Justification gives us perfection and sanctification urges us to press
on toward it. Through justifying faith the heart is cleansed of all
sin; yet are we called to go on purifying our souls by obeying the
truth. And so we could go on to enumerate many aspects of the
paradoxical relation between justification and sanctification. It is
the paradox of present possession and future hope, to be pure and yet
impure; to possess all things yet have nothing (2 Cor. 6:10); to rest
in faith yet labour in love; to be made free by faith yet to be made a
servant of all by love; to be consoled yet to be admonished. And we
think of the paradoxical experience of the great apostle:
"We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed,
but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not
destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord
Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.
For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake,
that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal
flesh." 2 Cor. 4:8-11
Wrongly Relating to the Paradox
There are two things that we must not do with a paradox—yet in our
immaturity we are very inclined to make these two mistakes:
1. Bending one side of the paradox to fit the other: We are inclined
to accept one side of the paradox as the pre-eminent truth.
Consequently, we then proceed to bend the statements on the other side
to fit the opposite side of the paradox. Let us illustrate:
Suppose we take those statements of inspiration which show that Christ
was separate from sinners, and make that our major thesis. The danger
is that we do not let that other group of statements about Christ
sharing our hereditary infirmities have full weight. In fact, we might
try to explain them away by saying that such weaknesses were not an
inherent part of His human nature, but were only imputed to Him just
as the sins of the world were imputed to Him. Or supposing we make the
opposite group of statements our major premise; then when we read "We
should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the
human nature of Christ" (5 B.C. 1131), we start to do some fancy
theological footwork, and say, "Oh, that is not talking about the
human nature which He took at birth but to the human nature which He
revealed in His life."
Let us take another illustration of trying to bend one side of the
paradox to fit the other. Protestantism is divided between the
Calvinistic and Arminian streams of thought. Actually either side is
the result of an exaggerated emphasis on divine predestination on the
one hand and human responsibility on the other. The Calvinists seize
certain statements about predestination—and let's face it, they are in
the Bible. But instead of looking at the other side of the paradox and
giving it equal weight, the Calvinists proceed to bend the Bible
statements about universal atonement to fit their concept of
predestination. They labour hard and long to explain away those
specific Bible passages which declare that Christ died for all men.
This pinpoints the danger of so-called Systematic Theology—and the
greatest systematic theologians are the Calvinists. It was the German
theologian, H. Bezzel who said, "Extreme views have the advantage of
remarkable consistency." p.64. That statement is worth thinking about.
Instead of accepting one side of the paradox as the essential truth,
and then trying to bend the other side to fit (this is often called
the art of "harmonizing the apparent contradictions of the Bible") we
must allow both sides of the paradox to have full weight and to stand
in their undiluted strength. It is the mark of maturity to accept the
fact that infinite truth is often expressed to the finite mind in two
antithetical statements.
2. Resolving the paradox: Trying to resolve a paradox may be even
worse than bending one side to fit the other. Let us take a familiar
illustration:
The Christian man is simul justus et peccator — at the same time
righteous and sinful. The nearer he comes to Christ, the more sinful
he sees himself to be. Now a "final atonement experience" as we once
conceived of it would certainly resolve the paradox. After that the
saints would supposedly keep drawing nearer to Christ, but they would
no longer be "troubled" by the humbling consciousness of their own
sinfulness. Certain of our ideas on the final atonement were an
attempt to resolve the paradox of the demand for perfection of
Christian character and the need for continual confession of human
sinfulness; of the necessity and obligation of complete victory over
sin on the one hand, and constant repentance on the other hand.
Any resolving of the paradox in this life can only end in a distorted,
or at best, partial view of the truth. "Extreme views have the
advantage of remarkable consistency."
Consider also what this call to holiness and confession of abiding sin
means in our concept of the Church as a whole. Inspiration speaks of a
church without spot or wrinkle in the last days, a church going forth
conquering and to conquer. But this is only one side of the paradox.
Unless we give the other side equal weight, we will end up with an
exaggerated picture of the "loud cry church". We are also told that
evils will exist in the church till the end of time. If one then says,
"How can it be a pure church?", we will reply, "If a Christian still
has sin in him, how can he be said to be cleansed from all
unrighteousness?" (1 John 1:8,9) If the single believer is certainly
the aggregate of believers are simul justus et peccator.
How to Relate to the Paradox
In this life we must live by accepting and living with the paradox of
having and not having, of being righteous and unrighteous, of being
complete and incomplete, of rest and activity, of believing and
working, of confidence and fear, of being able to do all things
through Christ and not being able to do the things that we would, of
avoiding sin and confessing its inevitability, of victory over sin and
mourning that when we would do good evil is present with us, of
advancement and repentance, of freedom and subjection, and so on. It
is the mark of immaturity, we repeat, to emphasize only one side of
the paradox, especially so as to cancel out the truth of the other
side.
Law and gospel, faith and works, justification and sanctification and
all the great paradoxes need to be kept in proper tension. If we
proclaim the glory of His justifying grace and imagine that this alone
will motivate people to earnestly pursue sanctification, it will not
be long before we shall realize that people need to be warned and
sharply admonished in the pathway of obedience. But lest the language
of Christian experience become all too loud and confident, there must
be a return to the critical sternness of justification otherwise
sanctification will turn into romanticism or dangerous "holiness"
pretensions.
Think of flying a plane. There are two antithetical forces — gravity
and speed. One must not cancel out the other, but the secret of flying
is to keep both in proper tension. If the tension of speed against
gravity is not maintained you come crashing down. If gravity ceases
you go off into orbit somewhere.
Now think of gravity as the power of indwelling sin, and speed as the
power of sanctifying grace. Human "wisdom" may lead us to think we
could make better spiritual flight if we could find some way to do
away with the limiting pull of "gravity". But as long as we are in
this world we need this "gravity"—it is part of the curse that God
uses to bless us (Gen. 3:17). How can a curse bless us? Well, that is
another paradox.
vince garcia
Nov 4, 2012, 5:31:58 PM11/4/12
to
existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
from sin
MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
MC: As you know full well, yes, I am saying that I do not sin.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
John Cooper
Nov 4, 2012, 5:40:36 PM11/4/12
to
"vince garcia" <vggar...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:5096EC...@ix.netcom.com...
> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> from sin
>
> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> MC: As you know full well, yes, I am saying that I do not sin.
I see. If that is the case, then sadly we do not mean the same thing. I do
not believe that those who are born again are sinless. I believe that those
who are born again sin less, a lot less that those who think that believing
that Jesus died for their sins means that they have been born again.
John Cooper
news:5096EC...@ix.netcom.com...
> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> from sin
>
> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> MC: As you know full well, yes, I am saying that I do not sin.
not believe that those who are born again are sinless. I believe that those
who are born again sin less, a lot less that those who think that believing
that Jesus died for their sins means that they have been born again.
John Cooper
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
vince garcia
Nov 4, 2012, 8:05:02 PM11/4/12
to
Pete wrote:
> and just what do you do with the verses that say walk in the spirit and you
> will not sin.
No verse says that. It says you will not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
That's not equal to 24/7 sinlessness in thought/word/deed as MC thinks
HE is
You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
> will not sin.
No verse says that. It says you will not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
That's not equal to 24/7 sinlessness in thought/word/deed as MC thinks
HE is
You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 4, 2012, 8:16:38 PM11/4/12
to
Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord;
for in thy sight shall no man living be justified. Psalm 143:2.
for in thy sight shall no man living be justified. Psalm 143:2.
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 1:49:19 AM11/5/12
to
On Nov 5, 8:03 am, "John Cooper" <bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
> "Michael Christ" <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Perhaps this will clarify even further: a sinner has his standard of
what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
This is God's standard...
Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
shall save it.
Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
There you go, one in each gospel.
Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
the boat.
If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
unacceptable.
Michael Christ
wrote:
> "Michael Christ" <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
This is God's standard...
Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
shall save it.
Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
There you go, one in each gospel.
Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
the boat.
If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
unacceptable.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 2:03:11 AM11/5/12
to
On Nov 5, 11:25 am, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> > "vince garcia" <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
Pete wrote:
> and just what do you do with the verses that say walk in the spirit and you
> will not sin.
You flush them down the toilet with Vince's philosophy. :-).
> and just what do you do with the verses that say walk in the spirit and you
> will not sin.
Along with these verses...
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto
sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye
should obey it in the lusts thereof.
Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that
are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
righteousness unto God.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not
under the law, but under grace.
1Co_15:34 (KJV) Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have
not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
1Jn_2:1 (KJV) My little children, these things write I unto you,
that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the
Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1Jn_3:9 (KJV) Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his
seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye
through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
We must all remember though, no one can walk greater than Vince Garcia
and his religion in his sin.
Michael Christ
Message has been deleted
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 4:23:16 AM11/5/12
to
On Nov 5, 9:42 am, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 21:13:55 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> > John Cooper
Pete wrote:
> Snipped so as to not waste time, but to let you know I read it. The word of
> God disagrees with you in part.
What a pathetic self-centred response!
You leave your neighbour with an innuendo of wrong, a stain, without
any explanation, and present yourself as the high ground of
righteousness.
How you people can walk in the spirit of this world and even think of
yourselves as being in Christ for a moment is a monumental delusion!
Michael Christ
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 21:13:55 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> > John Cooper
Pete wrote:
> Snipped so as to not waste time, but to let you know I read it. The word of
> God disagrees with you in part.
What a pathetic self-centred response!
You leave your neighbour with an innuendo of wrong, a stain, without
any explanation, and present yourself as the high ground of
righteousness.
How you people can walk in the spirit of this world and even think of
yourselves as being in Christ for a moment is a monumental delusion!
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 4:32:35 AM11/5/12
to
> > "Michael Christ" <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
finger, and summarised according to his belligerent ignorance:
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
> >news:5892e79e-234f-44fe...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
> > >> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead
> > >> to good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also
> > >> invariably leads to good works, so those who are born again will
> > >> definately have good works. Those who don't have good works are not born
> > >> again. And those who are born again, are justified by their faith in
> > >> Christ.
>
> > > Have...have been justified by faith in Christ.
>
> > Do I understand you correctly? There are scriptures which speak of
> > justification in the past, present and future tenses. Similarly, there are
> > scriptures which speak of forgiveness in the exactly the same way.
>
> > If we repent and believe, we shall be forgiven. Whenever we pray the Lord's
> > Prayer, we receive forgiveness for our sins. If we have confessed our sins
> > to God, then we have been forgiven.
> > _____________________________________________________
>
> > > But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> > > what God says faith is!
>
> > > THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
>
> > I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
>
> > John Cooper
Vincent Garcia the self-righteous pure sinner pointed his golden
>
> > >> Predestination is a mystery best left to God. The important thing is to
> > >> believe in Jesus. If we believe him, we shall repent, and this will lead
> > >> to good works - Matthew 21:28-31; Acts 26:20. Faith in Christ also
> > >> invariably leads to good works, so those who are born again will
> > >> definately have good works. Those who don't have good works are not born
> > >> again. And those who are born again, are justified by their faith in
> > >> Christ.
>
> > > Have...have been justified by faith in Christ.
>
> > Do I understand you correctly? There are scriptures which speak of
> > justification in the past, present and future tenses. Similarly, there are
> > scriptures which speak of forgiveness in the exactly the same way.
>
> > If we repent and believe, we shall be forgiven. Whenever we pray the Lord's
> > Prayer, we receive forgiveness for our sins. If we have confessed our sins
> > to God, then we have been forgiven.
> > _____________________________________________________
>
> > > But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> > > what God says faith is!
>
> > > THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
>
> > I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
>
> > John Cooper
finger, and summarised according to his belligerent ignorance:
> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> from sin
>
> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> MC: As you know full well, yes, I am saying that I do not sin.
You are far too comfortable in your sin, Vincent Garcia.
> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> from sin
>
> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> MC: As you know full well, yes, I am saying that I do not sin.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 6:07:51 AM11/5/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:SHDls.15037$td7....@newsfe22.iad...
>> I see. If that is the case, then sadly we do not mean the same thing. I
>> do not believe that those who are born again are sinless. I believe that
>> those who are born again sin less, a lot less that those who think that
>> believing that Jesus died for their sins means that they have been born
>> again.
>
> and just what do you do with the verses that say walk in the spirit and
> you will not sin.
'This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of
> you will not sin.
the flesh.' (Galatians 5:16)
'Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery,
fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred,
variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders,
drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I
have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not
inherit the kingdom of God.' (Galatians 5:19-21)
We cannot walk in the Spirit, and at the same time commit the sins listed
above. These sins are particularly heinous, and those who do these things
will not inheit the kingdom of God. But there are other sins, the like of
which are included when we pray 'forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive
those who trespass against us'. Obviously it is taken for granted that not
all sins are equal. This is understood by earthly judges, and the Just
Judge is no less just.
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 6:08:08 AM11/5/12
to
"vince garcia" <vggar...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:509710...@ix.netcom.com...
>> and just what do you do with the verses that say walk in the spirit and
>> you will not sin.
>
> No verse says that. It says you will not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
> That's not equal to 24/7 sinlessness in thought/word/deed as MC thinks
> HE is
>
> You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
forgive us our trespasses...' So I assume that he assumes that we shall not
achieve sinless perfection in this life. However, there are sins, which if
a Christian commits, then he/she is to be excommunicated from the church,
and if not repented of before death, it will exclude them from the coming
kingdom.
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 6:08:14 AM11/5/12
to
"Michael Christ" <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cac7b2e5-f221-4c43...@qi10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>>> But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
>>> what God says faith is!
>>> THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
>>
>> I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
> Perhaps this will clarify even further: a sinner has his standard of
> what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
>
> This is God's standard...
>
> Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
> loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
>
> Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
> whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
> shall save it.
>
> Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
> whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
>
> Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
> hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
>
> There you go, one in each gospel.
>
> Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
> multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
> the boat.
>
> If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
> unacceptable.
I accept those verses. How do you interpret them?
> what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
>
> This is God's standard...
>
> Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
> loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
>
> Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
> whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
> shall save it.
>
> Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
> whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
>
> Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
> hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
>
> There you go, one in each gospel.
>
> Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
> multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
> the boat.
>
> If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
> unacceptable.
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 6:08:21 AM11/5/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:RCJls.19855$2Q3....@newsfe25.iad...
> In Heb it says....
> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that
> the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
>
> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
> the theologies of the churches?
People were aware of forgiveness of sins in the Old Testament, and
presumably they felt forgiven after they had confessed their sins, and
offered the sacrifice required by the Law. But there was never any
all-encompassing sacrifice, offered once-for-all, which could supply the
basis for their forgiveness on confession. In the NT we have such a
sacrifice, which needs no repetition, as it is valid for all time. The
verse does not imply that Christians do not get *convicted of sin* by the
Holy Spirit, and led to repentance, and thus forgiveness.
____________________________________________________________
> How does that fit in with this?
> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
> the first, that he may establish the second.
> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the
> body of Jesus Christ once for all.
> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
> footstool.
> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
> sanctified.
In verse 10, the 'once for all' refers to the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ, not to the sanctification. The means by which we are sanctified, is
the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ. In verse 14, we see that
sanctification is ongoing (literally 'those being sanctified'). But this
present experience depends on Christ's completed work on the cross, which we
are availing ourselves of, by our daily faith. In a similar way, Christ
died once for our sins, but we receive that forgiveness personally whenever
we confess our sins and receive forgiveness for them. This is a lifelong
experience, based on a once-for-all sacrifice.
___________________________________________________________
>> You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
>
> Yes?
>
> Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that
> he had said before,
> Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those
> days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their
> minds will I write them;
> Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Surely this refers to forgiven sins. 'If we confess our sins, he is
faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness' (1.John 1:9) That verse was written to Christians. So
Christians are also going to confess their sins, as they become aware of
them. But then, once forgiven, they are forgotten.
___________________________________________________________________
> 1Co 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the
> knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
When one reads this epistle, it is not surprising that Paul writes these
words, for there were people there who were schismatic, there was strife and
envying, fornication, in one case, which they weren't even bothered about,
they were suing each other in court, Paul has to remind them that Christians
don't visit prostitutes, there were heresies there, people were getting
drunk at the Lord's Table, and not a few had died as a result of abusing the
Lord's Supper. There was confusion over the gifts, so that Paul had to
point out how to tell the difference between Christian manifestations and
pagan ones, there was even denial of the resurrection. So there were a lot
of problems at Corinth.
______________________________________________________
> Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who
> walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
>
> That verse should answer the question about where is the law in the
> believer? It is fulfilled in us as it was in the Lord.
The Law is only fulfilled in us, if we walk after the Spirit, and not after
the flesh. This is what it means to fulfil the Law
'Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another
hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt
not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou
shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly
comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the
fulfilling of the law.' (Romans 13:8-10)
____________________________________________________________
> Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for
> sin.
There is no more offering for sin, because Jesus is the last and perfect
sacrifice.
John Cooper
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 7:23:12 AM11/5/12
to
Pete wrote:
> Vince, you're correct. At least in that I cannot find the verse written as
> I recalled it. However, for the sake of discussion let us leave it as you
> have written the verse,
> Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the
> lust of the flesh.
> Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against
> the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot
> do the things that ye would.
>
> Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
> So the question is, if we be led of the Spirit and we are not under the
> law, then how does one commit sin?
>
> Then in verse 24 it says....
> Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
> affections and lusts.
>
> Can one be a believer in Jesus Christ and *not* crucify the flesh with all
> its attendant problems?
It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
>
> Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
> Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
> envying one another.
>
> In these NG's there are tons of vain glory, provoking and or evying
> another, And I am speaking only to born again believers here. The rest are
> children of the Father of this earth, and one expects them to act that way
> as it is their nature. It isn't ours.
>
> I am not excusing my behavior and wish to apologize to all for my responses
> to poor behaviors and for the times I may have generated them. I am seeking
> to let the Lord modify my behavior as He sees fit.
>
> In line with the above I have a question for you, and thank you for asking
> me.
indwelling Spirit does. But again, it's from glory to glory IN STAGES.
It's not, as MC claims, "God saved me from my sin, and now I exist in a
sinless state. I can call pete a "sleazy bastard" and I'm still sinless
because I'm of the right spirit."
>
> How does that fit in with this?
> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
> the first, that he may establish the second.
> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the
> body of Jesus Christ once for all.
> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
> footstool.
> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
> sanctified.
Actually verse 14 is correctly translated from greek as: By one
offering, he has forever perfected those who are BEING sanctified!
>
> > You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
>
That would actually place you in the same boat as MC, making God a liar
by claming you have no sin you now need forgiveness for
>
> Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that
> he had said before,
> Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those
> days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their
> minds will I write them;
> Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
>
> a bunch of verses about people and their sins, please stop and read the
> verses before your throw them. I think you will find those verses and these
> will be in harmony, not disharmony as you suspected
>
> Now, do I see sinlessness as MC see's it? Who knows. He has never validated
> with scripture his reasons. He has responded with accusations and no Love.
> it that a mark of a brother? He uses his "Freedom" as he calls it,
> inappropriately.
>
> There are plenty of other verses on sin to discuss for clarifications sake
> if nothing else.
>
> --
> Peter
> A living Stone
> A Disciple of The Lord Jesus Christ
> Joh 13:34-35 KJV
> I recalled it. However, for the sake of discussion let us leave it as you
> have written the verse,
> Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the
> lust of the flesh.
> Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against
> the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot
> do the things that ye would.
>
> Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
> So the question is, if we be led of the Spirit and we are not under the
> law, then how does one commit sin?
>
> Then in verse 24 it says....
> Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
> affections and lusts.
>
> Can one be a believer in Jesus Christ and *not* crucify the flesh with all
> its attendant problems?
It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
>
> Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
> Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
> envying one another.
>
> In these NG's there are tons of vain glory, provoking and or evying
> another, And I am speaking only to born again believers here. The rest are
> children of the Father of this earth, and one expects them to act that way
> as it is their nature. It isn't ours.
>
> I am not excusing my behavior and wish to apologize to all for my responses
> to poor behaviors and for the times I may have generated them. I am seeking
> to let the Lord modify my behavior as He sees fit.
>
> In line with the above I have a question for you, and thank you for asking
> me.
>
> In Heb it says....
> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that
> the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
>
> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
> the theologies of the churches?
Paul is referring to the fact that the law cannot perfect people; the
> In Heb it says....
> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that
> the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
>
> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
> the theologies of the churches?
indwelling Spirit does. But again, it's from glory to glory IN STAGES.
It's not, as MC claims, "God saved me from my sin, and now I exist in a
sinless state. I can call pete a "sleazy bastard" and I'm still sinless
because I'm of the right spirit."
>
> How does that fit in with this?
> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
> the first, that he may establish the second.
> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the
> body of Jesus Christ once for all.
> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
> footstool.
> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
> sanctified.
offering, he has forever perfected those who are BEING sanctified!
>
> > You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
>
> Would not this fit in with the above and make the answer to your question,
> Yes?
No, if you're claming you live 24/7 in sinless thought/word/deed
> Yes?
That would actually place you in the same boat as MC, making God a liar
by claming you have no sin you now need forgiveness for
>
> Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that
> he had said before,
> Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those
> days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their
> minds will I write them;
> Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
>
> 1Co 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the
> knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
>
> knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
>
> Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who
> walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
>
> That verse should answer the question about where is the law in the
> believer? It is fulfilled in us as it was in the Lord.
>
> walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
>
> That verse should answer the question about where is the law in the
> believer? It is fulfilled in us as it was in the Lord.
>
> Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for
> sin.
>
> Now if anyone has a knee jerk reaction to this and starts wanting to throw
> sin.
>
> a bunch of verses about people and their sins, please stop and read the
> verses before your throw them. I think you will find those verses and these
> will be in harmony, not disharmony as you suspected
>
> Now, do I see sinlessness as MC see's it? Who knows. He has never validated
> with scripture his reasons. He has responded with accusations and no Love.
> it that a mark of a brother? He uses his "Freedom" as he calls it,
> inappropriately.
>
> There are plenty of other verses on sin to discuss for clarifications sake
> if nothing else.
>
> --
> Peter
> A living Stone
> A Disciple of The Lord Jesus Christ
> Joh 13:34-35 KJV
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 7:29:09 AM11/5/12
to
himself:
MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
And about whom it is reported:
On 1999/03/12
Michael Sheppard wrote of his meeting Michael Christ:
> He began by telling me that God had him get involved
> in a homosexual relationship with a younger man called Moses.
> By submitting to sex with this person he was laying down his life
> and giving God "his all".That`s a quote from him.
MC's definition of submitting to God is apparengtly, according to this
post from someone who claims to know him--to sin and then blame God for
it.
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot
be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
But MC was of the "right spirit" when he had this gay relationship, I
suppose
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 7:30:43 AM11/5/12
to
Michael Christ wrote:
>
> You are far too comfortable in your sin, Vincent Garcia.
>
>
> You are far too comfortable in your sin, Vincent Garcia.
>
And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
himself:
himself:
MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
And about whom it is reported:
On 1999/03/12
Michael Sheppard wrote of his meeting Michael Christ:
> He began by telling me that God had him get involved
> in a homosexual relationship with a younger man called Moses.
> By submitting to sex with this person he was laying down his life
> and giving God "his all".That`s a quote from him.
MC's definition of submitting to God is apparently, according to this
And about whom it is reported:
On 1999/03/12
Michael Sheppard wrote of his meeting Michael Christ:
> He began by telling me that God had him get involved
> in a homosexual relationship with a younger man called Moses.
> By submitting to sex with this person he was laying down his life
> and giving God "his all".That`s a quote from him.
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 7:31:25 AM11/5/12
to
duke
Nov 5, 2012, 8:15:14 AM11/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:29:09 -0800, vince garcia <vggar...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:
>And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
>himself:
>
>MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
>MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
>
>And about whom it is reported:
No sane Christian would say such a thing. It's totally contrary to scripture.
At best, it's heresy.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
A vote for obama is a vote for the end of
democracy in America as we know it. Let the
rolling thunder guide your decision at the
ballot box to put an end to Imperial Obama.
May God bless America.
********************************************
wrote:
>And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
>himself:
>
>MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
>MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
>
>And about whom it is reported:
At best, it's heresy.
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
A vote for obama is a vote for the end of
democracy in America as we know it. Let the
rolling thunder guide your decision at the
ballot box to put an end to Imperial Obama.
May God bless America.
********************************************
"grasshopper"
Nov 5, 2012, 8:31:03 AM11/5/12
to
Some are "sinless" because they define sin to be what they are not doing.
If what one wants to retain is in conflict with scripture and the church,
then scripture and the church are in error.
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 8:46:59 AM11/5/12
to
duke wrote:
>
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:29:09 -0800, vince garcia <vggar...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> >And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
> >himself:
> >
> >MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> >MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
> >
> >And about whom it is reported:
>
> No sane Christian would say such a thing. It's totally contrary to scripture.
> At best, it's heresy.
That's my point exactly. And that's why he attacks you, me, Linda, and
>
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:29:09 -0800, vince garcia <vggar...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> >And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
> >himself:
> >
> >MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> >MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
> >
> >And about whom it is reported:
>
> No sane Christian would say such a thing. It's totally contrary to scripture.
> At best, it's heresy.
everyone else here--with no exceptions--as the "false Christians who
just want to hold onto their sin"
So ALL of us are wrong but HE is right. That's the cry of every cultist
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 8:51:15 AM11/5/12
to
the god he knows.
...the cry of every cultist
"grasshopper"
Nov 5, 2012, 11:04:07 AM11/5/12
to
> Some are "sinless" because they define sin to be what they are not doing.
>
> If what one wants to retain is in conflict with scripture and the church,
> then scripture and the church are in error.
"Well, his view is that ALL denominations are in heresy and none teach the
god he knows."
Then we can extend the previous observations. If scripture and the church
>
> If what one wants to retain is in conflict with scripture and the church,
> then scripture and the church are in error.
"Well, his view is that ALL denominations are in heresy and none teach the
god he knows."
are in error, then one redoes scripture and invents the church that will
comply with one's spiritual state, including any sin as it is commonly
understood by others.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 1:50:06 PM11/5/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:_MSls.5087$TD5....@newsfe01.iad...
>> People were aware of forgiveness of sins in the Old Testament, and
>> presumably they felt forgiven after they had confessed their sins, and
>> offered the sacrifice required by the Law. But there was never any
>> all-encompassing sacrifice, offered once-for-all, which could supply the
>> basis for their forgiveness on confession. In the NT we have such a
>> sacrifice, which needs no repetition, as it is valid for all time. The
>> verse does not imply that Christians do not get *convicted of sin* by the
>> Holy Spirit, and led to repentance, and thus forgiveness.
>
> in a fault? Can you err? Why is it sin? The scripture does not say it is
> sin, it asks you if Christ is a minister of sin, then says, NO.
Do you then not pray the Lord's Prayer? Would you not pray the Lord's
Prayer? The words about asking for forgiveness? Do you believe that you
will ever reach a stage when you will not need to pray this prayer? If you
were with Christians who were praying the Lord's Prayer, would you not join
with them in praying this prayer? Or would you just miss out the bit about
asking for forgiveness for our trespasses?
The scripture you alluded to is this:
'But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are
found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.'
(Galatians 2:17)
This means that neither Christ, nor his doctrine, tends to produce sin. The
Christian who sins, does so because they are falling short of Christ's
teaching, not because they are following it. Since none of us can honestly
claim to be always following Christ's teachings at all times, we confess our
faults to him, and ask him for forgiveness and help to live better in the
future. And the Church has always done this.
_____________________________________________________________
>>> How does that fit in with this?
>>> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
>>> the first, that he may establish the second.
>>> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of
>>> the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
>>> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
>>> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
>>> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
>>> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
>>> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
>>> footstool.
>>> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
>>> sanctified.
>>
>> In verse 10, the 'once for all' refers to the offering of the body of
>> Jesus Christ, not to the sanctification. The means by which we are
>> sanctified, is the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ. In verse 14,
>> we see that sanctification is ongoing (literally 'those being
>> sanctified'). But this present experience depends on Christ's completed
>> work on the cross, which we are availing ourselves of, by our daily
>> faith. In a similar way, Christ died once for our sins, but we receive
>> that forgiveness personally whenever we confess our sins and receive
>> forgiveness for them. This is a lifelong experience, based on a
>> once-for-all sacrifice.
>
> the believer, the law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Period.
Do you have any evidence to support your theory? Is the Hebrews passage
quoted above not good enough for you? Do I take it you see salvation as a
one-off experience, rather than a process? And if there is no more sin for
the believer (as you say), do you believe that you, as a believer, can sin
in the sight of God? Could you do the same things you did before you became
a believer, but now, they are not sin? Does God not recognise sins in a
believer?
___________________________________________________________
> Only if a person renounced Jesus Christ having once tasted of Him and His
> righteousness and chosen to walk away, in sin, is a man lost. There is no
> more remission for sin for him, and there is no second sacrifice like
> under the old Covenant of Law. He is a reprobate.
So if a person lives a 'sinful' life, but doesn't actually renounce Jesus,
will he still be saved? We're talking serious sins here, like adultery.
___________________________________________________________
>>> Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after
>>> that he had said before,
>>> Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those
>>> days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their
>>> minds will I write them;
>>> Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
>>
>> Surely this refers to forgiven sins. 'If we confess our sins, he is
>> faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
>> unrighteousness' (1.John 1:9) That verse was written to Christians. So
>> Christians are also going to confess their sins, as they become aware of
>> them. But then, once forgiven, they are forgotten.
>
> and future. We are not part of a law covenant. Without the law there is no
> sin.
I see. So if your future sins were forgiven before you even committed them
the moment you 'received Christ' (whatever that means), and if believers in
Jesus cannot commit sins (in the sight of God), what is there to stop you
living it up?
But because we are not under the Mosaic Law, does not mean that we are not
obliged to obey Christ's commandments, surely? If we do not keep his
commandments, then we commit sins, surely?
John Cooper
"lllmmm.-"
Nov 5, 2012, 2:42:58 PM11/5/12
to
"Any sin under the law commits one to hell, all are equal in God eyes.
Some men see lies as insignificant. Some see slander as minor and
overcomeable. I have seen lives destroyed by both of these things,
literally destroyed. Only God can judge. In Him there is no shades of
gray."
Luke:
018:010 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee,
and the other a publican.
018:011 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
adulterers, or even as this publican.
018:012 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
018:013 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying,
God be merciful to me a sinner.
018:014 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather
than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be
abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 3:03:05 PM11/5/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:ukTls.19909$%z6....@newsfe04.iad...
>>> Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
>>> affections and lusts.
>>>
>>> Can one be a believer in Jesus Christ and *not* crucify the flesh with
>>> all its attendant problems?
>>
>> It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
>>
>
> we are totally sanctified. Completed to the uttermost. The spirit of the
> believer is made so correct that when the body dies, no matter the state,
> the spirit and soul go to be with the Father.
I may be misunderstanding you. From what you have written, I can see 2
options. Please clarify which of these positions, if either, you actually
hold.
1. The important bit is the spirit. What the body does is not really that
important. The spirit of the believer in Jesus can be saved, and is pure in
the sight of God, even though our body may be caught up in serious sins,
like adultery. The sins of the body do not contaminate the spirit.
2. The moment we 'receive Christ' (whatever that means) our inclinations are
totally changed, and we thereafter do not wish to commit any sins.
Therefore those who still commit sins, even little ones, have not truly
received Christ.
___________________________________________________________
>>> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because
>>> that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of
>>> sins.
>>>
>>> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
>>> the theologies of the churches?
>>
>> Paul is referring to the fact that the law cannot perfect people; the
>> indwelling Spirit does. But again, it's from glory to glory IN STAGES.
>>
>
> via baptism of the Holy Sirit, but our Spirits are made the righteousness
> of GOD through Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit seals our spirits. Our
> spirits, born again with the Holy Spirit, the Righteousness of God and the
> mind of Christ has in it everything one needs. This is why we are not to
> quench the Holy Spirit, as our minds are renewed via out spirit.
I don't like this. You keep on talking about our spirit's this and our
spirit's that. What about us as a whole. For we are body as well as
spirit. Surely holiness is a physical thing, as well as a spiritual thing?
Or am I wrong?
_____________________________________________________________
>>> How does that fit in with this?
>>> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
>>> the first, that he may establish the second.
>>> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of
>>> the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
>>> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
>>> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
>>> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
>>> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
>>> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
>>> footstool.
>>> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
>>> sanctified.
>>
>> Actually verse 14 is correctly translated from greek as: By one
>> offering, he has forever perfected those who are BEING sanctified!
>>
> Heb 10:14 for by one offering he hath perfected to the end those
> sanctified;
He is correct. The Received Text clearly has 'sanctified' as a present
passive participle. So it is an ongoing sanctification, a process.
__________________________________________________________
> The mind is being renewed, the body is learning from our mind, yet is wars
> against us, but in our spirits we are already living an eternal life. It
> does not die. The believers eternity begins with rebirth. Praise God.
In our spirits. I see. This is looking more and more like Gnosticism.
_________________________________________________________
> Two things, our spirit is made perfect through God our Father and Jesus
> Christ. Without the law there is no sin. So tell me, how do you commit
> sin?
I am not under the Mosaic Law. I am however under the discipline of Jesus
Christ.
'And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?' (Luke
6:46)
If we don't keep Jesus' commandments, then our house will fall down -
Matthew 7:26,27
If we disobey Jesus, then we commit sin.
_________________________________________________________
> If you reread all the scriptures I presented here you would see them
> speaking to that end, so much so that we are not to even be conscience of
> sin.
Does the Holy Spirit never convict you of some small sin, which needs to be
confessed, forsaken and forgiven?
_________________________________________________________
> Are you living under the law?
I am not under the Mosaic Law.
_____________________________
> He said our sin account is closed.
Really? Where?
______________________________
> He said our sin is not imputed to us once forgiven, it is imputed to Him.
> He is the propitiation for all sin. So sin goes into that account.
If you believe that all our future sins are already forgiven, then why
confess and repent of them and forsake them at all?
__________________________________________________________
> Why do you thing Paul and others warn us of the law of liberty?
Because we are no longer under a multitude of OT commandments. Christ's
yoke is easy and his burden is light. But he still has commandments. And
his principle for living is the principle of love, which does no harm to its
neighbour, and thereby fulfils the Law.
The danger is that our liberty might be a stumbling block to the weak
brother - 1.Corinthians 8:7-13.
Some people assume that liberty from the multitude of OT commandments means
that we are under no commandments or restraints whatsoever.
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 5, 2012, 3:13:09 PM11/5/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:%vTls.16347$iq6....@newsfe21.iad...
>> We cannot walk in the Spirit, and at the same time commit the sins listed
>> above. These sins are particularly heinous, and those who do these
>> things will not inheit the kingdom of God. But there are other sins, the
>> like of which are included when we pray 'forgive us our trespasses, as we
>> forgive those who trespass against us'. Obviously it is taken for
>> granted that not all sins are equal. This is understood by earthly
>> judges, and the Just Judge is no less just.
>
> Any sin under the law commits one to hell, all are equal in God eyes.
> Some men see lies as insignificant. Some see slander as minor and
> overcomeable. I have seen lives destroyed by both of these things,
> literally destroyed. Only God can judge. In Him there is no shades of
> gray.
That is not what the Bible says.
> Some men see lies as insignificant. Some see slander as minor and
> overcomeable. I have seen lives destroyed by both of these things,
> literally destroyed. Only God can judge. In Him there is no shades of
> gray.
'Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee
from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee *hath the greater sin*'
(John 19:11).
________________________________________________________
If all sins were equal, then they would all receive the same judgment. This
is not the case with earthly judges, and it is certainly not the case with
the Just Judge.
'Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widow's
houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive *the
greater damnation*' (Matthew 23:14).
'it shall be *more tolerable* for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment,
than for thee' (Matthew 11:24).
__________________________________________________________
'The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to
reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: *but chiefly*
them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise
government' (2.Peter 2:9,10).
The apostle Paul warns Christians that there are certain sins, which unless
repented of and forsaken, will keep them from inheriting the kingdom of
God - 1.Corinthians 6:9,10; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:5-7.
___________________________________________________________
The Bible has always made a distinction between sins.
'The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in
goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving *iniquity* and
*transgression* and *sin*' (Exodus 34:6,7).
______________________________________________________________
The Bible also makes a difference between sins committed in ignorance and
those committed deliberately.
'And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of
the first year for a sin offering. And the priest shall make an atonement
for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before
the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him....But
the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or
a stranger, the same reproacheth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off
from among his people. Because he hath despised the word of the LORD, and
hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his
iniquity shall be upon him' (Numbers 15:27,28,30,31).
'And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself,
neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he
that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with
few stripes' (Luke 12:47,48).
See also Hebrews 10:26-31.
__________________________________________________________
When Jesus told the woman taken in adultery to 'sin no more' (John 8:11), he
was not expecting her to become sinlessly perfect - he taught his disciples
to pray every day for forgiveness of their sins (Luke 11:4). However he did
expect her not to commit adultery again.
Likewise when he told the man whom he had healed at the pool of Bethesda to
'sin no more' (John 5:14) he was not expecting him to become sinlessly
perfect, but he did expect him not to repeat the kind of action which had
led to him being confined to a bed of sickness for thirty-eight years.
Likewise when the apostle Paul tells the Corinthian Christians to 'awake to
righteousness, and sin not' (1.Corinthians 15:34), he was not preaching
sinless perfection.
When he exhorts Timothy 'them that sin rebuke before all, that others also
may fear' (1.Timothy 5:20), he was hardly referring to run-of-the-mill sins.
It is obvious therefore that there are degrees of sins. Some call them
'mortal sins' and 'venial sins'.
John Cooper
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 3:50:23 PM11/5/12
to
Pete wrote:
I think I need to ask you plainly so I can understand your view:
Do you claim to live in a sinless state in thougbht word and deed 24/7
because of all these verses you quote, and your views on what
sancification is?
The answer is yes or no.
Please don't just lay out a bunch of verses and theology for me to try
and figure out--just dumb it down for me and make it a plain yes or no
so I can see where your head is on this
In the spirit
> we are totally sanctified. Completed to the uttermost. The spirit of the
> believer is made so correct that when the body dies, no matter the state,
> the spirit and soul go to be with the Father.
>
> >>
> No. Is there room in our heart for God and Satan? No. The man speaks from
> his heart, when there is one evil thing there is every evil thing. Unless
> he repents and turns away he may walk away from the Lord right into the
> depths of hell on this earth. It is his choice to listen and accept or
> deny. If he wont read the scriptures and study them then the mirror of God
> is not manifest to him and so he does not realize his hair is messed up and
> his face is dirty.
with what you're saying here. But I still need to understand how far you
go in your view
It
> does not die. The believers eternity begins with rebirth. Praise God.
>
> >>
not imputed to us even though we are imperfect and DO technically commit
sin"?
Or do you mean actually: "We've been delivered from the law, and so we
have been delivered from sin as well, and so we exist in practical
rightesousness and literally are sinless in thought/word/deed 24/7"?
> If you reread all the scriptures I presented here you would see them
> speaking to that end, so much so that we are not to even be conscience of
> sin.
>
I don't nened to re-read them. I think you totally misunderstand them as
MC does.
And we know how deceived HE is. You sound like you walk the same path,
which is why I'm trying to figure out if you do or do not
> Can a person get caught up in the flesh? Yes. We who are brothers see
> someone in a fault are to speak to him in Love, and thus save a life. Or
> one who errs. Yet like the verse says, is Christ a minister of sin? NO
> every one. There is no more sacrifice for sin. Christ died once for it and
> that is all there will every be. He said our sin account is closed. He said
> Paul and others warn us of the law of liberty? Not to use it as an occasion
> to err? Because by doing so one can become re-entrapped in the flesh and
> its desires, so much so that they are willing to give up what God did for
> them so He won't be bugging them about there faults and errors. They Choose
> to place themselves back into sin, like a homosexual that will not give up
> the lifestyle once having come to Christ and were set free. For all these
> there will be no second sacrifice. I want to be clear on this. A homosexual
> can be tempted, and like any other sin they may slip, then quickly jump
> back on track, Jesus Paid for that sin like all else. It is those who
> having tasted of the fullness of God that walk away and then thumb their
> nose at God who lose. Any sin is sin. Under salvation we do instinctively,
> from the heart and our spirit what the law called out for. It is part of
> our being in Christ and that is what Paul said about us justifying the law
> because it is Gods will for all and not just some measuring stick which he
> uses to beat us.
Part of what you say sounds fine, but part sounds like heresy. You do
seem to admit Christians can and do sin, which is good. But then you
also seem to tout practical righetosuness as MC does, which is not good
> That is nothing more than a paltry excuse for sloppy living.
No it is not.
I think I need to ask you plainly so I can understand your view:
Do you claim to live in a sinless state in thougbht word and deed 24/7
because of all these verses you quote, and your views on what
sancification is?
The answer is yes or no.
Please don't just lay out a bunch of verses and theology for me to try
and figure out--just dumb it down for me and make it a plain yes or no
so I can see where your head is on this
In the spirit
> we are totally sanctified. Completed to the uttermost. The spirit of the
> believer is made so correct that when the body dies, no matter the state,
> the spirit and soul go to be with the Father.
>
> >>
> >> Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
> >> Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
> >> envying one another.
> >>
> >> In these NG's there are tons of vain glory, provoking and or evying
> >> another, And I am speaking only to born again believers here. The rest are
> >> children of the Father of this earth, and one expects them to act that way
> >> as it is their nature. It isn't ours.
> >>
> >> I am not excusing my behavior and wish to apologize to all for my responses
> >> to poor behaviors and for the times I may have generated them. I am seeking
> >> to let the Lord modify my behavior as He sees fit.
> >>
> >> In line with the above I have a question for you, and thank you for asking
> >> me.
> >>
> >> In Heb it says....
> >> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that
> >> the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
> >>
> >> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
> >> the theologies of the churches?
> >
> > Paul is referring to the fact that the law cannot perfect people; the
> > indwelling Spirit does. But again, it's from glory to glory IN STAGES.
> >
>
> >> Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
> >> envying one another.
> >>
> >> In these NG's there are tons of vain glory, provoking and or evying
> >> another, And I am speaking only to born again believers here. The rest are
> >> children of the Father of this earth, and one expects them to act that way
> >> as it is their nature. It isn't ours.
> >>
> >> I am not excusing my behavior and wish to apologize to all for my responses
> >> to poor behaviors and for the times I may have generated them. I am seeking
> >> to let the Lord modify my behavior as He sees fit.
> >>
> >> In line with the above I have a question for you, and thank you for asking
> >> me.
> >>
> >> In Heb it says....
> >> Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that
> >> the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
> >>
> >> Paul is stating a principle there. How does that fit in with the bulk of
> >> the theologies of the churches?
> >
> > Paul is referring to the fact that the law cannot perfect people; the
> > indwelling Spirit does. But again, it's from glory to glory IN STAGES.
> >
>
> Again, the Spirit is completed, we are given gifts, and we can be filled
> via baptism of the Holy Sirit, but our Spirits are made the righteousness
> of GOD through Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit seals our spirits. Our
> spirits, born again with the Holy Spirit, the Righteousness of God and the
> mind of Christ has in it everything one needs. This is why we are not to
> quench the Holy Spirit, as our minds are renewed via out spirit.
>
> via baptism of the Holy Sirit, but our Spirits are made the righteousness
> of GOD through Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit seals our spirits. Our
> spirits, born again with the Holy Spirit, the Righteousness of God and the
> mind of Christ has in it everything one needs. This is why we are not to
> quench the Holy Spirit, as our minds are renewed via out spirit.
>
> > It's not, as MC claims, "God saved me from my sin, and now I exist in a
> > sinless state. I can call pete a "sleazy bastard" and I'm still sinless
> > because I'm of the right spirit."
> >
>
> That state leads once again to death, spiritual death. Is God dble minded?
> > sinless state. I can call pete a "sleazy bastard" and I'm still sinless
> > because I'm of the right spirit."
> >
>
> No. Is there room in our heart for God and Satan? No. The man speaks from
> his heart, when there is one evil thing there is every evil thing. Unless
> he repents and turns away he may walk away from the Lord right into the
> depths of hell on this earth. It is his choice to listen and accept or
> deny. If he wont read the scriptures and study them then the mirror of God
> is not manifest to him and so he does not realize his hair is messed up and
> his face is dirty.
>
> >>
> >> How does that fit in with this?
> >> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
> >> the first, that he may establish the second.
> >> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the
> >> body of Jesus Christ once for all.
> >> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
> >> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
> >> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
> >> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
> >> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
> >> footstool.
> >> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
> >> sanctified.
> >
> > Actually verse 14 is correctly translated from greek as: By one
> > offering, he has forever perfected those who are BEING sanctified!
> >
> >>
> >> How does that fit in with this?
> >> Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away
> >> the first, that he may establish the second.
> >> Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the
> >> body of Jesus Christ once for all.
> >> Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering
> >> oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
> >> Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for
> >> ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
> >> Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
> >> footstool.
> >> Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
> >> sanctified.
> >
> > Actually verse 14 is correctly translated from greek as: By one
> > offering, he has forever perfected those who are BEING sanctified!
> >
> Not in the TR versions.
> Heb 10:14 for by one offering he hath perfected to the end those
> sanctified;
>
> Heb 10:14 for by one offering he hath perfected to the end those
> sanctified;
>
> The mind is being renewed, the body is learning from our mind, yet is wars
> against us, but in our spirits we are already living an eternal life.
Though I think you are misunderstanding some verses, I can overall agree
> against us, but in our spirits we are already living an eternal life.
with what you're saying here. But I still need to understand how far you
go in your view
It
> does not die. The believers eternity begins with rebirth. Praise God.
>
> >>
> >>> You're not claiming you live in sinlessness, are you?
> >>
> >> Would not this fit in with the above and make the answer to your question,
> >> Yes?
> >
> > No, if you're claming you live 24/7 in sinless thought/word/deed
> >
>
> >>
> >> Would not this fit in with the above and make the answer to your question,
> >> Yes?
> >
> > No, if you're claming you live 24/7 in sinless thought/word/deed
> >
>
> Two things, our spirit is made perfect through God our Father and Jesus
> Christ. Without the law there is no sin. So tell me, how do you commit sin?
Are you talking positionally? ala "we are not under the law so sin is
> Christ. Without the law there is no sin. So tell me, how do you commit sin?
not imputed to us even though we are imperfect and DO technically commit
sin"?
Or do you mean actually: "We've been delivered from the law, and so we
have been delivered from sin as well, and so we exist in practical
rightesousness and literally are sinless in thought/word/deed 24/7"?
> If you reread all the scriptures I presented here you would see them
> speaking to that end, so much so that we are not to even be conscience of
> sin.
>
MC does.
And we know how deceived HE is. You sound like you walk the same path,
which is why I'm trying to figure out if you do or do not
> Can a person get caught up in the flesh? Yes. We who are brothers see
> someone in a fault are to speak to him in Love, and thus save a life. Or
> one who errs. Yet like the verse says, is Christ a minister of sin? NO
>
> > That would actually place you in the same boat as MC, making God a liar
> > by claming you have no sin you now need forgiveness for
> >
>
> Are you living under the law? Then you have sin and must follow every one,
> > That would actually place you in the same boat as MC, making God a liar
> > by claming you have no sin you now need forgiveness for
> >
>
> every one. There is no more sacrifice for sin. Christ died once for it and
> that is all there will every be. He said our sin account is closed. He said
> our sin is not imputed to us once forgiven, it is imputed to Him. He is the
> propitiation for all sin. So sin goes into that account. Why do you thing
> Paul and others warn us of the law of liberty? Not to use it as an occasion
> to err? Because by doing so one can become re-entrapped in the flesh and
> its desires, so much so that they are willing to give up what God did for
> them so He won't be bugging them about there faults and errors. They Choose
> to place themselves back into sin, like a homosexual that will not give up
> the lifestyle once having come to Christ and were set free. For all these
> there will be no second sacrifice. I want to be clear on this. A homosexual
> can be tempted, and like any other sin they may slip, then quickly jump
> back on track, Jesus Paid for that sin like all else. It is those who
> having tasted of the fullness of God that walk away and then thumb their
> nose at God who lose. Any sin is sin. Under salvation we do instinctively,
> from the heart and our spirit what the law called out for. It is part of
> our being in Christ and that is what Paul said about us justifying the law
> because it is Gods will for all and not just some measuring stick which he
> uses to beat us.
Part of what you say sounds fine, but part sounds like heresy. You do
seem to admit Christians can and do sin, which is good. But then you
also seem to tout practical righetosuness as MC does, which is not good
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 3:52:32 PM11/5/12
to
Message has been deleted
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 4:48:33 PM11/5/12
to
Vincent Garcia wrote:
> Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
> Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent.
I am at peace with the Lord, you are not.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 4:57:36 PM11/5/12
to
On Nov 5, 10:08 pm, "John Cooper" <bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
> "Michael Christ" <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
It means this...Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the
mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy,
acceptable unto God, which is your REASONABLE service.
It means that you surrender all your heart to the Lord or nothing. It
has never ever been any different.
However with all this new age 'superficial righteousness imputation'
sinner theology, you can be and do and say whatever you see fit in
your fallenness and then claim the blood of Jesus. No. The Lord is
not a fool, and is not taken in with lukewarm or man-made
'convenience' theology.
Michael Christ
wrote:
> "Michael Christ" <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cac7b2e5-f221-4c43...@qi10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> >>> what God says faith is!
> >>> THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
>
> >> I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
> news:cac7b2e5-f221-4c43...@qi10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> But...not faith according to what man says faith is but according to
> >>> what God says faith is!
> >>> THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
>
> >> I entirely agree. Hopefully we mean the same thing.
Michael Christ wrote:
>Perhaps this will clarify even further: a sinner has his standard of
>what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
>This is God's standard...
>Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
>loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
>Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
>whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
>shall save it.
>Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
>whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
>Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
>hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
>There you go, one in each gospel.
>Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
>multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
>the boat.
>If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
>unacceptable.
>Perhaps this will clarify even further: a sinner has his standard of
>what faith is, but it is NOT God's standard.
>This is God's standard...
>Mat_10:39 (KJV) He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that
>loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
>Mar_8:35 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but
>whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same
>shall save it.
>Luk_9:24 (KJV) For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but
>whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.
>Joh_12:25 (KJV) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that
>hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
>There you go, one in each gospel.
>Anything less is pure pretence of faith...and it is a multitude. The
>multitude want a foot on the pier (world) and a foot (in Christ) on
>the boat.
>If you know anything about the Lord God you will know that it is
>unacceptable.
John wrote:
> I accept those verses. How do you interpret them?
> John Cooper
Good. But many to do not.
> I accept those verses. How do you interpret them?
> John Cooper
It means this...Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the
mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy,
acceptable unto God, which is your REASONABLE service.
It means that you surrender all your heart to the Lord or nothing. It
has never ever been any different.
However with all this new age 'superficial righteousness imputation'
sinner theology, you can be and do and say whatever you see fit in
your fallenness and then claim the blood of Jesus. No. The Lord is
not a fool, and is not taken in with lukewarm or man-made
'convenience' theology.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 5:09:44 PM11/5/12
to
trying to condemn me. If you truly believed in the Lord you wouldn't
dare try it. So, I have said something that has offended you. So
what? If it is a lie, like you say, you don't have to worry.
Your problem Vince is that you desperately need me to be wrong. "It
is hard to kick against the pricks".
With God all things are possible; that means there is greater than
what you think and say...greater than you.
Michael Christ
"grasshopper"
Nov 5, 2012, 5:00:26 PM11/5/12
to
> Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
"Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 5:12:23 PM11/5/12
to
Pete wrote:
>Snipped so as to not waste time, but to let you know I read it. The word of
>God disagrees with you in part.
Michael Christ wrote:
>What a pathetic self-centred response!
>You leave your neighbour with an innuendo of wrong, a stain, without
>any explanation, and present yourself as the high ground of
>righteousness.
>How you people can walk in the spirit of this world and even think of
>yourselves as being in Christ for a moment is a monumental delusion!
Pete wrote:
> It is easy. He said he was not interested and its a time waster. Just like
> conversations with you.
Don't waste your time trying, Pete.
Michael Christ
>Snipped so as to not waste time, but to let you know I read it. The word of
>God disagrees with you in part.
Michael Christ wrote:
>What a pathetic self-centred response!
>You leave your neighbour with an innuendo of wrong, a stain, without
>any explanation, and present yourself as the high ground of
>righteousness.
>How you people can walk in the spirit of this world and even think of
>yourselves as being in Christ for a moment is a monumental delusion!
Pete wrote:
> It is easy. He said he was not interested and its a time waster. Just like
> conversations with you.
Don't waste your time trying, Pete.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 5:31:02 PM11/5/12
to
> There is no more offering for sin, because Jesus is the last and perfect
> sacrifice.
>
> John Cooper
Therefore it is not about sin any more because Jesus died for the sins
of the whole world.
So what remains?
A choice, a simple choice. Praise the Lord.
Does a man want Him or doesn't He?
All your heart or nothing; that is the decision a man must make.
How does one give all his heart.
Ask, seek, knock. If a man earnestly desires to give all his heart to
the Lord, the Lord will show him what he must do/lead him in the path
he must walk. "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness".
Ever read or listened to Pilgrims progress??
http://www.orionsgate.org/
All this talk about sin and it is not about sin, it is about whether
or not you give your life to Him. And not, as we have discussed,
according the low standards of 'convenient theology' man, but of the
high calling and the requirement of God.
It is all your heart, or it is go eat, drink and be merry...and make
up a 'ear-ticklin' filthy religious theology.
Michael Christ
> sacrifice.
>
> John Cooper
Therefore it is not about sin any more because Jesus died for the sins
of the whole world.
So what remains?
A choice, a simple choice. Praise the Lord.
Does a man want Him or doesn't He?
All your heart or nothing; that is the decision a man must make.
How does one give all his heart.
Ask, seek, knock. If a man earnestly desires to give all his heart to
the Lord, the Lord will show him what he must do/lead him in the path
he must walk. "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness".
Ever read or listened to Pilgrims progress??
http://www.orionsgate.org/
All this talk about sin and it is not about sin, it is about whether
or not you give your life to Him. And not, as we have discussed,
according the low standards of 'convenient theology' man, but of the
high calling and the requirement of God.
It is all your heart, or it is go eat, drink and be merry...and make
up a 'ear-ticklin' filthy religious theology.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 5:36:06 PM11/5/12
to
On Nov 6, 5:12 am, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:23:12 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
> > Pete wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:05:02 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
>
> >>> Pete wrote:
>
> >>>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
>
> >>>>> "vince garcia" <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:23:12 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
> > Pete wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:05:02 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
>
> >>> Pete wrote:
>
> >>>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
>
> >>>>>news:5096EC...@ix.netcom.com...
>
> >>>>>> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> >>>>>> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> >>>>>> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> >>>>>> from sin
>
>
> >>>>>> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> >>>>>> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
>
> >>>>>> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> >>>>>> from sin
>
> >>>>>> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
Vince wrote:
> > It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
> > It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
Pete wrote:
> That is nothing more than a paltry excuse for sloppy living.
It is.
> That is nothing more than a paltry excuse for sloppy living.
Pete wrote:
> In the spirit
> we are totally sanctified. Completed to the uttermost. The spirit of the
> believer is made so correct that when the body dies, no matter the state,
> the spirit and soul go to be with the Father.
That is the truth.
However Pete, you got the theology right in this case (a pleasant
surprise :-), but you are like Vince.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 5:43:26 PM11/5/12
to
On Nov 6, 9:10 am, "grasshopper" wrote:
> > Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
>
> "Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
> condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
> > Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
>
> "Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
> condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Anonymously wrote:
> So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
No.
> So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
It is all about Jesus and His amazing love for stinking selfish self-
righteous sinners, and whether they choose to give their lives to Him
or not.
Michael Christ
Message has been deleted
vince garcia
Nov 5, 2012, 6:31:15 PM11/5/12
to
"daring" to expose what a liar and hypocrite you are.
You are a deceived son of satan, and your god was deafeted by MY God on
the cross.
Your lying false god, and you his false prophet, have no power over my
life and I have no fear of him or you. Pray all you want for your false
god to send the lightning of judgment down on me for cursing his false
prophet, Michael Christ. I will simply pray it back on you 7 fold.
I have no fear of you and the demon you serve
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 5, 2012, 6:31:44 PM11/5/12
to
On Nov 5, 4:59 pm, Pete <s...@bod.cap> wrote:
"Our body isn't that important to us"
1 Corinthians 6:19-20, Your Body, His Temple
by Matt Slick
"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit,
who is in you, whom you have received from God?
You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price.
Therefore honor God with your body," (1 Cor. 6:19-20).
http://carm.org/christianity/sermons/1-corinthians-619-20-your-body-his-temple
"Our body isn't that important to us"
1 Corinthians 6:19-20, Your Body, His Temple
by Matt Slick
"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit,
who is in you, whom you have received from God?
You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price.
Therefore honor God with your body," (1 Cor. 6:19-20).
http://carm.org/christianity/sermons/1-corinthians-619-20-your-body-his-temple
"grasshopper"
Nov 5, 2012, 6:46:30 PM11/5/12
to
> > Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
>
> "Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
> condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Anonymously wrote:
> So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
"No."
Is gay sex acceptable? As the case of adultry to even look on another with
>
> "Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
> condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Anonymously wrote:
> So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
"No."
lust is sin.
"It is all about Jesus and His amazing love for stinking selfish self-
righteous sinners, and whether they choose to give their lives to Him or
not."
from the sin and do it no more.
To redefine a sin to make it not a sin is not to repent.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
"tttmmm.-"
Nov 5, 2012, 7:27:29 PM11/5/12
to
"You can tell a little white lie that totally devastates someone else's
life. I guarantee you that your lie will be judged much harsher than that
of a murderer while you protest it was only a little lie."
That is because it would be in conflict with the new law of love Christ
gave us. On it we will bejudged.
False witness in all its forms violates this law because others are almost
always hurt.
Barry OGrady
Nov 5, 2012, 7:49:51 PM11/5/12
to
On 06 Nov 2012 00:27:29 GMT, "tttmmm.-" wrote:
>"You can tell a little white lie that totally devastates someone else's
>life. I guarantee you that your lie will be judged much harsher than that
>of a murderer while you protest it was only a little lie."
Who are you quoting?
>"You can tell a little white lie that totally devastates someone else's
>life. I guarantee you that your lie will be judged much harsher than that
>of a murderer while you protest it was only a little lie."
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote1.html#ss1.1
One should reply using the standard technique of the following schema:
User C. wrote:
> User B. wrote:
> > User A. wrote:
> > > blablabla
> > blubberblubber
> laberlaber
This way, it is easy to clearly identify who wrote what, by simply
counting the quotation-marks at the beginning of each line (indention
does facilitate this as well). Each time, only one line is being
added. One can easily see which statements belong to which author.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Nov 5, 2012, 8:11:16 PM11/5/12
to
http://www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/XXIX/29-4.htm
The Body and Christian Theology
In his letters to the Corinthian church the apostle Paul tried to
correct a type of super-spirituality which depreciated the human body.
He contended that the body was God's temple which would be resurrected
at the last day (1 Cor. 3:16,17; 6:18,19; 2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Cor. 15).
The early apologists for the Christian faith had to contend against
the same Grecian influence by stoutly maintaining three fundamental
things — that God created a material universe including the human
body, that the incarnation was a bodily reality, and that there will
be a resurrection of the body at the last day. This is how it came
about that these three Christian affirmations figured so prominently
in the Apostles' Creed.
Many of the early church Fathers were educated in Greek philosophy or
came under its influence. The result was an amalgamation of Christian
theology with Greek philosophy.
The theology of the early Middle Ages was dominated by the towering
figure of Augustine of Hippo, who completed the fusion of the Pauline
emphasis of sin and grace through faith with a Neoplatonic view of man
that stressed the imprisonment of the soul in the body. This dualism
led to an increasing asceticism in the life of the medieval church,
which meant an attitude of indifference or even outright hostility
toward the body. The official theology of the church concentrated on
getting the soul of the believer into heaven, through the Sacraments,
or at least on saving it from hell, as the doctrine of purgatory
developed. —James N. Lapsley, Salvation and Health, p.39.
Coming down to the medieval period, Lapsley continues:
If the health of the body was not forgotten, it was once again
generally relegated to the status of a matter of relative
indifference, which might as well be sacrificed to gain eternal bliss.
This was the situation that obtained as Martin Luther grew toward
manhood at the turn of the sixteenth century. —Ibid., p.41.
The medieval church did not understand what the New Testament meant by
"flesh" and "spirit." In real Greek fashion she understood these terms
to designate two parts of man — the higher and lower natures. Since
things like body, work, eating and sexuality belonged to the "flesh,"
they were regarded as inferior functions, if not tainted with evil. On
the other hand, prayers, fasting, celibacy and religious tasks were
regarded as "spiritual" and therefore superior, if not meritorious.
Luther exploded this whole pietistic framework by returning to a more
biblical view of man. He understood that "flesh" and "spirit" were not
two parts of man but the whole man seen from two different aspects.
All that man did in his natural state was "flesh," especially such
"higher" things like praying, fasting, celibacy and religious
devotions. And all that which man did under the control of the Spirit
was "spiritual" even though it was corporeal activity such as working,
eating, and performing family duties.
Subsequent Protestant theology, however, tended to make as great a
dichotomy between salvation and body as the church did before the
Reformation. Its overriding concern was to save the soul and get it
into heaven. The Bible also talks about saving souls, but by this it
means saving whole persons, not a part of the totus homo.
Results of Super-spirituality
An unbiblical super-spirituality which depreciates the body can be a
real handicap in the church's task of reaching those outside her fold.
The man in the street often feels that the church's concern is not for
his concrete corporeal existence. He thinks that Christians are
preoccupied with the flight of the soul from the material world, and
he feels that Christian theology is too unrelated to real life. Where
did cartoonists get the idea of depicting heaven as a ghost sitting on
a cloud, strumming a harp? How can a real man, who is a lover of his
own flesh (Eph. 5:29)—which in itself is not sinful but is man's God-
given nature — and who is a lover of the material world, find anything
really winsome in a "salvation" like that? He is often "turned off" by
this talk about "salvation" of the soul as if such "salvation" meant
some form of incorporeal existence which he cannot possibly appreciate—
in fact, an existence which he must, as man, find quite repugnant (see
2 Cor. 5:3, 4).
The problem is that the word salvation has become so truncated through
the influence of Christian philosophy on Christian theology that the
word seldom means to modern ears what it meant in Bible times. It has
come to mean (or at least sounds like) salvation of a part of man. It
is true that the resurrection of the body is still confessed, but it
is tacked onto salvation almost like an eschatological afterthought.
A distorted anthropology distorts the healthy, down-to-earth realism
of God's loving concern for the whole man. It tends to the notion that
God does not care, or at least cares very little, for the body or the
whole man as a totality. It is a dehumanizing view of man which fails
to do justice to the biblical truth that it is the whole man whom God
loves — man who in the totality of his existence eats and sleeps,
works and plays, laughs and weeps; man who loves to see the light of
the sun and dreads the darkness of the grave.
When the church presents anything less than a message of salvation of
the whole man, when she fails in her mission to speak to the whole
man, she abdicates vital territory which is then completely taken over
by secular philosophies. Then she has to compete with false messiahs
with one hand tied behind her back. But the church should be the
bearer of the good news of the redemption and restoration of the total
man.
A super-spirituality which depreciates the body also has a detrimental
effect on believers within the church. If they think that salvation
has little to do with man's corporeal existence but consists rather in
a flight from that existence, this will distort their view of what it
means to live the Christian life. Some will tend to think that the
essence of holiness consists in ascetic withdrawal from all the joys
of concrete bodily existence. A sharp distinction is then made between
doing "secular work" and "the Lord's work." Heaven seems near only in
devotional exercises or when the emotions are stirred in religious
meetings. Spiritual euphoria is thought to be the atmosphere of
heaven.
Or a concept of "soul-salvation" which is not a "whole-salvation" can
lead people to think that since God is not very concerned with the
body, neither should they be too concerned about how they treat the
body. It is amazing how many Christians think that they display their
spirituality by neglecting the body. If they hasten a coronary by bad
living habits, they think that this will be a good testimony of their
dedication to the Lord's work.
While no evangelical Christian today would espouse the heresy that
immoral acts are not a hindrance to holiness, still the Grecian view
of the human body is difficult to shake off. Many of us still treat
the body with shameful indifference. We make little effort to preserve
our powers in the best possible condition. We invite great bodily
debility by the indulgence of appetite and hurtful habits, and think
that God is not concerned with how we regard the laws of life. By
intemperance our powers of body and mind are greatly impaired, yet we
think this has little or nothing to do with progress in the divine
life. But so-called harmless indulgences of the flesh can enslave us
and prove to be the greatest hindrance to soul sanctification. We need
to distinguish between this spurious "Grecian sanctification" and the
New Testament sanctification of the whole man.
This type of emphasis which concentrates on an immaterial soul
salvation has brought a reaction — a radical swing by one section of
the church toward the "social gospel" and a message of salvation which
concentrates on improving man's lot in this world. Either view — the
salvation of the metaphysical "soul-box" to the exclusion of the body,
or the salvation of the body without personal regeneration of the
heart and the creation of a hope of the life hereafter — is a
distortion of the biblical idea of salvation of the whole person, whom
God wills to live in the totality of his existence in the enjoyment of
all God's gifts in fellowship with God.
The Interrelation of the Physical, Mental and Spiritual Natures
Man has physical, mental and spiritual powers, which are closely
related and integrated into one living person. Instead of man being
like this:
he is more like this:
This means that whatever affects one part of man will affect the whole
man. We cannot be truly healthy in one area of our existence unless we
are healthy in every area. A sick body tends to depress the mind and
the human spirit. Guilt can cause all sorts of physical disorders,
while a merry heart does good like a medicine.
There are many people in this world who are looking for real health
and quality of life. Surely the church has a message for them. She can
tell them that they cannot find optimum well-being and quality of life
while they ignore their spiritual health. Their life of estrangement
from God, their hostility to Him, and their burden of guilt affect
their mental and physical health. But what if they reply (as they
might) that our neglect of the physical laws of life also prevents us
from attaining optimum spiritual health?
Of course, this principle of the vital interrelation of our threefold
nature means that while we are in this world we cannot realize perfect
physical, mental or spiritual health. We cannot be perfect in one area
unless we are perfect in every area. But we do have a completeness
already by faith in Jesus Christ (Col. 2:10). In Him we are already
restored and glorified at God's right hand (justification), and we
wait for this perfect life to appear with Him (glorification) (Col.
3:2-4). In the meantime, however, it is our privilege and
responsibility to glorify God by living in harmony with all the laws
of our physical, mental and spiritual natures (sanctification). One
thing is sure: we will inevitably begin to practice in the here and
now what we hope to be in the there and then.
The Body and Christian Theology
In his letters to the Corinthian church the apostle Paul tried to
correct a type of super-spirituality which depreciated the human body.
He contended that the body was God's temple which would be resurrected
at the last day (1 Cor. 3:16,17; 6:18,19; 2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Cor. 15).
The early apologists for the Christian faith had to contend against
the same Grecian influence by stoutly maintaining three fundamental
things — that God created a material universe including the human
body, that the incarnation was a bodily reality, and that there will
be a resurrection of the body at the last day. This is how it came
about that these three Christian affirmations figured so prominently
in the Apostles' Creed.
Many of the early church Fathers were educated in Greek philosophy or
came under its influence. The result was an amalgamation of Christian
theology with Greek philosophy.
The theology of the early Middle Ages was dominated by the towering
figure of Augustine of Hippo, who completed the fusion of the Pauline
emphasis of sin and grace through faith with a Neoplatonic view of man
that stressed the imprisonment of the soul in the body. This dualism
led to an increasing asceticism in the life of the medieval church,
which meant an attitude of indifference or even outright hostility
toward the body. The official theology of the church concentrated on
getting the soul of the believer into heaven, through the Sacraments,
or at least on saving it from hell, as the doctrine of purgatory
developed. —James N. Lapsley, Salvation and Health, p.39.
Coming down to the medieval period, Lapsley continues:
If the health of the body was not forgotten, it was once again
generally relegated to the status of a matter of relative
indifference, which might as well be sacrificed to gain eternal bliss.
This was the situation that obtained as Martin Luther grew toward
manhood at the turn of the sixteenth century. —Ibid., p.41.
The medieval church did not understand what the New Testament meant by
"flesh" and "spirit." In real Greek fashion she understood these terms
to designate two parts of man — the higher and lower natures. Since
things like body, work, eating and sexuality belonged to the "flesh,"
they were regarded as inferior functions, if not tainted with evil. On
the other hand, prayers, fasting, celibacy and religious tasks were
regarded as "spiritual" and therefore superior, if not meritorious.
Luther exploded this whole pietistic framework by returning to a more
biblical view of man. He understood that "flesh" and "spirit" were not
two parts of man but the whole man seen from two different aspects.
All that man did in his natural state was "flesh," especially such
"higher" things like praying, fasting, celibacy and religious
devotions. And all that which man did under the control of the Spirit
was "spiritual" even though it was corporeal activity such as working,
eating, and performing family duties.
Subsequent Protestant theology, however, tended to make as great a
dichotomy between salvation and body as the church did before the
Reformation. Its overriding concern was to save the soul and get it
into heaven. The Bible also talks about saving souls, but by this it
means saving whole persons, not a part of the totus homo.
Results of Super-spirituality
An unbiblical super-spirituality which depreciates the body can be a
real handicap in the church's task of reaching those outside her fold.
The man in the street often feels that the church's concern is not for
his concrete corporeal existence. He thinks that Christians are
preoccupied with the flight of the soul from the material world, and
he feels that Christian theology is too unrelated to real life. Where
did cartoonists get the idea of depicting heaven as a ghost sitting on
a cloud, strumming a harp? How can a real man, who is a lover of his
own flesh (Eph. 5:29)—which in itself is not sinful but is man's God-
given nature — and who is a lover of the material world, find anything
really winsome in a "salvation" like that? He is often "turned off" by
this talk about "salvation" of the soul as if such "salvation" meant
some form of incorporeal existence which he cannot possibly appreciate—
in fact, an existence which he must, as man, find quite repugnant (see
2 Cor. 5:3, 4).
The problem is that the word salvation has become so truncated through
the influence of Christian philosophy on Christian theology that the
word seldom means to modern ears what it meant in Bible times. It has
come to mean (or at least sounds like) salvation of a part of man. It
is true that the resurrection of the body is still confessed, but it
is tacked onto salvation almost like an eschatological afterthought.
A distorted anthropology distorts the healthy, down-to-earth realism
of God's loving concern for the whole man. It tends to the notion that
God does not care, or at least cares very little, for the body or the
whole man as a totality. It is a dehumanizing view of man which fails
to do justice to the biblical truth that it is the whole man whom God
loves — man who in the totality of his existence eats and sleeps,
works and plays, laughs and weeps; man who loves to see the light of
the sun and dreads the darkness of the grave.
When the church presents anything less than a message of salvation of
the whole man, when she fails in her mission to speak to the whole
man, she abdicates vital territory which is then completely taken over
by secular philosophies. Then she has to compete with false messiahs
with one hand tied behind her back. But the church should be the
bearer of the good news of the redemption and restoration of the total
man.
A super-spirituality which depreciates the body also has a detrimental
effect on believers within the church. If they think that salvation
has little to do with man's corporeal existence but consists rather in
a flight from that existence, this will distort their view of what it
means to live the Christian life. Some will tend to think that the
essence of holiness consists in ascetic withdrawal from all the joys
of concrete bodily existence. A sharp distinction is then made between
doing "secular work" and "the Lord's work." Heaven seems near only in
devotional exercises or when the emotions are stirred in religious
meetings. Spiritual euphoria is thought to be the atmosphere of
heaven.
Or a concept of "soul-salvation" which is not a "whole-salvation" can
lead people to think that since God is not very concerned with the
body, neither should they be too concerned about how they treat the
body. It is amazing how many Christians think that they display their
spirituality by neglecting the body. If they hasten a coronary by bad
living habits, they think that this will be a good testimony of their
dedication to the Lord's work.
While no evangelical Christian today would espouse the heresy that
immoral acts are not a hindrance to holiness, still the Grecian view
of the human body is difficult to shake off. Many of us still treat
the body with shameful indifference. We make little effort to preserve
our powers in the best possible condition. We invite great bodily
debility by the indulgence of appetite and hurtful habits, and think
that God is not concerned with how we regard the laws of life. By
intemperance our powers of body and mind are greatly impaired, yet we
think this has little or nothing to do with progress in the divine
life. But so-called harmless indulgences of the flesh can enslave us
and prove to be the greatest hindrance to soul sanctification. We need
to distinguish between this spurious "Grecian sanctification" and the
New Testament sanctification of the whole man.
This type of emphasis which concentrates on an immaterial soul
salvation has brought a reaction — a radical swing by one section of
the church toward the "social gospel" and a message of salvation which
concentrates on improving man's lot in this world. Either view — the
salvation of the metaphysical "soul-box" to the exclusion of the body,
or the salvation of the body without personal regeneration of the
heart and the creation of a hope of the life hereafter — is a
distortion of the biblical idea of salvation of the whole person, whom
God wills to live in the totality of his existence in the enjoyment of
all God's gifts in fellowship with God.
The Interrelation of the Physical, Mental and Spiritual Natures
Man has physical, mental and spiritual powers, which are closely
related and integrated into one living person. Instead of man being
like this:
he is more like this:
This means that whatever affects one part of man will affect the whole
man. We cannot be truly healthy in one area of our existence unless we
are healthy in every area. A sick body tends to depress the mind and
the human spirit. Guilt can cause all sorts of physical disorders,
while a merry heart does good like a medicine.
There are many people in this world who are looking for real health
and quality of life. Surely the church has a message for them. She can
tell them that they cannot find optimum well-being and quality of life
while they ignore their spiritual health. Their life of estrangement
from God, their hostility to Him, and their burden of guilt affect
their mental and physical health. But what if they reply (as they
might) that our neglect of the physical laws of life also prevents us
from attaining optimum spiritual health?
Of course, this principle of the vital interrelation of our threefold
nature means that while we are in this world we cannot realize perfect
physical, mental or spiritual health. We cannot be perfect in one area
unless we are perfect in every area. But we do have a completeness
already by faith in Jesus Christ (Col. 2:10). In Him we are already
restored and glorified at God's right hand (justification), and we
wait for this perfect life to appear with Him (glorification) (Col.
3:2-4). In the meantime, however, it is our privilege and
responsibility to glorify God by living in harmony with all the laws
of our physical, mental and spiritual natures (sanctification). One
thing is sure: we will inevitably begin to practice in the here and
now what we hope to be in the there and then.
Message has been deleted
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 8:17:30 PM11/5/12
to
On Nov 6, 10:31 am, vince garcia <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > On Nov 5, 11:30 pm, vince garcia <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > > > You are far too comfortable in your sin, Vincent Garcia.
>
> > > And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
> > > himself:
>
> > > MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> > > MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
>
> > > And about whom it is reported:
>
> > > On 1999/03/12
> > > Michael Sheppard wrote of his meeting Michael Christ:
>
> > > > He began by telling me that God had him get involved
> > > > in a homosexual relationship with a younger man called Moses.
> > > > By submitting to sex with this person he was laying down his life
> > > > and giving God "his all".That`s a quote from him.
>
> > > MC's definition of submitting to God is apparently, according to this
> > > post from someone who claims to know him--to sin and then blame God for
> > > it.
>
> > > Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot
> > > be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
>
> > > But MC was of the "right spirit" when he had this gay relationship, I
> > > suppose
> Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > On Nov 5, 11:30 pm, vince garcia <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > > > You are far too comfortable in your sin, Vincent Garcia.
>
> > > And let's remember these words come from someone who claims about
> > > himself:
>
> > > MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> > > MC: As you know full well, yes, I AM SAYING THAT I DO NOT SIN.
>
> > > And about whom it is reported:
>
> > > On 1999/03/12
> > > Michael Sheppard wrote of his meeting Michael Christ:
>
> > > > He began by telling me that God had him get involved
> > > > in a homosexual relationship with a younger man called Moses.
> > > > By submitting to sex with this person he was laying down his life
> > > > and giving God "his all".That`s a quote from him.
>
> > > MC's definition of submitting to God is apparently, according to this
> > > post from someone who claims to know him--to sin and then blame God for
> > > it.
>
> > > Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot
> > > be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
>
> > > But MC was of the "right spirit" when he had this gay relationship, I
> > > suppose
Michael Christ wrote:
> > You, like him, are just a dirty sinner pointing his finger in his sin
> > trying to condemn me. If you truly believed in the Lord you wouldn't
> > dare try it.
> > You, like him, are just a dirty sinner pointing his finger in his sin
> > trying to condemn me. If you truly believed in the Lord you wouldn't
> > dare try it.
Vince wrote:
> I think you're a piece of crap, Michael.
In your perfect sin vision!
> I think you're a piece of crap, Michael.
You...don't...know...me...or the depth of what I talk about!
That is a fact.
All you are doing is walking in your own bent on religion.
And if you truly believed in the Lord, by your own church religious
standards, you wouldn't dare declare unsubstantiated gossip to
denigrate your neighbour. You are walking in the filthy accusations
of a disgruntled witness because it suits you in your filth.
You are the liar, Vincent, and your life is a religious lie.
Vince wrote:
> I have no fear whatever "daring" to expose what a liar and hypocrite you are.
your sin, Vincent.
Vince wrote:
> You are a deceived son of satan, and your god was deafeted by MY God on
> the cross.
> Your lying false god, and you his false prophet, have no power over my
> life and I have no fear of him or you. Pray all you want for your false
> god to send the lightning of judgment down on me for cursing his false
> prophet, Michael Christ. I will simply pray it back on you 7 fold.
> I have no fear of you and the demon you serve
Will not a lie fade away? Is not the Lord Jesus Christ in control?
You are a prejudiced, bias, man-made 'finger pointing' religious
sinner who acts like he is the Lord of all.
Jesus is Lord, the Lord you wipe your arse with in your ignorant
judgements in your sin.
He is not blind, nor is He a fool to be taken in with fake adherence
to His will.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 5, 2012, 8:29:30 PM11/5/12
to
>Is gay sex with young men acceptable, michael?
Michael Christ wrote:
>"Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
>condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Anonymously wrote:
>So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
Michael Christ wrote:
>"Believe whatever you want to read in the newspapers to support your
>condemnation of me in your sin, Vincent."
Anonymously wrote:
>So this is what it is all aboutafter all?
> "No."
Anonymously wrote:
> Is gay sex acceptable? As the case of adultry to even look on another with
> lust is sin.
Michael Christ wrote:
>"It is all about Jesus and His amazing love for stinking selfish self-
> righteous sinners, and whether they choose to give their lives to Him or
> not."
Anonymously wrote:
>And if they choose to repent of their sin or not.
Show me a person on these newsgroups who has repented by God's
>And if they choose to repent of their sin or not.
standards, and I will show you are son of God.
Anonymously wrote:
>Repent means to turn from the sin and do it no more.
what you are and choose another path.
Anonymously wrote:
> To redefine a sin to make it not a sin is not to repent.
outside of the Lord's will.
How are you doing?? Are you still smiting your breast as you like to
promote?
Michael Christ
Michael Christ
Nov 6, 2012, 3:00:09 AM11/6/12
to
On Nov 6, 7:13 am, "John Cooper" <bl...@bishop1960.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
Sin is sin whether it be pinching a pen from work or murder.
Indeed, Jesus died for both.
Michael Christ
wrote:
Indeed, Jesus died for both.
Michael Christ
vince garcia
Nov 6, 2012, 6:24:18 AM11/6/12
to
sinless in the sense of practical righteousness and entire
sanctification; and you live as an accuser of the brethren, declaring
the rest of us who DO admit our sin as rejectors of Christ in favor of
staying IN sin.
I know you can't name one person other than yourself who lives in such
perfect deliverance from sin.
I know you pronounce ALL Christian denominations to be in heresy, and to
teach another God than the one you follow.
On every possible level, you are a deceived tool of satan the body of
Christ must run from and denounce
>
> That is a fact.
>
it is
vince garcia
Nov 6, 2012, 6:25:40 AM11/6/12
to
Pete wrote:
> Does one go to hell only if their status reaches a certain point?
In a sense, yes.
One goes to hell if he departs from the faith or if he persists in a
handful of sins the NT indicates will cause you to lose your salvation
>
> Were we arguing sinfulness?
>
> Why did Jesus die for sin?
>
> Why
>
> --
> Peter
> A living Stone
> A Disciple of The Lord Jesus Christ
> Joh 13:34-35 KJV
In a sense, yes.
One goes to hell if he departs from the faith or if he persists in a
handful of sins the NT indicates will cause you to lose your salvation
>
> Were we arguing sinfulness?
>
> Why did Jesus die for sin?
>
> Why
>
> --
> Peter
> A living Stone
> A Disciple of The Lord Jesus Christ
> Joh 13:34-35 KJV
vince garcia
Nov 6, 2012, 6:34:24 AM11/6/12
to
Pete wrote:
> >
> > I think I need to ask you plainly so I can understand your view:
> >
>
> Not without you explaining your view first. Who Sanctifies?
God sanctifies and WE sanctify.
For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and
ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with
any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Now please answer my question if you claim personal sinlessness?
>
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 12:50:23 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
>
> > Pete wrote:
> >>
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 12:50:23 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
>
> > Pete wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:23:12 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
> >>
> >>> Pete wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:05:02 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Pete wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "vince garcia" <vggar...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >>> Pete wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:05:02 -0800, vince garcia wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Pete wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 22:40:36 -0000, John Cooper wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> news:5096EC...@ix.netcom.com...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> >>>>>>>> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> >>>>>>>> from sin
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Unless you believe in practical righteousness--i.e. a sin-free
> >>>>>>>> existence--you do NOT mean the same thing.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> MC claims sinlessness on a practical level, and that God "delivered" him
> >>>>>>>> from sin
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> MC: Yes I am...holiness (without sin).
> >>> It's a process not an event. It's called sanctification
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >> That is nothing more than a paltry excuse for sloppy living.
> >
> > No it is not.
> >
> >
> > I think I need to ask you plainly so I can understand your view:
> >
>
> Not without you explaining your view first. Who Sanctifies?
God sanctifies and WE sanctify.
For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and
ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with
any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Now please answer my question if you claim personal sinlessness?
"grasshopper"
Nov 6, 2012, 8:02:46 AM11/6/12
to
Anonymously wrote:
> Is gay sex acceptable? =A0As the case of adultry to even look on another
=
with
> lust is sin.
"Anything that is outside of the Lord's will is sin."
Is gay sex outside of His will?
> lust is sin.
"Anything that is outside of the Lord's will is sin."
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:05:47 AM11/6/12
to
<lllmmm.-> wrote in message
news:509816c2$0$12891$1c46...@news.club.cc.cmu.edu...
> 018:010 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee,
> and the other a publican.
> 018:011 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
> thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
> adulterers, or even as this publican.
> 018:012 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> 018:013 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
> as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying,
> God be merciful to me a sinner.
> 018:014 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather
> than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be
> abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
An interesting passage showing the link between justification and
forgiveness. The publican asked for forgiveness, and got justified.
The same happened to David, when he asked for forgiveness -
'Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God
imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose
iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to
whom the Lord will not impute sin' (Romans 4:6-8).
The same happens to us when we ask for forgiveness -
'Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is
preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that believe are
justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law
of Moses' (Acts 13:38,39).
John Cooper
news:509816c2$0$12891$1c46...@news.club.cc.cmu.edu...
>
> "Any sin under the law commits one to hell, all are equal in God eyes.
> Some men see lies as insignificant. Some see slander as minor and
> overcomeable. I have seen lives destroyed by both of these things,
> literally destroyed. Only God can judge. In Him there is no shades of
> gray."
>
> Luke:
> "Any sin under the law commits one to hell, all are equal in God eyes.
> Some men see lies as insignificant. Some see slander as minor and
> overcomeable. I have seen lives destroyed by both of these things,
> literally destroyed. Only God can judge. In Him there is no shades of
> gray."
>
> 018:010 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee,
> and the other a publican.
> 018:011 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
> thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
> adulterers, or even as this publican.
> 018:012 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> 018:013 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
> as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying,
> God be merciful to me a sinner.
> 018:014 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather
> than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be
> abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
An interesting passage showing the link between justification and
forgiveness. The publican asked for forgiveness, and got justified.
The same happened to David, when he asked for forgiveness -
'Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God
imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose
iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to
whom the Lord will not impute sin' (Romans 4:6-8).
The same happens to us when we ask for forgiveness -
'Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is
preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that believe are
justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law
of Moses' (Acts 13:38,39).
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:05:55 AM11/6/12
to
"vince garcia" <vggar...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:509826...@ix.netcom.com...
>> Two things, our spirit is made perfect through God our Father and Jesus
>> Christ. Without the law there is no sin. So tell me, how do you commit
>> sin?
>
> Are you talking positionally? ala "we are not under the law so sin is
> not imputed to us even though we are imperfect and DO technically commit
> sin"?
>
> Or do you mean actually: "We've been delivered from the law, and so we
> have been delivered from sin as well, and so we exist in practical
> rightesousness and literally are sinless in thought/word/deed 24/7"?
This is the issue I want resolved as well. I note our friend seems to be
deliberately avoiding giving a straight answer to the question. I suspect
this is because he has something to hide. I am pretty sure we are dealing
with a case of neo-gnosticism here, where one can be 'holy in spirit'
without being holy in body. This is, of course, a denial of the teaching in
the New Testament.
It appears he believes that God no longer recognises as 'sin' the sins that
Christians commit, because Christ paid the price on the cross, and they have
already vanished.
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:06:02 AM11/6/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:wIVls.69220$oI6....@newsfe23.iad...
> Regarding salvation; Say it was in stages as some teach via theosis, (a
> non biblical teaching) and yesterday you asked Jesus to forgive you and
> thus started your onward path, but today were hit by a car. Is God going
> to say OOPS! Nope, are all those in your church going to moan over you
> becuase you started too late in life? To be saved in stages goes against
> everything Christ taught. As in Titus above and elsewhere, it is not by
> works so that any man can boast.
You misunderstand, my friend. When a person turns to Jesus and puts their
faith in him, they are forgiven all the sins they have committed. They then
start out on the narrow path which leads to eternal life. Provided they
stay on that path, no matter when they die, they are guaranteed eternal
life. But it is a path to be walked, and spiritual progress will be made,
if they remain on it, until they eventually reach their destination,
whenever that might be. How else could we 'grow in grace'?
________________________________________________________________
> When we are born again, we are born from above, we are made a new creation
> through Christ Jesus.
And when babies are born, they are new creations as well. They still have a
lot of growing up to do.
__________________________________________________________
> 2 Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old
> things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
> Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor
> uncircumcision, but a new creature.
>
> Old things are passed away, everything becomes new. This new creature that
> we are is made by God, instantly. Not a slow growth item.
See above
____________________________________________________________
> Do you understand this so far? Agree, disagree?
I agree with the biblical bits, but not your theology.
____________________________________________________________
>> So if a person lives a 'sinful' life, but doesn't actually renounce
>> Jesus, will he still be saved? We're talking serious sins here, like
>> adultery.
> Abraham married his half sister. He also put her up as a free woman to
> Kings to wed. While these things later became law where they sin for him?
> Did not God use him mightily and have various covenants with Him?
Marrying close relatives was the norm in the early days of the human race.
How could it have got started otherwise? The Law was given by Moses in any
case. The bit about Abraham auctioning off Sara is taking a bit of a
liberty with the text. I doubt if there are many who would read it like
that. But you seem to be implying that because these 'sins' were
'committed' before the Law was given, therefore they were not sins, and God
used him mightily whilst he was 'committing' them. The logical conclusion I
draw from your words is that you believe that since Christ paid the price
for our sins, therefore the 'sins' we commit are no longer regarded in the
eyes of God as sins, and therefore God can use us mightily, even though we
continue to commit serious sins. Have I misunderstood you. A straight
answer would be appreciated, instead of one of your usual riddles.
____________________________________________________
> Has not Jesus fulfilled the law? Is the Gentile under the law covenant?
> Was he ever? These are questions you will have to resolve in your mind.
> How do you deal with scripture that say the curse of the law was broken.
> Or that we are no longer under the law. Is there any truth in them? Do you
> believe beyond doubt that the Bible *is* the Word of God?
Jesus fulfilled the Law in the sense that he fulfilled the meaning of the
types and figures and allegories in the OT, like the sacrifices, for
example. As a Gentile Christian, I am not under the Mosaic Law - see Acts
chapter 15. I submit however to the teachings of Jesus Christ - Matthew
28:20; John 14:15.
Why do you confuse the Law of Moses with the commandments of Jesus Christ?
The fact that we are not under the Law, does not mean that we are without
commandments. This confusion is the telltale mark of antinomianism. This
is the argument they always use.
_____________________________________________________________
>>> My sins were all paid for the moment I received Christ. ALL, past,
>>> present and future. We are not part of a law covenant. Without the law
>>> there is no sin.
I see. So because we are no longer under the Law, therefore we cannot
commit sin. Nice one. How come the Church has not grasped this 'truth'
yet, after so long a time?
_______________________________________________________
>> I see. So if your future sins were forgiven before you even committed
>> them the moment you 'received Christ' (whatever that means), and if
>> believers in Jesus cannot commit sins (in the sight of God), what is
>> there to stop you living it up?
>
> Ones love of God. A person who uses God in such a way is of satan. they
> were lying in accepting Jesus as the son of God and as God. They were not
> turning themselves over to God for an overhaul. They would never be born
> again and they would know it.
So you basically admit that God does not recognise sins in a believer in
Jesus. And that the only defence against spiritual anarchy, is one's love
for God. That is a very precarious defence, and flies in the face of the
warnings of the NT against serious sins.
____________________________________________________________
> Were you alive when Jesus died on the cross and bore all our sin? Nope,
> then were your sins forgiven? Weren't they all in the future? What about
> your kids or grandkids. Who forgave their sin. What about all the Jews who
> sacrificed annually for their sins, weren't the too forgiven? Or from Adam
> on?
Christ died for all sins for all time, as I understand the Scriptures.
However, we avail ourselves of his sacrifice for us, through repentance and
faith, and this is our responsibility. It is like money in an account,
which I have access to, and can draw on whenever I want.
_____________________________________________________________
>> But because we are not under the Mosaic Law, does not mean that we are
>> not obliged to obey Christ's commandments, surely? If we do not keep his
>> commandments, then we commit sins, surely?
>
> We are to keep Christs commandments, for which there is no punishment.
Jesus disagrees, in that passage you said you had read. Here it is, so you
can see it for yourself
'Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will
liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and the rain
descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that
house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that
heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a
foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it
fell: and great was the fall of it.' (Matthew 7:24-27)
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:06:08 AM11/6/12
to
"Michael Christ" <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ceb826ff-823c-4aac...@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com...
>> I accept those verses. How do you interpret them?
> Good. But many to do not.
> It means this...Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the
> mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy,
> acceptable unto God, which is your REASONABLE service.
> It means that you surrender all your heart to the Lord or nothing. It
> has never ever been any different.
> However with all this new age 'superficial righteousness imputation'
> sinner theology, you can be and do and say whatever you see fit in
> your fallenness and then claim the blood of Jesus. No. The Lord is
> not a fool, and is not taken in with lukewarm or man-made
> 'convenience' theology.
Once again, what you SAY here I agree with. But do we mean the same thing?
John Cooper
news:ceb826ff-823c-4aac...@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com...
>> I accept those verses. How do you interpret them?
> Good. But many to do not.
> It means this...Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the
> mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy,
> acceptable unto God, which is your REASONABLE service.
> It means that you surrender all your heart to the Lord or nothing. It
> has never ever been any different.
> However with all this new age 'superficial righteousness imputation'
> sinner theology, you can be and do and say whatever you see fit in
> your fallenness and then claim the blood of Jesus. No. The Lord is
> not a fool, and is not taken in with lukewarm or man-made
> 'convenience' theology.
Once again, what you SAY here I agree with. But do we mean the same thing?
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:06:16 AM11/6/12
to
"Michael Christ" <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:80ff3ef3-adf0-487d...@q5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com...
>> There is no more offering for sin, because Jesus is the last and perfect
>> sacrifice.
> Therefore it is not about sin any more because Jesus died for the sins
> of the whole world.
On the contrary, if sin is no longer the issue, then why are Christians
> of the whole world.
given so much instruction on the subject?
'What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?'
(Romans 6:1,2)
'Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin
might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is
dead is freed from sin.' (Romans 6:6,7)
'Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive
unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your
mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye
your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield
yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members
as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion
over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.' (Romans 6:11-14)
'What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace?
God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey,
his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of
obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants
of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was
delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of
righteousness.' (Romans 6:15-18)
'I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for
as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto
iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto
holiness. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from
righteousness.' (Romans 6:19,20)
'But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your
fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.' (Romans 6:22)
________________________________________________________________
> So what remains?
>
> A choice, a simple choice. Praise the Lord.
>
> Does a man want Him or doesn't He?
>
> All your heart or nothing; that is the decision a man must make.
>
> How does one give all his heart.
>
> Ask, seek, knock. If a man earnestly desires to give all his heart to
> the Lord, the Lord will show him what he must do/lead him in the path
> he must walk. "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness".
> Ever read or listened to Pilgrims progress??
__________________________________________________________
> http://www.orionsgate.org/
>
> All this talk about sin and it is not about sin, it is about whether
> or not you give your life to Him. And not, as we have discussed,
> according the low standards of 'convenient theology' man, but of the
> high calling and the requirement of God.
>
> It is all your heart, or it is go eat, drink and be merry...and make
> up a 'ear-ticklin' filthy religious theology.
cross and following Jesus?
John Cooper
John Cooper
Nov 6, 2012, 10:06:23 AM11/6/12
to
"Pete" <s...@bod.cap> wrote in message
news:ZwXls.10901$Uu4....@newsfe12.iad...
>>> Two things, our spirit is made perfect through God our Father and Jesus
>>> Christ. Without the law there is no sin. So tell me, how do you commit
>>> sin?
>>
>> Jesus Christ.
>> 'And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?'
>> (Luke 6:46)
>> If we don't keep Jesus' commandments, then our house will fall down -
>> Matthew 7:26,27
>> If we disobey Jesus, then we commit sin.
> You seek to inject commandments when He gave only one.
>
> Jesus Christ said, You *must* be born again. John 3:7, John 3:3, 1 Peter
> 1:23
'A new commandment I give unto you' ? 'If ye love me, keep my commandmentS'
See also Matthew 28:20; Revelation 14:12
_______________________________________________________
> Guess what, that is all false. You are not under discipline, unless it is
> self discipline.
'But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye
are brethren.' (Matthew 23:8)
________________________________________________________
> Jesus came not to condemn, but that the whole world through Him might be
> saved.
>
> For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the
> world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not
> condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath
> not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the
> condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness
> rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
> (Joh 3:17-19 KJV)
Jesus came to save that which was lost. He died for us. If we believe in
him, we are forgiven our sins. Hence he did not come to condemn but to
save. The next time he comes, he comes to judge.
____________________________________________________________
> There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
> who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
> (Rom 8:1 KJV)
Absolutely right. If we walk in the Spirit, and not after the flesh, we
shall not be condemned.
___________________________________________________________
> To be saved one must believe that Jesus is God, One must believe that God
> is His Father. One must believe that God was born as a man. Believe in His
> death and resurrection. God's Holy Spirit is no less God than Jesus, of
> God the Father.
John 3:16; Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 8:37; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:38,39; Acts
16:31; Romans 10:9 and many more.
_____________________________________________________________
>> Does the Holy Spirit never convict you of some small sin, which needs to
>> be confessed, forsaken and forgiven?
>
> No sin, but error. It does not matter the size. Sin is sin.
I see. So we just change the definition when it suits us. That's very
convenient.
___________________________________________________________
>>> Are you living under the law?
>>
>> I am not under the Mosaic Law.
>
> Have you any idea what covenant you live under?
The New Testament.
____________________________________________________________
>>> He said our sin account is closed.
>>
>> Really? Where?
>
> Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God
> imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose
> Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God
> iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to
> whom the Lord will not impute sin.
> (Rom 4:6-8 KJV)
I think I see where you are going. You believe that justification is a
one-off, even though Luther didn't, and the Bible doesn't.
Justification/forgiveness can be both past, present and future. This is a
basic error on your part. And this is why some of us pray the Lord's
Prayer, in particular the bit about forgiveness of sins, for why would Jesus
command us to do something which didn't actually happen? Those of us who
pray the Lord's Prayer believe that our sins are forgiven as we confess
them, even though we also believe that Jesus died for our sins 2000 years
ago.
________________________________________________________________
>> If you believe that all our future sins are already forgiven, then why
>> confess and repent of them and forsake them at all?
>
> Argumentative question. You do not even believe that sin was done away
> with the cross of Jesus Christ.
I have never said any such thing. That was your interpretation of my
disbelieving your views about sin.
____________________________________________________________
>> Christ's yoke is easy and his burden is light. But he still has
>> commandments. And his principle for living is the principle of love,
>> which does no harm to its neighbour, and thereby fulfils the Law.
>
> Name his commandments. There is no principle for living. You are of God,
> or not. There is no feigning in Him.
Love one another, don't blow a trumpet when you put stuff in the collection,
don't ogle, lay up treasure in heaven, be watchful, occupy till I come, etc.
_________________________________________________________________
>> Some people assume that liberty from the multitude of OT commandments
>> means that we are under no commandments or restraints whatsoever.
>
> Well, Prove otherwise. :)
'Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and,
lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.' (Matthew
28:20)
John Cooper
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages