20 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadAs for the other passage I am not convinced that it is an outright claim that all who follow Jesus will cease sinning.
Don't waste our time playing games. You know perfectly well that I was referring to the other passage.
[b]"And no, a connection between 'iniquity' and 'sin' in the English dictionary is not good enough, you have to show that the words used in the original language of the book (Greek I guess) means or implies sin."
http://biblelexicon.org/matthew/7-23. ...[text shortened]... ot convinced that it is an outright claim that all who follow Jesus will cease sinning.
-------Whitey--------------------
Indeed it isn't , and the evidence backs your idea up. Jesus had a group of followers who had converted and clearly were not perfected or free from sin (eg-they bickered and argued). There's no suggestion from the way Jesus interacted with them that for one moment he stopped thinking of them as his followers. He even made the most arrogant and proud one the rock of his church.
This fact alone blows a hole in ToO's theory - why he doesn't see this is anyone's guess.
20 Apr 09
Do you notice how Think of One does his "now you see me , now you don't" thing?
It seems to be "I want to challenge some people with my ideas "(NOW YOU SEE ME) but then.....
"Oh no , they have found some problems with it that I can't answer " (NOW YOU DON'T SEE ME)
Depending on the severity of the challenge or the logic or evidence used he seems to come and go like a mysterious traveller who books in to an Inn and then is gone before sunrise with only hoof prints in the mud to tell you he was ever there.
Ever seen Pale Rider with Clint Eastwood?
20 Apr 09
10 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterMaybe the tag ThinkofOne implies that he has thought of one really problematic verse for the doctrine of
Do you notice how Think of One does his "now you see me , now you don't" thing?
It seems to be "I want to challenge some people with my ideas "(NOW YOU SEE ME) but then.....
"Oh no , they have found some problems with it that I can't answer " (NOW YOU DON'T SEE ME)
Depending on the severity of the challenge or the logic or evidence used he s ...[text shortened]... in the mud to tell you he was ever there.
Ever seen Pale Rider with Clint Eastwood?
Justification by Faith. And he is fond of hammering that one verse.
This like a one note piano. Any kind of harmony with the rest of Scripture seems not to be of interest to him. And it is not clear intentionally what constitutes Scripture to him anyway.
The usefulness of this one note is only important because of the dissonance it can bring to other parts of Scripture on justification by faith.
The fact that all disciples still have with them the fallen nature is not overlooked in the New Testament at all. The fact that some Christians put emphasis on Justification by Faith to the under appreciation of other aspects of Christ's teaching, is not a fault of the New Testament.
Revalation 12 says of the overcoming and victorious disciples, that they overcame the accuser of the brothers by the blood of the Lamb.
While they were in the process of developing and growing in the divine life, they countered Satanic accusation by believing in the power of the blood of Jesus to remove all guilt from sins.
The blood of Christ deals with the real guilt towards God, the self blame of failures, and the accusatory condemnation of God's enemy Satan.
Revelation 12:10 does not say that they overcame the accuser because they never had any more sins and failures after becomming Christians. If a teacher of the Bible was really interested in practical Christian victory he would not neglect the power of the blood of Jesus to cleanse from all sins and to shut the mouth of the accuser.
When we lead someone to be saved and follow Christ we have equip them with confidence in the power of Christ's blood the cleanse from the any failures that they inevitably will have as they grow into maturity.
The CONSTRUCTIVE way to teach the perfection and freedom spoken of by Christ, is to show believers that forgiveness of sins is not an end in itself. Rather forgiveness and reconciliation are for growth into victory and overcoming of that sin nature that is still with them until the redemption of the body in transfiguration.
Just hammering that a person cannot be a Christian disciple because he is not totally free in his actions from sin, has no constructive purpose that I can see.
They overcame the accuser of the brothers because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of thier testimony. And they loved not thier soul life unto death (See Rev.12:10,11)
It is not a matter of what we can do. It is a matter of what Christ has done for us and can Himself do within us.
"But to Him who is able to guard you from stumbling and to set you before His glory without blemish in exultation..." (Jude 24).
" ... He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before Him in love ..."(Eph. 1:4)
Because the Father is perfect, the sons will be presented before Him perfected, not only positionally but dispositionally as well.
Every saved person must become an overcomer eventually. All we can do is slow Him down a little. We cannot pernmanently stop God from bringing us into holy perfection. So we might as well cooperate with faith and not postpone the destiny of every saved believer in Jesus.
That is really the teaching of the whole New Testament. You can slow God down a little bit if you really want to. But you shall be perfect because your heavenly Father is perfect.
20 Apr 09
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywilli thought the correct rendering of the verse was complete, you must be complete as your heavenly father is? and also that its not only the Satanic element that causes guilt, our own hearts condemn us also,
Maybe the tag ThinkofOne implies that he has thought of one really problematic verse for the doctrine of
Justification by Faith. And he is fond of hammering that one verse.
This like a one note piano. Any kind of harmony with the rest of Scripture seems not to be of interest to him. And it is not clear intentionally what constitutes [b]Scripture to really want to. But you shall be perfect because your heavenly Father is perfect.[/b]
By this we shall know that we originate with the truth, and we shall assure our hearts before him as regards whatever our hearts may condemn us in, because God is greater than our hearts and knows all things. 1 John 3:19-20
sometimes we can be our own worst enemies, we may feel unworthy of the sacrifice of the Christ, our self esteem is low and we may be hard and condemn ourselves, i love this scripture, for it states that God is greater than us and assures us that regardless of what we may have been like in the past, although we may still be carrying the baggage in one form or another, the sacrifice of the Christ can cleanse our consciences, it is truly awe inspiring.
20 Apr 09
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie===============================
i thought the correct rendering of the verse was complete, you must be complete as your heavenly father is? and also that its not only the Satanic element that causes guilt, our own hearts condemn us also,
By this we shall know that we originate with the truth, and we shall assure our hearts before him as regards whatever our hearts may condemn ...[text shortened]... ws all things. 1 John 3:19-20
the question we want to ask is, why is our heart condemning us?
i thought the correct rendering of the verse was complete, you must be complete as your heavenly father is? and also that its not only the Satanic element that causes guilt, our own hearts condemn us also,
=========================================
You'll notice that I mentioned three problems that the blood of Jesus answers: Real guilt, self condemnation, and Satanic accusation.
===========================
By this we shall know that we originate with the truth, and we shall assure our hearts before him as regards whatever our hearts may condemn us in, because God is greater than our hearts and knows all things. 1 John 3:19-20
the question we want to ask is, why is our heart condemning us?
================================
Because of my fractured wrist I can only write slowly. I will come back on this. It is a good question.
Some self blame may have legitimate basis. Sometimes it does not.
In either case the blood of Jesus is important to have peace.
Some self blame can be because of premature knowledge or religion. We have to discern between the conviction of the Holy Spirit and a over sensative conscience. We have to discern between the Holy Spirit's conviction and Satan's debilitating accusation.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by jaywilldid you have an accident Jaywill?
[b]===============================
i thought the correct rendering of the verse was complete, you must be complete as your heavenly father is? and also that its not only the Satanic element that causes guilt, our own hearts condemn us also,
=========================================
You'll notice that I mentioned three problems that the blood of Je ...[text shortened]... We have to discern between the Holy Spirit's conviction and Satan's debilitating accusation.[/b]
yes its really interesting, and sometimes the three may be linked in some way, for example the tax collector who was afraid to raise his eyes heavenwards, obviously feeling real guilt and perhaps some self condemnation.
20 Apr 09
For Christian maturity it is vital to have an example. That is why God has provided the writings of men like John and Paul in the NT.
When people complian that wehould not listen to Paul's letters but only to what Jesus said in the Gospels, a red flag of error should alert us.
Along with the teaching of the Original Victor over sin we need to study some disciples who also gained victory through patient discipleship.
So I am ver suspicious when ToO tries to exclude Paul's letters from the NT canon under the guise of "We only should learn from Jesus."
I agree that we should. Chasing His victorious examples of disciples will not accomplish this. And He told us that. See John 17.
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI fell and fractured wrist.
did you have an accident Jaywill?
yes its really interesting, and sometimes the three may be linked in some way, for example the tax collector who was afraid to raise his eyes heavenwards, obviously feeling real guilt and perhaps some self condemnation.
I am trying to find a link for some people on the blood of Jesus.
20 Apr 09
1 edit
The Precious Blood of Christ
"Sins offend God on the one hand and defile us on the other. What is guilt? Guilt is the stain of sins on your conscience. When you are young, your conscience is only stained a little. But as you grow older, these stains accumulate. Like a window which is never washed, the conscience grows darker and darker until eventually little light can penetrate.
No detergent, no chemical, no acid can wash the stain of guilt from your conscience. Not even a nuclear bomb can dislodge this stain; no, your conscience demands something more powerful than that. Your conscience needs the precious blood of Christ."
Excellent short booklet on the power of the blood of Christ for spiritual growth.
http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?id=%23%26N8H%0A
20 Apr 09
Originally posted by jaywilli read a link that he gave one time, it was just that, someone was putting forth the proposition that we should disregard all other Biblical teaching, except those of the Christ, i cannot remember the name nor the denomination, but its not good, for God has used many individuals to write some beautiful passages, i cannot imagine what the scriptures would be like without the Psalms, or Isaiah etc etc.
For Christian maturity it is vital to have an example. That is why God has provided the writings of men like John and Paul in the NT.
When people complian that wehould not listen to Paul's letters but only to what Jesus said in the Gospels, a red flag of error should alert us.
Along with the teaching of the Original Victor over sin we need to study ...[text shortened]... ictorious examples of disciples will not accomplish this. And He told us that. See John 17.
21 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobie=====================================
i read a link that he gave one time, it was just that, someone was putting forth the proposition that we should disregard all other Biblical teaching, except those of the Christ, i cannot remember the name nor the denomination, but its not good, for God has used many individuals to write some beautiful passages, i cannot imagine what the scriptures would be like without the Psalms, or Isaiah etc etc.
i read a link that he gave one time, it was just that, someone was putting forth the proposition that we should disregard all other Biblical teaching, except those of the Christ, i cannot remember the name nor the denomination, but its not good, for God has used many individuals to write some beautiful passages, i cannot imagine what the scriptures would be like without the Psalms, or Isaiah etc etc.
==========================================
I regard Psalms as the word of Christ as well. That is because it is the word of God and Christ is God incarnate.
The Apostle Peter spoke of "the Spirit of Christ" who revealed matters in the Old Testament prophets:
"... the prophets, who prophesied concerning the grace [that was] to come unto you, sought and searched diligently ... what manner of time the Spirit of Christ in them was making clear ..." (2 Pet.1:10,11)
Before the birth of Jesus Christ, the Spirit of Christ as the Spirit of God revealed prophesies within the Old Testament prophets. And we should know that the Spirit of Christ is the Spirit of God (Rom. 8:9)
And Christ said the Holy Spirit would lead the apostles into all the truth after His ascension (John 16:13).
We should therefore listen to the apostle when he teaches us that the Spirit of God explicitly revealed something:
For example: "But the Spirit says expressly that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons ..." (1 Tim. 4:1)
So you cannot trust that teaching that only the words of Jesus should be received from the Bible. The writer clearly is not practicing what he is telling everyone else to do.
21 Apr 09
2 edits
Originally posted by twhitehead[/b]While the Bible seems to have quite a few contradictions, I find the teachings attributed to Jesus while He walked the Earth to be quite coherent. What do you see as contradictory?
The wording. If he meat 'anyone who sins' then no doubt he would have said so. The way he said it 'those who work iniquity' sounds much more like he is referring to people who deliberately do grossly sinful acts. It is not at all clear that it covers all sin.
[b]Jesus states that all who commit sin are slaves to sin. Jesus also states that those who fo ...[text shortened]... ink the phrase 'the slave cannot remain in the house forever' refers to? Is it an analogy?
Lets take a closer look at the second passage:
"Not everyone who says to me,'Lord, Lord,' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven...Depart from me, you who work iniquity.'"
While I can see how you might say that it seems ambiguous, I don't see anything in the text that overtly points to or even hints at the idea that "iniquity" is limited to "people who deliberately do grossly sinful acts." If you consider that in the last sentence Jesus is speaking to those who do not do "the will of [His] Father", I think it is less ambiguous. Is any act of sin doing "the will of [His] Father"? If you consider this passage in conjunction with the first where Jesus is quite explicit, I don't know that there is any ambiguity to speak of.
It seems reasonable to think that 'the slave cannot remain in the house forever' is referring to "heaven"/"eternal life". In effect, those who continue to commit sin cannot have "heaven"/"eternal life". To be more specific, I think I read somewhere that the metaphor would be that the slave of the owner of the house have no claim to the house while the son of the owner would, hence "the son does remain forever". This also works nicely with the passage about being "born again".
John 3
3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
4 Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?" 5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
So one must be "born of the Spirit", i.e. God to "enter into the kingdom of God". Note the dichotomy used in 3:6 where one is EITHER "born of the flesh" OR "born of the Spirit". This is consistent with the dichotomy of "slave" vs. "free".