We often speak of the need to “forgive yourself.” While I understand what is meant by this phrase, it is unintelligible on the Christian worldview. People speak of the need to forgive themselves in the context of feeling guilt for something they did (or failed to do). They recognize the need to eliminate this guilt and get on with their life – to stop beating themselves up for their failure.
The problem with this notion is that it’s not possible to forgive oneself. Forgiveness is something only a third party can grant to you. You can no more forgive yourself than you can give something to yourself. On the Christian worldview, the ultimate source of our forgiveness is God Himself. We will never stop feeling guilt if we are looking to ourselves. The solution for guilt is not self-forgiveness, but divine forgiveness. If we continue feeling guilt after we have repented of our sin, that is evidence that we have not truly believed that God has forgiven us – because once God forgives and we believe He has forgiven, the conscience ought to be quieted (Heb 9).
Thinking to Believe 
March 7, 2018 at 4:39 am
You are correct. Psychologists continue to repeat this line, but the problem is a lack of faith that you have been forgiven.
LikeLike
March 7, 2018 at 8:15 am
Jason; and, jerryensey
There is a reason that psychologists repeat this line and this is why.
First of all let me begin by stating that Creationists(Believers) and Evolutionists(Secularists) actually express the same divinity in different ways.
The creationist accepts the poof poof of instantaneous creation, now you see it; now you don’t which is just a variation of Evolution speeded up. Evolution on the other hand is merely creationism slowed down.
But whether you are the result of a Creator or an Evolver, the essence if the Creator Divine or the Evolver Divine are the same, nor can they be different. They are the same because the essence of the Creator and the essence of the Evolver are necessarily part of the created and/or part of the Evolver.
That is the essential sameness/difference: one sees the speeding up / slowing down of the other but the Divinity of each is the same.
Now going to scripture for a moment. The one who revealed the divinity of both as being the same said:
“Do you believe that I am in my Father and the Father is in me?”
You accept that as a believer and I believe that as an acceptor. The Divinity of Life Forces that force Life must necessarily remain in the created and in the evolved; for example, if the essence of the Creator/Evolver is sugar and spice and everything nice then we all too must be made of sugar and spice and everything nice. That’s the Axiom Equality.
The Father that is in Jesus and the Son that is in the Father are the same Divinity regardless of what you name the Divinity but that was not uniqueness of Jesus; the uniqueness of Jesus was that he was able to recognize that, describe it and impart that message to all; to those who understood what he was saying and to those who did not; and, to those who did but would not, that was stepping on their toes and they would not accept or believe any departure from their traditions. The other unique thing that Jesus messaged was that the Father being in the Son and the Son being in the Father was not unique to Jesus but was in all humanity; it was within you and within everybody; you simply needed to understand it, see it, grasp it and you would be, where he was at that moment and that is what he meant by being born again.
And here is why this description is so important to the understanding of forgiveness, the receiving and the giving of forgiveness. Why does Jesus say that the Father sees everything you do in secret? Because the father and the son are one and the same divinity within and it is this very reason that the son receives forgiveness in repentance from the father within you. So when one speaks of forgiving oneself, the way it is or the way it isn’t, is a non sequitor because forgiving oneself is merely a metaphorical analogy to the father because in reality it is the father’s endowment of forgiveness you have immediately in repentance, Forgiveness from Repentance is the cause of its own effect.
Remember that wonderful scriptural analogy, the time when Jesus virtually called the Canaanite woman a dog? Matthew 15: 22-28
The Scripture tells us about a Canaanite woman who approaches Jesus Christ to heal her demon-possessed daughter. But Jesus was silent until his disciples came to urge him to heal her, so that she could be sent away. Yet Jesus answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
The woman later came and knelt before Jesus and begged for His Healing. What is perplexing is Jesus’ seemingly cold remark to the woman. He said to her, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it the dogs.” But instead of getting offended, the woman admitted that she was a dog that eats the crumbs that fall from their master’s table. And hearing her response, Jesus (at once humiliated, repented) and the Father, (through the son) immediately applauded her faith and granted her request.
That is “forgiving oneself” in the metaphorical sense, and there is nothing wrong with that sense when you have complete understanding of Jesus’s life, behavior, parables and message.
Jesus, the astonishing preacher revolutionizing religiosity. If it sinks in we’re on the same page if it doesn’t, you don’t understand why Jesus embarked on his campaign to up-end tradition, over-turn tables so the blind could see, the downtrodden freed and the captives released from the animus of religious tyranny.
This revolutionary message of Jesus was for the bums on the seat, sitting in the pews and began within the congregation; it was not talking about gentiles outside the synagogue in the beginning; it was aimed at the insiders, the church-goers, the Scribes and Pharisees, priests and preachers, the whole congregation needed fixing because of the hole IN congregation. Because it was the church attendees who were the downtrods, the blinded, the captives; they were the ones who were sick and needed the doctor, who needed to have their minds opened, more to “love and mercy” than to “transgression and penalty” burdens they were constantly pummeled with.
But so intractable were they.
Now you know the rest of the story.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 7, 2018 at 9:38 am
All sin offends God Himself. He must be the primary priority when seeking forgiveness through repentance: Psalm 51.
6 But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.
8b for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
14 For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.
33a But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness,
(Matthew 6:6, 8b, 14-15, 33a)
15
For thus says the high and exalted One
Who lives forever, whose name is Holy,
“I dwell on a high and holy place,
And also with the contrite and lowly of spirit
In order to revive the spirit of the lowly
And to revive the heart of the contrite.
16
“For I will not contend forever,
Nor will I always be angry;
For the spirit would grow faint before Me,
And the breath of those whom I have made.
17
“Because of the iniquity of his unjust gain I was angry and struck him;
I hid My face and was angry,
And he went on turning away, in the way of his heart.
18
“I have seen his ways, but I will heal him;
I will lead him and restore comfort to him and to his mourners,
19
Creating the praise of the lips.
Peace, peace to him who is far and to him who is near,”
Says the LORD, “and I will heal him.” (Isaiah 57:15-19)
LikeLike
March 7, 2018 at 11:31 am
Frank:
That all sin offends God is BS dogma from religion. The only ones affected by sin is the sinners.
Having said that however, much of what you and others call sin is merely what others do that offends YOU, NOT God; and whatever you may think sin is, should be impotent as far as you’re concerned, because much the time, sin like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and you being the beholder, theoretically sin should have no effect on you, except if it angers you, upsets you, and your hatred of the sin and sinners grows so much; eventually, you believe you have advanced self righteousness by taking that drug of Absolute Certainty and that is unfair to the righteous person and then it becomes a drug that can make people do the strangest things.
It is really at that point that it becomes the devil’s drug.
And if you get hooked on it and if you keep taking it, you too could wake up one day, so full of righteousness that suddenly the only thing that makes sense to you anymore is somebody else’s death, the death of the sinners, as the penalty was in the ancient days a capital offense and still is in many other countries against apostates, against gays, against everybody who disagrees with you.
And you’ll realize that your mind is no longer your best friend and then it’s too late as you will have become the epitome of the sinner you hated and which you have become.
So if someone offers you, self righteous drug called Absolute Certainty, they’re going to make it sound attractive and you will be tempted; but, just say no. Your mind and your children’s minds will thank you for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 7, 2018 at 12:00 pm
Frank, God sets the standards. When we miss acting positively according to His standards, we sin. Since He sets the standards, when we sin it is obvious who is offended. Matter of fact, sin does not exist if God is just religious BS. Therefore, your acknowledgment that sin exists proves that you are seriously confused.
LikeLike
March 7, 2018 at 12:12 pm
SonofMan,
I don’t always agree with you but usually follow your “train of thought” — but you lost me here.
Only in certain sins can you say — “The only ones affected by sin is the sinners.” Numerous sins have a direct or indirect victim that is “affected” by that persons sin. If certain sins are wide spread even society can be adversely affected.
LikeLike
March 7, 2018 at 12:39 pm
Clayton,
You lost me also — “if God is just religious BS” sin would be transgression of the law of the land as it were. So if I get drunk and drive killing your wife and family haven’t I “sinned” even if God does not exist ? And shouldn’t I feel remorse/guilt for my sin that killed your family ? and wouldn’t it be you and the people affected by their deaths I ask forgiveness of ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 7, 2018 at 2:04 pm
Leo and SonofMan, this blog is not a place for you to pontificate on whatever you want, filling up the comment section with long, off-topic comments. Due to my lack of time to monitor comments, this has been going on for a long time unchecked. I am going to start deleting comments, and eventually banning you from commenting in the future. Please stay on topic.
LikeLike
March 7, 2018 at 6:40 pm
Dear Jason (TR),
Thank you for raising the topic of forgiveness.
You are right to say that Christian doctrine states that forgiveness comes from God. Roman Catholic Churches that adhere to the directives from Rome require their worshippers to confess their sins to the Priest before they are allowed to participate in Holy Communion.
Orthodox Christian doctrine does not demand confessions as a condition before the Eucharist is given to their worshippers. Instead, confession is offered as a gift, a means of healing someone who is guilt-ridden. After hearing the confession, the Priest tells them that they must repent earnestly before God who expects them not to repeat the transgression – commonly a one-off instance of adultery. If it is clear to the Priest that the confession is genuinely meant, he tells them that God has forgiven them.
You wrote, ” People speak of the need to forgive themselves in the context of feeling guilt for something they did (or failed to do). They recognize the need to eliminate this guilt and get on with their life – to stop beating themselves up for their failure.”
I have to say that nobody has said to me that they ‘need to forgive themselves’ without first explaining what it was that troubled them. Then, if they excuse themselves in the manner you have described they are usually repeating what a professional (maybe a counsellor or psychiatrist) has said to them.
May I ask for clarification of your closing remark, please? You wrote, “If we continue feeling guilt after we have repented of our sin, that is evidence that we have not truly believed that God has forgiven us – because once God forgives and we believe He has forgiven, the conscious ought to be quieted.”
Did you mean to write that the conscience rather than the conscious ought to be quieted?
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 7:55 am
Paul V.
I was thinking more about individual sin that only affects the sinner that would not necessarily be a sin according to the person. For example things like individual behavior like picking up sticks on the Sabbath or being gay which are sins as perceived by others; I didn’t have evil that affects the community at large in mind, such as a massacre. I was trying to see the sin of being gay for example not so much a sin of the individual but a sin of others who, in some countries and by some people believe they have the right to kill gays or beat on them when in fact it is the sin of the self righteous that end up being the more evil attributes.
I apologize for not clearly defining the worldview thoughts I was caught up in.
Thanks for pointing that out.
LikeLiked by 2 people
March 8, 2018 at 9:49 am
Dinos, yes that was a typo. I have fixed it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 8, 2018 at 10:00 am
“If we continue feeling guilt after we have repented of our sin, that is evidence that we have not truly believed that God has forgiven us – because once God forgives and we believe He has forgiven, the conscious ought to be quieted.”
Forgiveness does not come by us “repenting of our sin”. Forgiveness is and was accomplished by the shedding of blood, of Jesus that is. Our complete and total forgiveness of all sins, past, present and future was accomplished by Jesus Christ. While we all stumble in many ways, our track record and performance does not cause our forgiveness.
While all forgiveness, whether it’s of us or others is rooted in Christ’s finished work on the cross, guilt is a human emotion that can still plague us. As a believer in Christ, guilt for past sins can remain and with time and the renewing of our minds in the knowledge of Jesus, hopefully this guilt can be overcome. The presence of guilt does not negate our forgiveness in Christ, but it does bring present unrest which is not good for us as human beings in the here and now.
Should we believe God and eject guilt ? Absolutely YES ! But that’s easier said then done sometimes and certainly God is not going to hold it over us and ransom our forgiveness because of it. That would make Him pretty Sadistic if you ask me.
As for forgiving ourselves, I would say yes we should. We don’t need to make a doctrine out of it, just do it based on the fact that God has already forgiven us as believers and nothing can change that, not even our guilty conscience.
Jesus came to give us rest. As we grow in our understanding of Christ’s finished work and resurrection, we will be able to enjoy that rest as we should.
He who has ears to hear …. It is finished !
Cheers ! (That’s for you Charlie 🙂 )
Naz
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 10:01 am
Jason
if you would, please delete every post I have made on your blog or give me to option to do so and I will never post to theosophical gain. Do we have a deal?
Thank you
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 10:03 am
“again”
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 12:07 pm
Bro. Jason, I must disagree with you. You write:
The problem with this notion is that it’s not possible to forgive oneself. Forgiveness is something only a third party can grant to you. You can no more forgive yourself than you can give something to yourself.
These three sentences appear unsupported, excepting your later appeal to God’s ultimate forgiveness. Who says that forgiveness is something only a third party can give? One of the definitions of forgive is, “to cease to feel resentment against.” It is certainly possible to resent yourself for personal shortcomings. Such persons know others have forgiven them, but they cannot forgive themselves. Say, for example, a man who accidentally kills his son while backing out of the driveway (he was in a hurry and failed to look). He can be convinced that his family has forgiven him, but he cannot forgive himself for what he has done. There is nothing in the word forgive that necessitates a third party.
Now, you insist that if we truly believe that God has forgiven us for a transgression, all guilt should cease:
If we continue feeling guilt after we have repented of our sin, that is evidence that we have not truly believed that God has forgiven us – because once God forgives and we believe He has forgiven, the conscious [I think you meant ‘conscience’] ought to be quieted.
But guilt can be multi-directional. As with the case of family members, I can fully believe that they have forgiven me for accidentally killing my son, so any sense of liability to them can be released, but that does not in itself mean that I will not continue to hate myself for being so irresponsible. I can also believe that God has forgiven me for negligence, so my sense of obligation to Him ceases, but I don’t know how I could, in myself, ever get rid of personal guilt.
Of course, in Christ, all things are possible, and such a person would definitely need to lean on Him for self-forgiveness. In other words, though I may not be able to forgive myself, God’s love will help me to cope so that I can live in His joy and make positive contributions to the church. Moreover, His love helps us to realize that if we can forgive others for lapses of judgment which result in tragedy, we can forgive ourselves of the same.
@Naz
You write,
Forgiveness does not come by us “repenting of our sin”.
Luke 5
32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.
Acts 2
38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 3
19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,
Acts 5
31 God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
Acts 11
18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
Romans 2
4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?
5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.
2 Corinthians 7
9 As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.
10 For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death.
The scriptural record is quite clear that repentance directly relates to the forgiveness of sins and our standing with God.
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 1:35 pm
Scalia, it depends on how you define repentance ?
If you mean to say that repentance from sin means to “stop sinning”, I disagree with you.
For example in Acts 11, you cited this passage :
18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
If you take a look at the previous verse :
Act 11:17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?”
You will see that it was not the Gentiles ability to stop sinning that Peter attributed their repentance to. It was their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It was their turning to the Lord from from their own dead works or from their unbelief. This is the true meaning of repentance that leads to life.
Repentance cannot mean to “stop sinning”. Every person will sin even after they are born again. So there is no such thing as a human being completely ceasing from committing sins. As James said, we all stumble in many ways. The goal is LIFE not a perfectly behaved life. God help us to live honorably and nobly of course, but that is not the end game.
Naz
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 1:56 pm
Naz, nobody teaches repentance in a vacuum. Genuine faith will produce repentance. Why in the world would a person repent in a Christian context who did not have faith in Christ? Your objection presents a false dichotomy.
Repentance doesn’t mean to “stop sinning”?? Are you saying that I can be a Mafia hit man, express faith in Christ, continue to murder people and go to heaven?
LikeLike
March 8, 2018 at 2:00 pm
SonofMan, that’s ridiculous. Just stay on topic. A very simple request.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 8, 2018 at 2:31 pm
SonofMan,
Thank you for your clarification —- I figured that was what you were saying but just wanted to confirm.
I wouldn’t feel guilt/remorse/seek forgiveness from God for picking up sticks on the Sabbath because I don’t believe that is a sin. That’s a big problem with religion —- we don’t all agree on God and what God thinks is sin. Even non-theists could differ widely on what’s right and wrong.
Now if I committed a sin/crime, I’d not only have to seek forgiveness from God but the victim(s) of my sin/crime. Now even if I obtained forgiveness from all parties if the victim(s) could not be made whole I’d definitely suffer from guilt. In a way that could be beneficial in my repentance as long as it’s not overwhelming.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 8, 2018 at 3:14 pm
Paul V:
I did something one time and I suffered deep guilt. I wrote a letter of apology to the party offended, never received a reply but I felt forgiveness by the confession and apology nonetheless.
One time I was driving a decked-out promotional van for my company and inadvertently cut off another driver as I turned onto a one way street, I just didn’t see him in my blind spot I suppose. We stopped at the red light and with a mean, growly look rolling his window down, blasted me for cutting him off. Obviously I did or he wouldn’t have been where he was, beside my vehicle. My window being down, I immediately said “I’m sorry I didn’t see you” The next thing he said as his demeanor immediately transformed to a friendly smile: “Hey that’s a cool van you got there” And waved as we went separate ways when the light changed.
To me those were two memorable examples of forgiveness I experienced; one expressed within myself internally and one expressed externally that exonerated me because I confessed my “sin” to a third party and received from a third party.
And at that very occasion a scripture came to my mind about that encounter and this is what came to my mine.
“If you confess your sin, he is faithful and fair, and quick to forgive.” And to me that did not imply only an invisible god but actually coiuod mean, and in this case did from another human being.
LikeLiked by 2 people
March 9, 2018 at 11:14 am
Scalia, I don’t know of any Biblical evidence for the notion of “forgiving oneself.” Do you?
I think we are operating from two different conceptions of forgiveness. While many in today’s Christian world construe forgiveness as a psychological/emotional concept, I think the Biblical notion is primarily a relational concept. Sin fractures a relationship, and forgiveness is what restores the relationship. Forgiveness is considering the offense as never having occurred, and the relationship is restored to its pre-sin condition (our relationship with God is the paradigmatic example: we sinned, fracturing the relationship with God, but when we repent to God he forgives us, restoring our relationship to its pre-sin condition). Everything in the Bible that talks about forgiveness speaks of it as an action on the part of the offended toward an offender when they repent. Given a relational conception of forgiveness, forgiving oneself is meaningless and impossible. Since we do not have a relationship with ourselves, we cannot forgive ourselves.
Self-forgiveness is only meaningful if one thinks that forgiveness is about psychological/emotional states. On such a conception, you need to “let go” of feelings of guilt and self-condemnation, whether they are directed to yourself or to others. While I think such an “emotional” release is great advice, it is not what the Bible describes as forgiveness. Forgiveness is not about feelings, but about relationship. Forgiveness is about restoration of relationship, not the release of feelings. That is why God can command us to forgive. It’s hard to command feelings, but one can command behavior. When we forgive someone, we are to resume the relationship with them as though they had never sinned against us. And we are to do that simply because they have asked for us to do so – not because we suddenly feel happy feelings toward them. The same is true of love. The command to love is about how we treat people, not how we feel about them. Although, for both forgiveness and love, the feelings often follow the behavior.
I realize that you will likely disagree with this just as much as you disagreed with my original contention, and that’s fine. I don’t have the time to argue the case in this comment, but hope to do so someday as a new post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 9, 2018 at 11:18 am
Frank, I have deleted your comment in which you quoted lengthy portions of Scripture. Sharing Scripture is fine, but the chapter and verse citation is good enough. Tell us the significance of the Scripture rather than quoting it. And please don’t clog up the comments section with embedded videos either. Make your point in words. Summarize the argument of the videos rather than embedding them, and make sure the videos are relevant to the post. Thank you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
March 9, 2018 at 1:44 pm
Jason:
If I agreed with your idea as being relational from an external party, and I infer you meant external relationship, we’d both be wrong.
Repentance/Forgiveness happen spontaneously, together, at the same time, the cause of its own effect. We merely assume forgiveness follows repentance for the sake of convenience but I believe that is wrong. And here’s why.
If you deny a relational component of the father living “within you”, you imply that Jesus was misguided: John 14:9 “Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doth the works.(words)
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ (words) sake.
When a teacher teaches, the student doesn’t have to think about it for days and then learns from it. The student learns as the teacher teaches; the cause of its own effect.
And Jesus did not deny that everybody could see the father with the same understanding…because he taught and I learned. Taught and Learn is the same way And that’s how I see the relationship, the spirit within, not without.The “other” self within you, the one who sees everything you do in secret. One self repents, the other self forgives. To demonstrate by being “textually active” write it as one word “RepentForgive”. And that’s like……….L-E-V-E-L………. EVIGROFTNEPER
How many times have we said “thank you” in the silence of our own heart nobody around. It’s the same thing, it’s the relational spirit within you, the spirit Conduit from and to the father. That’s who you’re speaking to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 9, 2018 at 6:59 pm
Dear Jason,
I think the topic of forgiveness illustrates how personal is the understanding of it for different individuals. Maybe, you intended a discussion based on Christianity that might reflect the views of different denominations?
I have appreciated that you wrote on this topic and I’ve enjoyed the various thoughts in response to it.
The Lord’s Prayer exhorts us to forgive those who trespass against us after we ask God to forgive our trespasses.
If people have been killed we cannot expect the victims to forgive the murderers in an earthly way but if the murderers sensed that the victims forgave them it may be that this has arisen as an intercession from Christ.
We are aware that some people seem unlikely to ever forgive the murders of their loved ones and it may be because they have no relationship with Christ?
The link below contains a story of St Dionysius who forgave the man who had murdered the saint’s brother and gave him sanctuary from his pursuers. The story begins with, “He is also well known as the ‘Saint of Forgiveness’ and a true story of how he got this name is accounted on many occasions.”
https://zakynthosinformerblog.wordpress.com/2017/08/22/saint-dionysios-zakynthos-patron-saint/
Would you give us your thoughts on the forgiveness of murder, please?
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 9, 2018 at 9:10 pm
TR Jason,
From a Biblical standpoint forgiveness is all about righteousness & reconciliation. The first makes possible the second. Neither of which we can ever have through our own selves. These come directly from Messiah being propitiation for all sin. (2 Corinthians 5:21, 18-19)
LikeLike
March 10, 2018 at 12:07 am
There is a relationship between vertical (God-Mankind) forgiveness/salvation and horizontal (Mankind-Mankind) forgiveness/works. Jesus told the man that to obtain Eternal Life, he needed to put both God and his Neighbour at the forefront of his life. Allegiance and obedience with no mention of a sacrificial death or the spilling of blood.
At the Separation of the Sheep and the Goats, salvation (forgiveness) from God depended on the horizontal active relationship between people. Allegiance and obedience alone.
Nicodemus was told that salvation came through being reborn and through having belief in Jesus. No mention of blood or death.
If God required Jesus to be killed, who put Satan’s thoughts into Judas’s mind? Was Satan carrying out God’s instructions?
If God required Jesus to be killed before he could love humanity, who ensured that the crowd would select Barabbas?
Did Jesus’ blood (his death) provide the payment for Mankind being in a Sinful state or for individual sins? In other words, did he die for Sin or for sins?
If Jesus bought back (redeemed) humanity with his Death, who received the redeeming payment? Who owned Humanity before Jesus redeemed it?
Why do some people accept the concept of “Original Sin”?
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 10, 2018 at 10:12 pm
Bro. Jason,
You are correct in pointing out that there doesn’t appear to be any explicit example of self-forgiveness in the Bible, so it is probable that every instance of biblical forgiveness is interpersonal. I think, however, we can agree that there are many things in the Bible not specifically addressed that are in accordance with its principles.
The biblical words representing forgiveness predominantly mean a cancellation/release of a debt/obligation. For the offender, there is a sense of obligation to rectify the wrong which include sincere expressions of sorrow and remorse, along with acts of restitution. There is also often an acceptance of punishment for the infraction. We also understand that our transgression may have caused anger or perhaps hatred in those we have wronged. Thus, emotion is concomitant with an offense.
You write:
Forgiveness is not about feelings, but about relationship. Forgiveness is about restoration of relationship, not the release of feelings. That is why God can command us to forgive. It’s hard to command feelings, but one can command behavior.
But God commands feelings too:
Leviticus 19:18
18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.
Ephesians 4:26
26 Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger,
Anger, hatred, resentment, disappointment, sadness, etc., almost always if not always occur when we have been wronged. Your bifurcation of emotion and restoration seems incongruous in light of the fact that God forbids the bearing of a grudge and commands the release of anger by the end of the day. Moreover, many if not most people seeking forgiveness are not merely looking for a procedural pass; they are hurt because they hurt others and won’t feel fully restored until there is an emotional restoration. If I have wronged my wife, she may treat me no differently, but I will never feel comfortable until I know that her feelings toward me have been restored.
Since a person can love himself, hate himself, congratulate himself and admonish himself, why can’t he forgive himself? The fact that every biblical instance involves others does not in itself preclude self-forgiveness. Recall that one of the definitions of said word is to release feelings of resentment against. Since it is possible to feel resentment against oneself, to feel a sense of obligation even if others have forgiven you, it is certainly possible to release those feelings, no? And if you can stop resenting yourself then by definition you have forgiven yourself.
Since it is possible to direct all of the emotions I mentioned inwardly, I do not see how the argument that one cannot, in a biblical context, forgive oneself can be sustained. For if you can direct them inwardly, you can also bury them and move on.
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 10:53 am
From a Biblical standpoint forgiveness is all about righteousness & reconciliation. The first makes possible the second. Neither of which we can ever have through our own selves. These come directly from Messiah being propitiation for all sin. (2 Corinthians 5:21, 18-19)
We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are. For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard. Yet God, with undeserved kindness, declares that we are righteous. He did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for our sins. For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood. This sacrifice shows that God was being fair when he held back and did not punish those who sinned in times past, for he was looking ahead and including them in what he would do in this present time. God did this to demonstrate his righteousness, for he himself is fair and just, and he declares sinners to be right in his sight when they believe in Jesus. (Romans 3:22-26)
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 2:36 pm
Frank Adamick writes:
From a Biblical standpoint forgiveness is all about righteousness & reconciliation. The first makes possible the second. Neither of which we can ever have through our own selves.
The “Biblical standpoint” of forgiveness isn’t “all” about righteousness and reconciliation. Esau’s forgiveness of Jacob had nothing to do with Esau’s righteousness, and Jacob wasn’t made righteous by Esau’s act.
We can say that the biblical doctrine of salvation is “all” about righteousness and reconciliation, but what has that got to do with self-forgiveness? Naz legitimately raised the topic of forgiveness because he was challenging Jason’s assertion that the Christian worldview excludes such a notion. On Naz’s account of salvific faith, the sin question is forever settled in a Christian’s life. If so, then it does not follow that a person cannot struggle with self-forgiveness under a Christian worldview. Saving faith has forever sealed a believer unto the day of redemption, but said believer may commit sin and struggle with forgiving h/erself for earthly shortcomings.
Per Post 15, I’m convinced that Naz’s account of salvation is unbiblical, and Jason’s assertion does not follow under his account, but both perspectives address Jason’s topic: self-forgiveness. Whatever one’s view of redemption/forgiveness, how does that view relate to the topic?
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 3:59 pm
With the subject of divine forgiveness, it is useful to take the big sweep across history rather than have a myopic view through only one writer of the past.
The Deuteronomic Historian took the view of collective sin and punishment. However, the writer of Chronicles, who lived centuries later, formed the view of individual reward and punishment, as had Job’s friends. To cater for the emergent monotheism, the Chronicler was the first to have Satan operate independently of Yahweh.
In New Testament times – still Jewish – while Paul had his views, he was constantly at odds with the array of views held by other Jesus-followers. He operated with a highly creative mind.
In the 2nd century, Justin invented the idea that Snake in Eden was actually Satan, which paved the way for later Fathers, including Augustine, to invent the concept of Original Sin.
Another major player is the English poet, John Milton. His theology and soteriology, along with the vivid and lurid imagination of Medieval artists and writers (think of Dante, for example), shaped contemporary ideas about sins, Sin, Satan, God, and Forgiveness.
No two people think precisely the same way, and this is particularly evident when hypothesis is in play.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 11, 2018 at 4:08 pm
And, Doug, how does your view relate to forgiving yourself?
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 8:21 pm
Hi Scalia,
I believe it is unhealthy to carry regrets, although this is neither easy nor absolutely possible. In real life, we often think “if only … “.
I have heard a saying, whether true or not: “We judge others by their actions and ourselves by our motives”.
Of course, we learn through our mistakes, so if possible we should turn issues into lessons, and grow thereby. And not keep beating ourselves over the head with a stick. “Get up, shake off the dust, and walk”.
Regarding what I wrote before, I am dismayed when I read: “the Bible says … ” because it presents the ideas and views of any number of writers in communities spread over a long long period.
I want to know what each party wrote and their circumstances. For example, the 6th century Deuteronomists managed the ascendancy of monotheism, which had unintended consequences such as Theodicy. The later Chronicler addressed this by making Satan operate independently of Yahweh, and hemce distance God from Evil. The NT writers developed this further, as did the Church Fathers and medieval scholars (Anselm, Abelard, Aquinas, etc.) and the literati (Milton, Dante, etc.)
I am currently researching Satan, which I know is slightly off-topic, but if anyone has scholarly information, I will provide the location of my email address.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 11, 2018 at 8:57 pm
Scalia,
Why drag up Esau? He’s irrelevant. His actions weren’t driven by sincere motives. He was an utter phoney from the word go.: but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness.” [(Mal 1:3) (Oba 1:1-21)]
Fact is he didn’t receive forgiveness from the Almighty. Cain fared better. Now, let’s get back to the matter at hand.
Forgiveness from a Biblical standpoint means such as found in Psalm 51. This is the standard by which we receive our instruction.: Against You, You only, I have sinned And done what is evil in Your sight, So that You are justified when You speak And blameless when You judge. (Psalm 51:4) The standard is God’s perfect righteousness, nothing less. The aim is God reconciling the world to Himself through His Son. Stop sinning against God for He comes first then you won’t be sinning against your neighbor. You won’t be saved if you’re not forgiven by Him [Mat 6:14-15].
TR Jason wrote: “The problem with this notion is that it’s not possible to forgive oneself. [He’s determined self forgiveness isn’t valid.] Forgiveness is something only a third party can grant to you. [He sets a parameter governing forgiveness.] You can no more forgive yourself than you can give something to yourself. [Once again self forgiveness constitutes invalid.] On the Christian worldview, the ultimate source of our forgiveness is God Himself. [He refers to an aspect of a particular sort of forgiveness espoused by believing Christians.] We will never stop feeling guilt if we are looking to ourselves. [He introduces the concept of guilt/shame into consideration.] The solution for guilt is not self-forgiveness, but divine forgiveness. [A remedy for our guilt? – Messiah heals.] If we continue feeling guilt after we have repented of our sin, that is evidence that we have not truly believed that God has forgiven us [Continued guilt evinces flawed / lack of repentance.] – because once God forgives [God will not forgive without repentance on the part of the sinner.] and we believe He has forgiven [We know God forgives us when we put our trust / faith in His Son (1 Th 2:13)], the conscience ought to be quieted [When repentance proves genuine forgiveness becomes assured and our conscience is healed by God. (Luke 15)] (Heb 9) [Explains the substance for the shadow offered in Lev 16 pertaining Sacrifice / Atonement].” I am addressing these issues. Whether or not anyone thinks it’s possible or impossible to “forgive oneself” won’t cure your ills (Mat 9:11-13). You must be reconciled to GOD or you’re forever lost. Argue all day and all night whether you can “forgive yourself”, “feel sorry for yourself”, “pity yourself”, “deny yourself”; that’s all vanity. Read the book of Ecclesiastes. You need to humble yourself and repent, in that order, because you’ll never be capable of repentance without a contrite heart which you’ll never receive unless you seek it in humility from our Lord GOD. You will have no rest until you are reconciled to God. Messiah removes the guilt and blots out the shame. God’s gift of everlasting life comes by receiving His righteousness by His grace through faith / trust in the Person and work of His only begotten Son, Who is Yahshua Messiah, then walking in the sanctity of the Holy Spirit of Truth. If you want to try the Sigmund Freud route you certainly can. Unfortunately (most especially for those who have), many have but you’ll surely end in failure. Consequently, when judgment comes you’ll pay the penalty for your own sin [Eze 3:18-21].
I’ll take this opportunity to point out to you, Scalia, that TR Jason “Posted [this particular blog] by Theosophical Ruminator under Hamartiology, Miscellaneous, Soteriology, Theology” which leaves a wide field open for exploration & harvest.
Be well.
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 10:37 pm
@Frank
Why drag up Esau?
I explained why, and you typically missed it. This aptly illustrates why you’re a troll. Jason can try to rein you in, but you remain unchanged. You’re not here to engage anybody in dialog. You come here to air your beliefs because you perhaps think it’s your mission propagate whatever you think is the truth. Your problem, however, is you’ve so far shown yourself incapable of having a real discussion, and that’s why you fill up comment sections with cut-and-paste jobs, videos or lengthy Scripture quotations. Jason finally pulled the plug on that, but you continue to write stuff that shows you’re not paying attention to what you’re reading.
You quote Jason without even pretending to address my counterarguments, so you in effect have said nothing.
The rest of what you say about repentance and forgiveness most everybody here believes, but since you’re not paying attention, its understandable you’d miss that.
I’ll take this opportunity to point out to you, Scalia, that TR Jason “Posted [this particular blog] by Theosophical Ruminator under Hamartiology, Miscellaneous, Soteriology, Theology” which leaves a wide field open for exploration & harvest.
Still missing the boat by a mile. You have no idea how a blog works, do you? Well, perhaps you flat don’t care how a blog works because you’ve deliberately posted off-topic material ever since you’ve been here.
Blog categories are not topics of discussion; they are designed to assist readers in finding posts. Jason has a category called Politics. So, if he posts under that category a column about gay marriage, you can’t jump in and talk about abortion just because its a political issue. I suspect you couldn’t care less because your “mission” is more important than respecting your hosts wishes, right? You’d rather be a troll because your “truth” displaces courtesy.
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 10:46 pm
@Doug
You write:
I believe it is unhealthy to carry regrets, although this is neither easy nor absolutely possible. In real life, we often think “if only … “.
Yes, and in a manner, that’s part of what I’m arguing with Jason. I think all of us have done things we wish we’d done differently, but there are other things that may be particularly painful to bear (like my example of accidentally killing your son).
Jason argues that self-forgiveness is impossible in a biblical context but pursuant to our back-and-forth above, I simply don’t think that conclusion follows from his argument.
All the best.
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 10:52 pm
Dear Jason,
My comment #24 alluded to the variety of human understanding of forgiveness and I noted that you posted your thesis under the headings:
Hamartiology, Miscellaneous, Soteriology, Theology
The title of your thesis, “You Can’t Forgive Yourself,” seemed clear enough when you wrote of “divine forgiveness,” but on a discussion forum, it’s not unusual for contributors to understand the message differently so that they can express their views.
My understanding of the Doctrine of Forgiveness is that we ask God to forgive us for our continuing sins and we are expected to forgive those that sin against us – it’s in The Lord’s Prayer. I don’t know of a scripture that tells us that we can forgive ourselves; nor do I know of one that tells us it’s acceptable to reject God’s forgiveness after we have repented and asked God earnestly for it. The link below may be helpful to some contributors:
https://www.gotquestions.org/forgiving-yourself.html
I’m inclined to agree with you that the concept of forgiveness had divine origins in line with Hamartiology and Soteriology. I think the original meaning of forgiveness has been diluted through common use of the term in place of a more suitable one such as to pardon in the legal sense or as part of social etiquette. Largely, the Law of the Land has taken precedence over Godliness in current times and such law varies from country to country.
I should be grateful for your thoughts, please.
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLike
March 11, 2018 at 11:31 pm
This God you claim one needs to be reconciled to, where do you think that God resides?
Remember Jesus…… where did Jesus find God?…inside his own self….you all talk about God who as though there is some other existence, maybe on on another planet exist, in any case, elsewhere and that, I submit, is why you are stuck about whether to not you can forgive yourself./..Of course you can but that’s only if what you do affects somebody else; otherwise, why would you need forgiveness; the scripture that says Blessed(happy) is the man who does not condemn himself for what he does (allows) why would he then need forgiveness. Well, he wouldn’t.
That’s why Paul V, not Paul of Tarsus would not worry about forgiveness self forgiveness to otherwise: “I wouldn’t feel guilt/remorse/seek forgiveness from God for picking up sticks on the Sabbath because I don’t believe that is a sin.” ..that is merely perceived sin by others so Paul V would not need to have forgiveness from himself or even from others; that’s their problem.
When Jesus and his fisher disciples celebrated a good catch in the pub eating and drinking the only ones suffering discomfort about that was the Pharisees and Scribes, the self righteous but is self righteous any more important to have than self forgiveness.
I think everybody is mixed up here about forgiveness and are using the scriptural ninjas dancing across the pages to quote what supports their understanding.
So where does your perceived God reside? Jesus told you in Lk 17: 20-21
And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God comes not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Now if that is true and I verily believe that it is,. where in the world then do you think the Kingdom’s resident, God, is? If God is in the Kingdom and the Kingdom is in you where would any forgiveness for anything come from? If you said “from within” self you get a brownie point
And if you want to niggle over translations that the Kingdom is among you; well, fine; the Kingdom of God then is among you, in each of you, within each of you; he exists in your mind and in that reality he has existence and therefore he resides in the humanity of everybody who agrees that we are all here on this planet by certain inalienable forces and WE HUMANS ARE NOT IT! You and I are mere manifestations of those certain inalienable forces.
This was the Jesus campaign: to revolutionize humanity’s mindset, recognize the son-self within you and the father-self within you. That’s all. Differentiate all you want and it doesn’t matter whether you think you are right or wrong, it is what it is and that’s all that it is.
I rest my case.
LikeLiked by 2 people
March 12, 2018 at 12:36 am
Scalia,
I have genuine questions and I hope you accept this as an honest enquiry. As background, I am trying to survey the history of Judaeo-Christian “salvations”. It is vast and complex, not the simplistic selection of the occasional text by one writer or another.
You mention Esau and I do not claim to have researched the story, so hopefully you can fill me in.
Who wrote the story? When was it written? What was the contemporary situation when the story was written? What was the religious allegiance of the writer to the religious heirs of Esau?
Was the writer trying to score points against his contemporary religious opponents through writing that story, or was he trying to give support to his own religious group?
There was always a contemporary reason for any story. They did not write literal history as we know it. Rather they wrote religious stories to deliver a message or lesson to their own immediate communities. (Consider for a moment the underlying messages of the Johannine Community that lie behind the narratives in the Gospel according to John. They had been expelled from the local synagogues and they provide messages through their accounts.)
I am thus interested to uncover the history of what was going on with the writer(s) of the story of Esau.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 7:52 am
Doug: I don’t mean to sound condescending, but seriously, you don’t know how to do a literature search? Admittedly, standard Bing or Google searches are usually lacking in scholarly references, much like some of the discourse one reads on this website. Love or hate how he approaches presenting information, it was Frank who taught me the value of Google Scholar as a search engine for scholarly literature sources. Typing in Esau Bible or Esau Jacob on the Google Scholar search line furnishes a wealth of information written be people who actually have training on the subject and know what they are talking about. The Jewish midrash discussions are especially useful for interpreting the Esau/Jacob tale and deciding whether or not is relevant to the topic of self forgiveness. Read and decide for yourself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 8:12 am
@Doug
Hello again, Doug. Given that I think dialog along that line is off-topic, I can’t reply to your questions.
Just a little background, so you can at least understand where I’m coming from: I believe in God as He is traditionally defined, excepting the unintelligible three-person part. I also believe the Bible to be God’s inspired word. That means (at least how I interpret the Bible) that Esau literally existed and that the Bible’s account of him is true.
LikeLike
March 12, 2018 at 8:39 am
Gee Doug:
I know that written thoughts stimulate thinking in other human beings but unless that stimulation is on absolute topic and not on tangential topic, SORRY but your questions and the Supreme Court, at least in the opinion of ScaliaAlito, just cannot be answered. Sorry about that but those are the rules.
This is like the Scribes and Pharisees that Jesus railed against in his 8 fold indictment against the religious scholars in the entire chapter 23 of Matthew. Take a listen to the lesson of Jesus against academia addiction as defended by Scalia by his refusal to lift a neuron to help you in your query:
Now Jesus turned to address his disciples, along with the crowd that had gathered with them. “The religion scholars and Pharisees are competent teachers in God’s Law. You won’t go wrong in following their teachings on Moses. But be careful about following them. They talk a good line, but they don’t live it. They don’t take it into their hearts and live it out in their behavior. It’s all spit-and-polish veneer.
“Instead of giving you God’s Law as food and drink by which you can banquet on God, they package it in bundles of rules, loading you down like pack animals. They seem to take pleasure in watching you stagger under these loads, and wouldn’t think of lifting a finger to help. Their lives are perpetual fashion shows, embroidered prayer shawls one day and flowery prayers the next. They love to sit at the head table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions, preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called ‘Doctor’ and ‘Reverend.’
“Don’t let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates. Don’t set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of ‘Father’; you have only one Father, and he’s in heaven. And don’t let people maneuver you into taking charge of them. There is only one Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.
“The religion scholars are useless! Frauds! they keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime they get, but on the meat of God’s Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment—the absolute basics!—they carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do they have any idea how silly they look, writing a life story that’s wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons? And neglecting the weightier matters of the Law, neglected the weightier matters of the law: judgment, and kindness, and faith with integrity; these it behoves them to do…….. but they nitpick and deny.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 11:04 am
Doug, here’s a link to a starting point for you in your search concerning Esau:
The Berean: Ezekiel 35:6
http://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Home.showBerean/BereanID/8806/bblver/NKJV/Ezekiel-35-6.htm
As it’s been said, “Trust but verify.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 2:57 pm
Thank you Frank. That link provides me with some clues towards my question. I am deeply committed doing other research, so I had wondered whether anyone else had pursued the issues I could be interested in:
I wonder what was the religious/political purpose behind the story. It would have been written for a purpose that was contemporary with the writers, and knowing the history of the political/familial relationships and the related contemporary issues will provide clues as to the intent of the writing group.
I read the material as propaganda, not as literal history, and I seek to determine why they bothered to write a story. I treat these religious writings as intriguing literature.
———
I am familiar with the rigours of research. To date my investigation of the history of the doctrine of Salvation has resulted in collating more than 600 pages of material and I suspect I am about 60% of the way through.
I am thus disappointed when I see discussions on “forgiveness” failing to address the sweep of history and the changes that each culture and time introduced. Paul’s opinions were not and are not the only thoughts. He never explained salvation, hence the multitude of models. A modern demonstration of diverse models include the differences between Arminianism and Calvisnism
My study into Satan has only reached 100 pages, so I have a way to go. If there are thoughts, I can provide my email address.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 3:54 pm
@Doug
Hello again, Doug. You write:
I am thus disappointed when I see discussions on “forgiveness” failing to address the sweep of history and the changes that each culture and time introduced.
Recall that Jason is arguing that the Christian worldview (CW) renders the concept of self-forgiveness unintelligible. Jason doesn’t define what he means by “Christian worldview,” but based on his writings, his beliefs are informed by the Bible, and it is the Bible that defines his worldview. There are, of course, competing definitions of a CW, so this discussion revolves around whether his CW or every competing CW precludes or includes such a concept.
Since each participant will likely bring h/er CW into the discussion, it is not expected that they analyze the issue from every possible perspective. Your mentioning the Arminian/Calvinism debate has, more or less, been raised by Jason and Naz. Also, since under the various CW’s the range of meaning for forgiveness is rather clear, I fail to see how examining “the sweep of history” and various cultural changes will appreciably affect the debate. At the end of the road, is the concept of self-forgiveness really unintelligible under a CW?
LikeLike
March 12, 2018 at 10:20 pm
I agree, Scalia.
Each of us is unique and while I do not share a Judaeo-Christian World View, I fully respect the right of everyone to have their views — and I will defend the right for everyone else to have and to hold their ideas, as long as it helps them cope and does not harm them or anyone else. Why does a person’s Soteriology matter?
My intention with bringing up the Arminian/Calvinist debate was simply to highlight that Paul gave no explanation for his Soteriology, which leaves the door wide open for every form of speculation. Augustine’s lasted the longest (about 1000 years) until Anselm came along. Then came one idea after another.
Looking at the sweep of history provides perspective and it shows where one’s ideas come from. We learn lessons from our own mistakes. Similarly, we learn from the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, “the lesson that history teaches is that people do not learn the lesson that history teaches”.
What is the history of your soteriology?
I think that the opening question about forgiveness at the human level is all that matters. It is essential for good mental health and relationships.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 12, 2018 at 10:38 pm
Frank,
Again, thank you for that link regarding the writing of Esau. It is important to know the religious politics at play behind every statement in Scripture. The writings were not created (or edited) in a vacuum. They came from the hotbed of heated discussion.
At the time of the Hebrew Bible, only about 5% could read, even less could write. The temple at Jerusalem was basically for the royal household and it played no part in the lives of the vast majority. Scribes wrote to influence other scribes. They invented stories that supported their allegiances (compare Chronicles with Kings, for example).
Hence I am interested in the power politics at play.
For the Deuteronomists, forgiveness was at the corporate national level, operating exclusively vertically. Hence forgiveness was limited to accidental or unintended minor infringements.To protect the community from things that the upper echelon objected to (including homosexuality and adultery) demanded stoning to death, which also taught the consequences to the community.
Doug
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 13, 2018 at 10:41 am
You’re welcome, Doug. I’m glad you found the link useful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 13, 2018 at 10:47 am
You must be reconciled to GOD or you’re forever lost. Argue all day and all night whether you can “forgive yourself”, “feel sorry for yourself”, “pity yourself”, “deny yourself”; that’s all vanity. Read the book of Ecclesiastes.
The Berean: Ecclesiastes 7:19-25
http://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Home.showBerean/BereanID/9223/bblver/NKJV/Ecclesiastes-7-19-25.htm
LikeLiked by 2 people
March 13, 2018 at 10:55 am
I agree with you Doug, there’s nothing better than learning from original sources.
SATAN, Prince of This World by William Guy Carr, R.D.
Commander R.C.N. (R)
Click to access satan_prince_of_this_world.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 13, 2018 at 11:08 am
@Frank
You write:
You must be reconciled to GOD or you’re forever lost.
Yes, Frank, you must be reconciled to God or you’re forever lost. The same goes with everybody. We don’t argue otherwise. Stay focused.
…that’s all vanity. Read the book of Ecclesiastes.
I have…many times. Nothing therein addresses self-forgiveness. You should try exegesis rather than eisegesis.
LikeLike
March 13, 2018 at 11:51 am
Frank:
From another perspective and not unlike the perspective of Jesus, everybody needs to repent and receive forgiveness and be born again; that is, a change in the mindset and be reconciled to the Natural Evolution you are a product of. That is what Jesus meant by the Father within him and he within the Father. He understaff that not born of superstition, not born of supernaturalism but born from common sense of the reality of the Life Forces and you are not it, you are part of it because it is in you and you in it.
Father Evolution; Father Evolver; Father Evol for short, of Mankind and the Cosmos. Spell Evol backwards and what of you get? Can you see it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 23, 2018 at 9:03 am
Dino,
In response to #24 and #36, I am persuaded that the Biblical view of forgiveness is about restoring relationship, not ridding oneself of negative emotions. Forgiveness is what restores a relationship to its pre-sin state. One who forgives is to treat the other person as if they had never sinned against them. Forgiveness is a way of behaving, not a way of feeling. If someone slaps me in the face, you better bet I’ll be mad. If they later come and ask for forgiveness, I am commanded by God to forgive them. God doesn’t command us to feel a certain way about them, but to act a certain way toward them. Once I forgive them, I need to resume the relationship as if they never slapped me, and treat them the way I did prior to them slapping me. Will I still be angry at them? Probably so, at least for a time. But feelings often follow actions. Eventually my feelings will catch up to my behaviors. But the act of forgiveness is the act of no longer holding someone’s sin against them, allowing the relationship to be restored to its pre-sin state. It’s not about feeling a certain way. I think we’ve turned forgiveness into a selfish concept where the reason we forgive others is so that we feel better emotionally. Biblically, however, forgiveness is for the benefit of the other person. God doesn’t forgive us so that He can feel better, but for our benefit so that our relationship with Him can be restored.
I am also persuaded that forgiveness is conditional on the offender asking for forgiveness (Lk 17:3-4; Mt 18:15-34). This notion that we are to forgive everybody and anybody even if they don’t ask for forgiveness is not Biblical. Now I recognize that in teaching this view of forgiveness, many people are just trying to communicate that one shouldn’t harbor resentment and anger toward those who have offended them. I agree with that advice. One should let go of their anger (release), but that’s not what forgiveness is. Forgiveness is not release, but restoration. Forgiveness is about restoring a relationship. And a relationship can’t be restored unless the offending party seeks forgiveness and the offended party grants it. When we resume a relationship with someone who has sinned against us (acting as if they hadn’t sinned) without them asking for forgiveness, I think we are actually doing something wrong. We are preventing the sinner from making things right. We are acting as if their sin can just be ignored. But that’s not how God treats us. He doesn’t resume a relationship with us by choosing to ignore what we’ve done. Our sin has to be addressed. We have to ask Him to forgive us before He resumes a relationship with us. If God doesn’t forgive us unless we ask for forgiveness, what makes us think that He requires us to forgive others without their repentance? Forgiveness is about restoring a relationship, and that requires repentance.
So let’s apply this to murder. Since forgiveness is about a restored relationship, and there can be no restored relationship because one of the parties is dead, there can be no forgiveness. Since forgiveness requires that the offended person ask for forgiveness and the offended party grant it, and the offended party can’t grant it because he’s dead, there can be no forgiveness. While God can forgive the murderer, the victim cannot. And neither can other people on behalf of the victim. Only the person who was sinned against can forgive. Perhaps there is a sense in which family members and close friends could offer forgiveness since the sinner’s sin indirectly affects them, but they could not forgive the sinner for his primary sin of killing the person.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 23, 2018 at 10:53 am
Paul, you said,
“Now if I committed a sin/crime, I’d not only have to seek forgiveness from God but the victim(s) of my sin/crime. Now even if I obtained forgiveness from all parties if the victim(s) could not be made whole I’d definitely suffer from guilt. In a way that could be beneficial in my repentance as long as it’s not overwhelming.”
Paul, if you are a child of God, you don’t have to seek forgiveness from God since you already have it in Christ. You can surely feel remorse towards God but asking God to forgive you will not make God swoop down and sprinkle another dose of forgiveness on you since you are already completely forgiven by God forever once and for all.
If our forgiveness was contingent on our asking God to forgive us every time we sinned, then I don’t see how any person could be saved with this theology which basically says that our forgiveness is contingent on our personal book keeping of sins and not on the blood of Christ. This is a common misunderstanding in Christian circles which makes no sense.
The Lord’s prayer needs to be understood in the proper context which I can’t get into now, but suffice to say, the end of the Lord’s prayer indicates that our forgiveness is contingent on us forgiving others. This is not the gospel and should be a red flag to us to how we are interpreting the Lords’s prayer and it’s application to believers.
As for the other person, this is where the struggle and guilt comes in and I certainly would agree with you on this point. I think the relational aspect of this is the one which is the most difficult to deal with. At some point we need to move on and forgive ourselves. Regardless I can see where there will always be some feelings of guilt especially if the person you hurt is suffering in some manner. Not an easy deal …. but with God all things are possible.
Cheers.
Naz
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 23, 2018 at 12:50 pm
Naz:
You have a lot of biblical verses to discard with your simplistic view of forgiveness. How do you discount these verses Naz:
James 5:16—-1 John 1:9—-Proverbs 28:13—-Psalm 32:5 —-Acts 3:19—-Romans 10:10—-Daniel 9:5—-James 4:8—-Romans 3:23-24—-Romans 10:9—-1 Timothy 6:12—-Leviticus 5:5
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 23, 2018 at 1:37 pm
The Mosaic system had no provision for forgiveness that extended to most sins, such as murder.
Click to access Sacrifice.pdf
Rather than diminishing any condemnation regarding murder, the writers of the Matthew Gospel expanded murder to include mental attitude. (“You have heard … but I say. …”)
Additionally, one needs to determine whether “salvation, forgiveness, redemption”, and the like are to be seen as objective or as subjective. This is fundamental to positions being held in this Thread.
How could Jesus’ life, death and resurrection free the power of the Devil and provide reconciliation between Humanity and God?
Doug
LikeLike
March 23, 2018 at 2:14 pm
Naz,
Looks to me like we agree/are not far apart on the main point of my post regarding guilt.
On what I think is your other point it sounds like you think I’m saying — I have to seek forgiveness and do penance. I’m saying you should seek forgiveness from God/wronged party and try and make the person whole if possible. And if a sinful behavior is a reason for the transgression then stop the sinful behavior.
I’m usually asking for forgiveness, but whether it’s asking for or granting forgiveness it is a wonderful cleansing experience and I agree with others here that have expressed it as —- “restoring relationships.”
LikeLike
March 23, 2018 at 5:06 pm
In my previous posting, I mentioned the need to identify whether one is speaking objectively or subjectively. I say this because I sense people are speaking across one another.
I am not in any way saying that only one view is correct.
In my post, when I mentioned the Mosaic Law, I was writing in terms of objective forgiveness. In the post that followed mine, mention is made of “cleansing experience”. This is speaking of forgiveness subjectively, an emotional response.
Allow me to illustrate: The Greek word pistis is usually rendered as “faith”, even though it needs to be comprehended as “allegiance”.
To see “salvation by faith” subjectively is to say that the Believer’s allegiance-faith saves. To see “salvation by faith” objectively is to say that salvation is possible because of Jesus’ allegiance-faith towards God.
Is one true without the other? That is not the question here, but I wanted to use it to illustrate the difference between objective forgiveness and subjective forgiveness. I suppose one is legal-judicial while the other is emotional-psychological.
Doug
LikeLike
March 23, 2018 at 11:05 pm
@Leo
You write,
You have a lot of biblical verses to discard with your simplistic view of forgiveness. How do you discount these verses Naz:
James 5:16—-1 John 1:9—-Proverbs 28:13—-Psalm 32:5 —-Acts 3:19—-Romans 10:10—-Daniel 9:5—-James 4:8—-Romans 3:23-24—-Romans 10:9—-1 Timothy 6:12—-Leviticus 5:5
Not only those, but Mt. 6:14-15, Ro. 8:13, 2 Cor. 7:1, Ga. 5:19-21, 1 Ti. 5:22 & Re. 3:4, and so on. These verses and a plethora of others make no sense under Naz’s unscriptural paradigm.
@Naz
You haven’t answered my question. If you’re going to assert that as “a child of God, you don’t have to seek forgiveness from God since you already have it in Christ,” then a Mafia hit man can accept Christ as his personal savior, continue to perform services for the Mob and go to heaven, right? No matter how many more people he kills, he’ll be saved. Is that your position?
Your only logical reply is that such a person could not continue to commit murder if he has been truly born again. But if sin is indicative that he has not been born again, then you cannot argue that “every person will sin even after they are born again” with consistency. If sin in a believer’s life cannot negate his standing with God, then you cannot consistently argue that a true believer cannot be a mobster. If all sins are forever cleared for all time, you cannot argue that mass murder discounts one’s faith in Christ.
Rev. 3
Rev 2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.
Rev 3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.
Rev 4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
Rev 5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Rev 6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 3:06 pm
Doug,
Objectively or subjectively ? If forgiving and being forgiven does have an emotional component is that bad ? Having my sins washed away (cleansed) by the blood of the Lamb/having someone I wronged forgive me/forgiving someone I wronged does bring about an emotional response but that is not why I seek forgiveness —- I seek forgiveness to “restore relationships” and it’s good for my well being to seek and grant forgiveness. I highly recommend it to all whether theists or non-theists.
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 4:38 pm
Hi Paul,
I am not passing judgement on objective forgiveness versus subjective forgiveness.
I am simply saying that when people discuss the subject of forgiveness they ought to be conscious of whether they are speaking about a Divine level (objective) or personal (subjective). This ensures they are communicating from the same base.
The concept of forgiveness helps a person to cope and that is a good thing. It has nothing to do with religious convictions. It is simply good.
Every message needs to be positive and uplifting, removing all doubt and negativity.
Doug
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 7:16 pm
Doug Mason:
Personally speaking I believe we are a composite of the higher powers; I do not think that this is a personal relationship intellectually but by designwith humanity (theism) anymore than it is a personal relationship with every other life form.
However accepting that we are part of the higher powers for my way of thinking there is only the subjective and that must necessarily equate with the “divine”, a Creator or an Evolver; in any case the higher powers if you want to call it that, simply because that higher power (singular) or those higher powers (plural) are within us and we in it.
To me that is the Father that Jesus came to tell us about. You see Jesus came to demonstrate the proposition, the divine logic of which is absolutely imperative to a man’s humanity. And in explaining this to you, I’m simply preaching the gospel. Don’t please imagine that the gospel is simply come to Jesus and have your sins forgiven; that isn’t the gospel. You will only have your sins forgiven if you are prepared to come to Jesus and accept him into your life for the reason he came to message us but THAT IS NOT GOSPEL. That simply lets you off the hook; that simply changes your destination; that simply trades hell for heaven but Jesus Christ didn’t come into this world simply to get you and me out of hell and into heaven; he came into this world supremely to get the Father out of a virtual heaven in to you and to me and messaging us that the Father was there all along but nobody announced it because people were too dogmatized by invalid sacraments, meaningless offerings and nonsense ritualisms, like sprinkling the blood of dead animals sacrificed over the congregation for the forgiveness of sins. And that that kind of religion was useless. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;….Heb 10:5…(Our bodies, have you prepared for us!)
You don’t imagine that the Father takes any pleasure in having a heaven filled with men and women redeemed by his embodied son who will be as useless in heaven as they were on earth? Heaven is going to be populated with men, women, boys and girls, who’ve been restored to their redeemed and now true humanity with the Father being recognized as living within, having been given that revelation that the Father dwells therein, by Jesus, if you let him.
And to me Jesus not only alluded to the fact but spoke very directly, that everybody who believed Jesus was correct, and I believe he was correct, we also are put squarely on the same level as Jesus himself. When Jesus came to the conclusion about that, that revelation prompted his campaign that we are in the Father [higher power(s)] and the Father [higher power(s)] is/are in us.
Therefore from where I sit, calling the divine “objective” and calling self “subjective” is a distinction without a difference. Accordingly there is only one level base from which I speak.
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 7:52 pm
Jason:
You said in Post 52:
“So let’s apply this to murder. Since forgiveness is about a restored relationship, and there can be no restored relationship because one of the parties is dead, there can be no forgiveness………………..etc”
You must be saying that forgiveness for murder by the offended party is not necessary for a restored relationship because one party is dead. So your premise of forgiveness being a restored relationship is untrue and meaningless if God doesn’t require forgiveness from an offended party. Of course, God can overrule that requirement if it ever was a requirement I am sure you will accept.
The reason I ask this is because of what King David did to murder Uriah, whose wife Bathsheba King David wanted for sexual gratification..
In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In the letter he wrote, “Put Uriah in the front lines where the fighting is the fiercest. Then pull back and leave him exposed so that he’s sure to be killed.” 2 Sam 11:15
David sent Uriah into front line battles in order to perish so David could take Uriah’s wife Bathsheba for himself without guilt of adultery.
Did the Theory GodFather give David a free pass for murder and adultery so David could have Uriah’s wife with impunity by murdering Uriah? So David could have his cake and eat it too? If so the purpose of a restored relationship is meaningless isn’t it?
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 9:50 pm
The Take Away,
Thank you for your thoughts.
My position is quite different to yours but I fully respect your right to them. I am certain they help you.
My statements about “objective” and “subjective” come from reading Biblical scholarship, and I find their positions attractive. This helped me see that some people here were reasoning on personal forgiveness whereas others were speaking of the divine.
I simply hope that my observation might help. I did not describe what I believe.
In your response, you use the word “redeemed”. What action is meant by that term. How is someone “redeemed”? Is it a payment? If so, who is being paid, and why?
Doug
LikeLike
March 24, 2018 at 11:00 pm
Doug Mason:
To be redeemed does not necessarily mean a payment although it is one definition. A student is redeemed from ignorance when a teacher opens the mind of the student by revelation.
Intellectual redemption from ignorance is why teachers are called heroes by some students.
One of Jesus’s revelations opened the mind about useless religious ritualism and another revelation was that the Father, whether Father Evolution, Father Creator, or Father Higher Powers, necessarily resides within the creature so evolved or created. Revelation redeems one from ignorance; in other words, changed one indoctrinated mindset to grasp a new concept which guided a new way of life.
Many parables have a redemptive quality in the same way Aesop’s Fables make an impact.
To be redeemed can be a revelation to compensate for faults or bad aspects of religious dogma or erroneous misinformation when certain truth dispels false information.
A revelation once grasped can redeem the mind like an axiom: A self-evident and necessary truth, or a proposition whose truth is so evident at first sight that no reasoning or demonstration can make it plainer.
Many say, erroneously, that Jesus redeemed sinners by shedding his blood and paid the price with his life for that redemption but that is more metaphorical than actual from where I sit.
LikeLike
March 25, 2018 at 1:55 am
The take Away,
Interesting thoughts that you have. Church scholars over time have expressed a range of views on “redemption”, many involving the Devil in one way or another.
For me this is an academic exercise, which I approach as a very interested objective disinterested observer. I appreciate your contribution.
I believe that the idea of sin was a rationalisation that emanated from the experience of death. I cannot know if that was confined to humanoids or whether it was also adopted by other forms such as the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and any other similar life form.
Doug
LikeLike
March 25, 2018 at 9:12 am
Paul, I realize that asking for forgiveness may feel like a cleannsing experience and perhaps the act of confession to God gets it off your chest. However, theologically your forgiveness is not based on you asking for it. If that was the case what about the sins you forgot about ? Are they not forgiven? Many reference 1John on this and use it as a bar of soap for Christians to get extra cleansing. However the context of 1 John is about agnostics who deny sin. Those people are the ones that need to confess their sins to God just as we did at salvation, not over and over again for daily cleansing. Hebrews 10 is clear that the one time sacrifice of Jesus is how we are forgiven.
Should we feel remorse when we sin ? Yes we should and we will if we’re born again. Should we confess those sins to God ? Sure talk with dad and get it off your chest. But know that your forgiveness is guaranteed and your standing with God is not in jeopardy because of your human failings.
Naz
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 25, 2018 at 2:03 pm
Naz,
Is your concern I’m making asking/seeking/granting forgiveness a work required for salvation ? If so, I’m not. That being said, I believe it is a action I should do.
Now let’s talk about residual guilt. I’ve heard a couple of sermons over the years about still having guilt after being forgiven. I’ve been told it’s the demonic trying to cripple a person in some way — I don’t dismiss that out right because I believe in the supernatural but is there other possibilities ?
What if we think of guilt like pain. Hunger pain motivates us to get something to eat. The pain of a previous injury may give us pause to stop and think if I continue in this activity as the previous time I could very well suffer the same injury (ie. pain). So if guilt stops me from committing the same sin again but does not prevent me from speaking my mind is that guilt beneficial ? And if beneficial then is it from God ?
LikeLike
March 25, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Naz writes:
However, theologically your forgiveness is not based on you asking for it. If that was the case what about the sins you forgot about ? Are they not forgiven?
If you concede arguendo that forgiveness must be requested, it is nonsensical to ask about forgotten sins. If you are sincerely walking with God, He will reveal whatever it is you need to make right.
Psalm 139
23 Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:
24 And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.
This kind of prayer is common among believers. Since we want to draw closer to God, we don’t want anything in our lives which would hinder our communion with Him.
Many reference 1John on this and use it as a bar of soap for Christians to get extra cleansing. However the context of 1 John is about agnostics who deny sin.
This is patently false. Nothing in that chapter refers to “agnostics.” The epistle of 1 John is a running address from John to a group of people. Of course, there were no chapter/verse subdivisions in the original, and John’s address makes it clear that he is speaking to believers.
Some have argued that vss. 2 & 3 imply an address to unbelievers, but John clearly shows otherwise:
1Jn 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.
1Jn 2:12 I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.
1Jn 2:13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
1Jn 2:14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
Verses like these can be reproduced many times over from 1 John. He is not addressing unbelievers or “agnostics”; he is clearly speaking to Christian believers.
Moreover, he includes himself when he says:
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
1Jn 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1Jn 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If John were truly speaking to unbelievers, he would say, “If you say you have no sin, you deceive yourself, and the truth is not in you. If you confess your sins, he is faithful and just to forgive you your sins, and to cleanse you from all unrighteousness.”
John even shows more than once that our standing with God is conditional:
1Jn 2:24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.
Under Naz’s paradigm, passages like 1 Jn. 2:24 are nonsensical. How can I let what I have heard from the beginning abide in me since I can never lose it? What sense does it make to say that if what I’ve heard remains in me, I’ll continue in the Son/Father? How can it NOT remain in me if I’m born again? Naz’s “Christian” worldview is a textbook case of eisegesis.
Should we feel remorse when we sin ? Yes we should and we will if we’re born again. Should we confess those sins to God ? Sure talk with dad and get it off your chest.
“Yeah, Dad; I killed eight people this past week. I know I’m forever saved, but the killing stuff has been bothering me. Just wanted to let you know. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. When the don pays me, I’ll be certain to give a good offering in the missionary fund. By the way, I won’t be in church for the next couple weeks because I have to bump off a few more people in a rival gang.”
But know that your forgiveness is guaranteed and your standing with God is not in jeopardy because of your human failings.
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
The writer of Hebrews is NOT talking to or about those who were never believers.
Rev 2:14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
Rev 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
Rev 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
Naz, this was a Christian leader. You cannot say that he was a pretender because the Lord said, “I have a few things against thee,” and none of those things include never being born again. God commanded him to repent (stop sinning). Too bad he didn’t have Naz around to tell him he could ignore God.
As unbiblical as your system is, self-forgiveness is not unintelligible because you base that in human guilt which bears no relevance to one’s standing with God. Your problem, however, renders forgiveness, regardless the object, ultimately irrelevant to one’s relationship with God. Should you forgive yourself? Well, yeah, if it makes you feel better, but you’re still saved. Should you stop sinning? Well, yeah, if it makes you feel better, but you’re still saved. Strangely enough, you’ll end up accomplishing neither.
Under the biblical system, repentance and forgiveness are mandatory. Nobody gets a pass. The only CW that would preclude self-forgiveness is one that teaches the impossibility self-hate, etc., but we’ve yet to hear an argument along that line.
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 5:30 am
Paul, I don’t believe guilt is from God. The bible says we have an accuser, the enemy that would like to steal our joy. God does not use guilt as a motivation, that would be completely against His character. Our motivation is the love of God.
God’s true nature and character is at stake here and the enemy would want nothing more than to disfigure the face of God in our minds and turn Him into some sadistic ogre who uses guilt to get us to behave, There is no condemnation for those that are in Christ Jesus. There is no guilt. Jesus took the guilt and the shame.
Naz
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 6:35 am
Scalia, I will try to respond to you a little at a time. Too much material here to handle all at once.
“If you concede arguendo that forgiveness must be requested, it is nonsensical to ask about forgotten sins. If you are sincerely walking with God, He will reveal whatever it is you need to make right.”
So if I forget my sins then they are automatically forgiven ? Really ? Well isn’t that a convenient theology. The discussion here is about forgiveness from God. This is not about getting right with your brother, which God very well and surely will prompt your spirit about, I get that. You can definitely make things right with another person, but you can’t make things “right” in terms of your forgiveness from God. If that was the case, Jesus died for nothing and you are your own savior.
I’m talking about what the basis of our forgiveness as believers is and I still assert that it is accomplished by the blood of Jesus alone and is not contingent on our subsequently asking for forgiveness every time we sin. As Christians we are totally forgiven people once and for all when we are born again and our sins are remembered no more. It is not a progressive forgiveness that we need to continually ask God to give. This is the Catholic viewpoint of forgiveness which most on the blog know is littered with gross theological errors.
We all stumble in many ways as James said. That doesn’t mean we lose our forgiveness because we commit a sin. The gospel is not a get out of jail free card because His Spirit works within us to will and do of His good pleasure. The gospel is more than forgiveness, God is not naive. When He saved us He not only forgave us, but also put His Spirit within us to want the things He wants. Our lives are spent renewing our minds and growing in the grace and knowledge of our Savior. While we may still stumble, our forgiveness is not in jeopardy and cannot be undone. Moreover to the point of this post, we surely don’t need to ask for something we already have that was finished by Jesus Himself.
Naz
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 6:38 am
Paul, to your point about is asking for forgiveness a work. That was not my concern. My point was the that the basis of our forgiveness as Christians is the blood of Jesus and nothing else. This is a one time forgiveness that is granted when we first believed in Christ. It’s done ! Now enjoy it.
Cheers !
Naz
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 7:26 am
Naz writes,
So if I forget my sins then they are automatically forgiven ? Really ? Well isn’t that a convenient theology.
That is not AT ALL what I said. Your whole notion of “what if I forget” is nonsensical. If you committed a sin in ignorance or you “forgot” to repent, God will reveal it so that you may address it accordingly. I never said anything about automatic forgiveness.
I recommend you try to comprehend what you reply to.
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 9:36 am
Scalia, regardless of how you become aware of your failings, they have already been dealt with at the cross.
“I recommend you try to comprehend what you reply to.”
Did God make you aware of your condescending and rude remark to me above ?
Naz
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 9:59 am
Psalm 139
23 Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:
24 And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.
“This kind of prayer is common among believers. Since we want to draw closer to God, we don’t want anything in our lives which would hinder our communion with Him.”
This Psalm must be read in the context of a new covenant. While our thoughts need renewing, our hearts are pure as we’ve been given a new spirit. So there is no longer wickedness in us now that Christ has purified our hearts. Surely there are still mind sets and habits that we will need to work on as we grow in our knowledge of the Lord but at the core we are holy and pure and are not defined by our actions but are defined by our union with Christ.
We cannot draw any closer to God than we already are. We are seated with Him in heavenly places…. The notion that we can draw closer to God or break communion with Him is false. All this will do is result in religious gymnastics and an exhausting life. We have a superior covenant than those in the old testament, we have Christ in us and He will never leave us or forsake us.
Jesus said He came to give us rest. I don’t see how keeping short accounts of our sins with God and remembering to ask for forgiveness puts us in a state of rest. Furthermore, how do we measure how close to God we are ? Is it the number of times we pray, go to church, witness ? All the above ? So am I in a state of rest if I do more and more to stay close ? I don’t think so. Eventually you will burn out and come to the same conclusions as I have. Our works and efforts must come from a state of rest. It’s a paradox but it’s true.
Naz
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 12:06 pm
Naz writes:
Scalia, regardless of how you become aware of your failings, they have already been dealt with at the cross.
You keep repeating this without an argument, so you are in effect saying nothing. Numerous counterarguments have been offered against your assertion, but you refuse to address them. Without an argument, your assertion fails, and because it fails, it is entirely unpersuasive. Repeating yourself over and over and expecting a different result is indicative of a problem on your part, Naz.
Did God make you aware of your condescending and rude remark to me above ?
Are you aware that is it rude to ignore questions and arguments while completely mischaracterizing what somebody said? Are you the pot or kettle? You deserve condescension because you’re not arguing in good faith.
In response to my quotation of Ps. 139:23-24, you write:
This Psalm must be read in the context of a new covenant. While our thoughts need renewing, our hearts are pure as we’ve been given a new spirit.
This is further evidence that not only are you not even trying to comprehend what I wrote, you’re not even paying attention to what YOU wrote. You stated in Post 66:
However, theologically your forgiveness is not based on you asking for it. If that was the case what about the sins you forgot about ? Are they not forgiven?
To which I replied:
I then quoted said passage in Psalms.
Your question assumes the point for sake of argument to prove that an absurd conclusion follows. My response shows that sins do not remain unforgiven (or are automatically forgiven) because God will reveal an offense to a sincere believer (who should then repent of the offense). Instead of addressing my rebuttal in the context of the assumption, you launch into an explanation of what you think that verse means according to your worldview! You do this time and again–ignore questions, ignore arguments, fail to understand what you or your interlocutor is writing and then repeat yourself as if a counter argument had never been made! That kind of sloppy, bad faith approach is insulting in the extreme. If you’re no address rebuttals, then why reply?
2 Timothy 2 (Amplified)
12. If we endure, we will also reign with Him; if we deny him, He will also deny us;
LikeLike
March 27, 2018 at 12:44 pm
Naz,
Thanks for your clarification. I think I understand your concerns so let me explore them as follows:
person to person — what if someone wrongs you in some way, as an example hits your car by mistake causing a few hundred dollars damage and just drove away, is that proper behavior ? Shouldn’t they try and track you down/or leave a note to resolve/repair the situation ? As a Christian you can forgive them and repair the car by yourself but is that helping the person who damaged your car be a better person ? Now, If that person leaves a note because of guilt they suffered in the past for driving away isn’t that guilt a good thing ?
person to God — what if in a social setting you kept quiet while others said things you thought were un-Christian because you were afraid of being ridiculed and you felt guilty . Isn’t that guilt a good thing ? Wouldn’t it motivate you to talk to God about that and ask for strength to speak up next time ?
Now what if someone committed a sin and they felt God could never forgive them because it was so horrible. Wouldn’t that guilt drive them from God ? Then that guilt wouldn’t be from God because it is the opposite of what He wants to happen when we sin — come to Him and seek forgiveness as stated in the bible imo.
So then aren’t there two types of guilt —- one that drives us to God and one that drives us from God ? One good and one bad.
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 10:17 am
Paul, making things right because you wronged someone is the right thing to do. If you want to call if “good guilt” that’s fine. I understand your meaning.
However, with regards to God the dynamics are much different. Our neighbors did not shed blood for us to keep us right with each other, however the Son of God, on God the Father”s behalf did. Our relationship with God is not based on our ability to make things right with God because we can’t make things right with Deity. Only the blood of Jesus puts us in good standing with God and reconciles us to Him.
Further to your other point regarding guilt, I think your premise about feeling guilty for not speaking or acting and using that guilt to motivate is not good for a few reasons. First of all we should never feel pressure to share the gospel but should do so freely with gentleness and respect of others at all times when the opportunity presents itself. Secondly, we are not the morality police and we don’t always have to “speak up”. Sometimes less is more. You are free in Christ and should exercise that freedom using wisdom to decide when to speak and when not to speak. There is no heavenly quota on your head to win X number of souls or correct everyone’s faults and missteps. You are free indeed !
Naz
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 1:05 pm
Naz,
I agree with you that I’m “free indeed.”
I’ll try this from another angle —- do you believe the Holy Spirit convicts believers ? Could I describe that conviction as guilt ? if so, wouldn’t that kind of guilt be good ?
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 1:07 pm
Messiah not only shed His blood at Golgotha unto death to provide propitiation & atonement for God’s wrath against sin; He also lived His life (walked) in perfect accord with God’s Instructions/Torah to set the standard for example in righteousness, be the One perfect sacrifice for our transgressions (Lamb of God) thus become our Kinsman Redeemer.
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 1:23 pm
Paul, as children of God we are not convicts …maybe ex-convicts but not convicts. No I don’t think the Holy Spirit “convicts” us of sin in that sense. The Holy Spirit convicts unbelievers not believers.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
Joh 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
Joh 16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
Notice He convicts the world of sin because they do not believe in Jesus. That is NOT us, we believe in Jesus, we are not convicted like a criminal.
The notion of God convicting Christians is a modern day church dogma that is non-biblical. This and many other dogmas have marred the face of our heavenly Father and have turned Him into a monster. It’s no wonder people reject the gospel when God is presented in such fashion.
Surely there will be times when we go down the wrong path and need to steer back on the right path, but I don’t believe “guilt” is the correct word to use for this. We can call it correction, discipline or something in that vain but not guilt.
So how does the Holy Spirit work then ?
Php 2:13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
The Holy Spirit motivates us from within to will and to do His good pleasure. This is not a guilt trip. Guilt eventually leads to judgment. There is no judgment for Christians. Jesus took the judgment on the cross on our behalf. Once we realize who we are in Christ we are freed up to live like who we are without the usual religious bondage and guilt trips of this world.
Let me say it again …. we are FREE indeed ! !
Cheers Paul and Happy Easter !
Naz
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 2:33 pm
Naz:
I have to tell you something that I believe passionately about……It’s Jesus
But not the Jesus Christians believe in and here’s why.
When Jesus came into this world he studied mankind and he studied a man’s humanity and what he gleaned from all his education was that religious ritualism was all wrong, totally wrong about the way they treated people and about why they treated them the way they did.
Religion has always treated people like cattle to be prodded and used ungodly means to convey the way they themselves believed.,,,,,,that nothing could be righteous, nothing could be redeemed, nothing forgiven nothing saved unless something, somebody died….it was old school that the shedding of blood was the only way that anything could be atoned for. And here is why I believe that was wring, and we see it today in your comments and in the comments of most Christian when they speak about Jesus. By his blood; by the shedding of his blood but that is the useless religious way of thinking about Jesus.
I am not trying to blame you or other Christians for this; it’s been that way for thousands of years centuries even. because that’s the way the world has been taught and traditionalized, indoctrinated whatever you want to call it. It was that very way when Jesus was here sharing his life that the entire congregation was off worshipping the sacrificial blood of slain lambs and pigeons.
So please allow me to tell you that your sins maybe forgiven and you may very well deserve that but it was not and is not because of the shed blood of Jesus. Any sins you and I can be forgiven for is because Jesus shared his life with us and made us realized that sacrifices and offerings and sacraments and blood letting are useless, void, meaningless and the bible is full of examples of worthless ritualism.
Now how did the Lord Jesus present his body, soul and spirit to the Father. Two verses only, very quickly; make a note of it if you don’t turn to it. Hebrews 9:14; Christ who through the eternal spirit offered himself without spot to God; how did the lord Jesus without spot, without blemish, totally unsullied, present his body, soul and spirit to the Father, thirty three years on earth, until he could cry,”finished”? Through the eternal spirit.
Because he, as the highest power Father we can conceive beyond which a greater cannot be thought had created man to be inhabited by that Higher Power Father through the conduit we conveniently call the holy spirit and Jesus had placed his humanity at his Father’s disposal through the indwelling presence of the one through whom the Father exercised in the son his divine jurisdiction.
The Father through the holy spirit indwelling the human spirit of Jesus Christ was given total, unchallenged access to every area of his personality and the Father through the holy spirit could teach his mind, control his emotions, so direct his will so that he, the Father, in the son could govern his behavior and Jesus said, without him I can do nothing. Sanctified.
So the Lord Jesus gave himself to the Father through the holy spirit, how did the Father give himself to the son? John 3: 34, make a note of it, John 3:34: let me write it for you. I like it from the Amplified New Testament, makes it very succinct, 34th verse 3rd chapter of John: ” Since he whom God has sent, Jesus, speaks the words of the Father; in other words, his lips make articulate what the Father wanted to say through the son. He, the son, proclaims the Father’s own message. The Father does not give him his spirit sparingly or by measure but boundless is the gift the Highest Power makes to him of his holy spirit.
In those days in Palestine, if you paid a bill and asked for a receipt, as still today in Israel, they wouldn’t put received with thanks; they used those very words, “tetelestai”: “It is finished”. No further demand to be made on this account, every last debt has been paid and from the cross the Lord Jesus could cry before he bowed his head; before he did that, He said “Father, no further demand to be made for any account built up by any boy, girl, man or woman who pleads my name. Because Jesus put his LIFE on the line.
You’re stuck in the blood channel while the river of Jesus’s life is running fast beside you and calling out “Naz, I’m right here.” Water’s fine come on in, you’re stuck in the blood channel.”
It’s his life from whence the message comes not from blood that was shed shed. It’s the life he used his body for to communicate the messages for us to follow but the Pharisaical ritual coagulates in the well meaning brains of Christians to the neglect of the life message of Jesus.
Lev 17: 10-12 “If any Israelite or foreigner living among them eats blood, I will disown that person and cut him off from his people, for the life of an animal is in the blood. I have provided the blood for you to make atonement for your lives on the Altar; it is the blood, the life, that makes atonement.
It’s not true.
The Old Testament required animal sacrifices because there needed to be a way to demonstrate the severity of sin, the cost of rebellion against God, the death….that’s the religious version and you are still stuck in the days of the ancients. and all you did was take the animals out of the picture and insert Jesus for the same reason.
That’s barbaric to my way of thinking and completely misses the life message from Jesus.
Here’s the legacy of Jesus you are missing by pulling the blood rabbit out of the religious hat at every chance. And you think you’re right because all your fellow christians agree with you because you all had the same teacher, the Pharisees and those before them and you still have them and perpetuate the hoax unto posterity; all were taught the same way from the ancients; but Jesus did not follow the crowd; oh he could have, but he chartered a new course and while you claim him for bloodletting for the atonement of sin it’s like the silliness of the children in the marketplace who say:
“To what shall I compare this generation? It is like children who sit in marketplaces and call to one another, ‘We played the flute for you, but you did not dance, we sang a dirge but you did not mourn.’ For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they said, ‘He is possessed by a demon.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking and they said, ‘Look, he is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.’
You don’t claim his attitude or his life.
Jesus’ legacy is one of attitude and disposition, graceful and genuine in compassion and kindness, always ready to forgive those willing to receive it; a man so full of common sense and sound judgment that he had the wisdom to turn insight into foresight and recognize the Father potential within everyman, not the supernatural outside gods created by charlatans, magicians, Popoffs and snake oil salesmen selling miracle water in ketchup packages.
No, Jesus was a real man but tagged with supernatural powers because of his common sense ideas to tackle any problem that startled everybody into thinking he must be a man of God, little did they know that the God of Jesus was much different than the God they were taught to believe in, the one that actually does not exist, the fairytale god of supernaturalism and superstition.
Jesus gave the presence of his peace to the world by his life, not by his death; the clergy has it all backward by claiming Jesus gave the world life through his death, uh uh. Couldn’t be farther from the truth. Jesus gave life to the world through his life but supernaturalism caters to the reptilian ritualistic brain of humans and as long as you have clergy devoted to living off of the avails of prostituting falsehoods, myths and miracles for the financial security they solicit from those willing to give it to them, catering to Bingo the Money God for their own selfish egos then you’re stuck with religion and the blood and the incessant niggling over frogiveness. If you don’t condemn yourself for what you do then what forgiveness do you need? So did Jesus need forgiveness? Sure he did but only minutely and I can easily forgive him for that because he realized it, needed to deceive the killers out to arrest him so he jumped in the boat, took off to the desert, went up the mountainside, escaped to his safe house and told his brothers he was not going to the festival but after the loud mouth brothers left, Jesius (french Je Suis = I Am) went up to the festival secretly.
Holy Thursday Batman. WTFantastic revelation Jesuis is communicating to you today.
Forgive me my typos on this wonderful day; knowing Jesus; not, believing in Jesus but knowing his message is knowing him of whom ye speak.
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 5:23 pm
The Bible teaches: You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.
For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body. (1 Co 7:23; 1 Co 6:20)
What was that price? That price was Messiah Yahshua HIMSELF, LORD & Saviour of the world. He gave His all. He gave all He had. He said, greater love has no man than to lay down His life for his friends. His Body, Soul & Spirit paid the price for our rebellion, our enmity against Almighty God. For that price both God and we receive reconciliation, shalom (peace) plus we receive God’s promise of the gift of life everlasting if we place our trust in His Son who paid that price that we ourselves could never pay. Think Kinsman Redeemer. God’s sole solution is execution concerning our carnality. He doesn’t put us into rehab. He doesn’t offer us a change of venue. He does not put up with our “old selves”. He does not permit sin. God executes the carnal self, i.e., the rebel. The good news (Gospel) is Messiah died for our sins according to Scripture, He was buried and in 3 days He rose again according to Scripture. Our carnal selves were executed along with Him at Golgotha. That’s how God sees it when we partake of Messiah’s suffering & death. Think Baptism. We are freed from penalty.Think Barabbas. He walked free while Messiah, the Innocent One, died a criminal’s death on his cross. It’s called substitutionary atonement. Without God we are dead in sin. All of us go astray, each of us goes his OWN way for we’re rebels. But the Righteousness of God becomes endued to us through the Person & work of Messiah when we believe in Him. He took our capital punishment for our offense of rebellion against God upon HIMSELF that we might be redeemed. By His Grace & Truth God compassionately pardons us. He makes it possible to become a new creature in Messiah Yahshua. Accept His pardon.
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 8:30 pm
Good luck pushing that hoax Frank. Stuck in the channel.
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 8:35 pm
Frank,
“You were bought with a price”.
Who were you bought from? Who received the payment? Why did you need to be purchased? Who was your previous owner?
Doug
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 9:17 pm
Frank,
It appears to me that you are following the “judicial-substitute” model of soteriology.
Given the significance, I presume you have investigated scholars such as Augustine, Tertullian, Anselm, Abelard, Aquinas, Milton, and all the others before deciding on this rationale.
Did God kill his son or did Satan follow God’s instructions?
Doug
LikeLike
March 29, 2018 at 9:20 pm
Frank:
You might be lauded by the choir but you’ll never find a proselyte Jesus didn’t die for your sins; you weren’t around then were you? He was scourged because of the sins related to egos of the religious tyrants of that era, sins of the egos at that time that could not and would not back down from the idiocy and nonsense of their ignorant beliefs, the same beliefs you perpetuate today with the drivel of ancients whose words you would have had to heed on pain of death if you were living in that time period. You cling to a remnant of chaos and corruption; that’s what Jesus faced when he undertook his campaign to clean up humanity by exposing the hole in humanity.
The tyranny of religion is not freedom of religion but shackled to a belief system that was someone else’s cause thousands of years ago based on superstition and the supernatural that had and still has no existence except in the minds of religious zealots and Hollywood imaginings.
Good luck selling those wares today to a population living in the “Now Generation”; you’re still in the “Then Generation”. Now and Then are two different planets Frank and you’re losing the war battle by battle.
LikeLike
March 30, 2018 at 11:21 am
Leo, we’ve been down this road many times, you’ve created a Jesus in your own image. You adamantly reject the death and resurrection of Christ and because of this you are still in your sins and have no part in God’s kingdom.
That’s the take away …
Naz
LikeLike
March 30, 2018 at 11:50 am
Naz,
Thanks Naz, and a Blessed Nisan 14th to you.
Cheers,
Paul
LikeLike
March 30, 2018 at 2:29 pm
The Take Away,
In response to #62, no I wasn’t saying “that forgiveness for murder by the offended party is not necessary for a restored relationship because one party is dead.” I am saying that forgiveness is not possible because the only (human) person who can forgive (the offended person) is not able to forgive because he is no longer alive. There can’t be a reconciliation of relationship because death has made a future relationship impossible. But the sinner really needs two sources of forgiveness: from God, from the one offended. While the murderer cannot receive forgiveness from the human person he sinned against, He can receive forgiveness from God for his sin against God (killing one of God’s image-bearers).
LikeLike
March 30, 2018 at 5:16 pm
Naz:
I am giving you a picture of a Jesus from reality but you cannot agree with that because without religion, for you to say that a dead person can come alive again, would just make you a mentally ill person.
Nevertheless religion is the only concept in the world that will say your belief in the impossible is okay and that your mental illness is not really a mental illness; it’s simply faith. So Faith; aka, belief, takes the place of mental illness and that’s you inside out…mentally ill, but off the hook, because of a concept called belief without evidence.
Faith allows the mentally ill to masquerade around the planet as though they were normal but the truth is they are not normal and neither is the supernaturalism or the religion that says it’s okay.
Naz, you can be mentally deficient as long as you claim it is religion, that makes it all okay and you are just normal to accept anything your mind wants to because that is where your mindset is best suited to in its deranged state.
Reality Naz…get with reality…Jesus did not die and did not come to life after being dead; he was not dead and that’s why he told his disciples after rising “FROM THE PLACE OF THE DEAD” like Jonah which Jesus clearly said that was the only sign he would give those who wanted a sign feel me and touch me I am alive flesh and bone and give me something to eat because I am alive.
Jonah rose from the place of the dead; Lazarus rose from the place of the dead, Jesus rose from the place of the dead Because they were not dead and escaped death. Why do you insist on being mentally deficient so as not to accept the reality of life?
I have been in the Kingdom for some time but you Naz will never be there because you have no idea what Jesus was talking about. Jesus was too ordinary and common sensical for you so you have to wrap him in your personality disorder to justify the chaos you can’t make sense of; it takes supernatural superstition to justify chaos. Jesus was someone you can not understand with a sound mind so you make your mind unsound and that satisfies your dependence on absurdity.
LikeLike
March 30, 2018 at 5:23 pm
Naz:
Severe cases of religious insanity demand certain medications; Chlorpromazine (CPZ), marketed under the trade names Thorazine and Largactil among others, is an antipsychotic medication. It is primarily used to treat psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia.
I hope you get help, not from a preacher, but from a psychiatrist or psychologist to get you out of the muck you’re wading in.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 1:16 am
Naz writes:
Notice He convicts the world of sin because they do not believe in Jesus. That is NOT us, we believe in Jesus, we are not convicted like a criminal.
Naz, your eisegesis is showing again. The word for “convict” in the passage you quoted (John 16:8) is not restricted to sinners. The same word in used in:
Heb 12:5 And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons? [M]y son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor be weary when reproved by him.
Rev 3:19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.
The notion of God convicting Christians is a modern day church dogma that is non-biblical.
Rather, the notion of God convicting Christians is New Testament doctrine. For some odd reason, you’ve swallowed a template of false doctrine, and you force that template onto the Bible and refuse to adjust it in the face of direct contradiction.
This and many other dogmas have marred the face of our heavenly Father and have turned Him into a monster.
God is a monster to correcting His children? He’s a monster because He doesn’t want us to sin and will reprove us if we do? Were your parents monsters because they rebuked you for wrongdoing? Naz, your doctrine has nothing to do with the Bible.
Once we realize who we are in Christ we are freed up to live like who we are without the usual religious bondage and guilt trips of this world.
This “world” doesn’t have guilt trips, Naz. It’s doing everything it can to get people to live like who they are. If you think you’re a girl, go for it! If you’re gay, go for it. If it feels good, do it!
1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Notice the past tense. That’s what Christians used to live like, but they don’t like that way any longer. The truly “free” Christian is the one who is free from sin, Naz, not deceived peddlers of false doctrine who don’t want anybody, including God, telling them what to do.
Eph 5:3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints.
Eph 5:4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.
Eph 5:5 For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.
Eph 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 7:47 am
Scalia, you have totally misunderstood my points and have taken everything I said out of context. I don’t have the energy to engage you in this in depth.
I don’t know why when I speak of freedom you automatically assume I’m condoning or promoting sin ?
Happy Easter.
Naz
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 7:56 am
“Reality Naz…get with reality…Jesus did not die and did not come to life after being dead;”
Leo, I wish you realized what the ramifications of that statement is.
This is the unforgivable sin. To reject the only means by which you can be forgiven is the only sin that God will NOT forgive.
Naz
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 8:48 am
This is a good dissertation on 1 John and our forgiveness. This will challenge you.
I usually don’t paste links but this is good if anyone is interested.
https://andrewfarley.org/videos/forgiven-or-not/
Naz
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 8:50 am
Naz:
Of me you said: “……you are still in your sins and have no part in God’s kingdom.”
Of Jesus the Pharisees said:”……’He’s a glutton and a drunkard, and a friend of tax collectors and other sinners!’
When I met Jesus, I was 12 years old; Jesus never said any such thing about me as the Pharisees said about him.
Jesus never said of me “you are still in your sins and have no part in God’s Kingdom” ……………but you did…………..so who do I listen to Naz, you, the Pharisees or Jesus?
Before I was 12, my friends and I went to the church looking for food but were shooed away like sinners by the Christians attending food kitchen in the Bingo Hall. So we went down to the waterfront and watched the stevedores unloading the wharfside ships, who upon seeing our wanting eyes always seemed to step on something that made them trip and throw the box of bananas at our feet trying to catch their balance. They always forgot to pick up the broken box spilling out bananas after they recovered from their tripping experience and went back to work as usual, with a smile on their face. Do you think the stevedores were clumsy sinners Naz?
Jesus was no clumsy sinner I can assure you. I knew him then and I know him now. He knows me too Naz and he knows you as well, can see right through you; don’t kid yourself, Jesus was no supernaturalist but said “…..to the extent you did it to one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me.”
The Pharisees rejected Jesus out of hand because Jesus rejected the self righteous mold of superstitious indoctrination they were erroneously lulled into. Not unlike the Pharisees of old; not unlike the christian of modernity
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 9:04 am
Sorry Naz:
I have told you many times what the unforgivable sin is and reason why it is unforgivable and you still will not understand, learn from it or deviate from your hard wired misunderstanding.
Jesus said, “If you were really blind, you would be blameless, but since you claim to see everything so well, you’re accountable for every fault and failure thus your guilt remains”
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 10:59 am
Theosophical Ruminations:
You only answered part of the question that only gives rise to more questions.
“………But the sinner really needs two sources of forgiveness:…………
That a sinner needs two forgivenesses doesn’t pass the reason test.
If a sinner needs two sources of forgiveness but can only receive one forgiveness, because one party is dead, so what does that mean for the sinner? Is the sinner only half forgiven?
Which is why I asked you…”….Did God give David a free pass for murder? Catholics would probably offer purgatorial forgiveness but then you would need to purchase indulgences and how many one needs I wonder depends on the church’s calculations of the value of sins but putting a value on sins would that be using the Law os Supply and Demand?
But we know that indulgent theory was just a church ploy to make money from poor sinners but a windfall from rich sinners, for church coffers. It’s like the Sins against the Laws of Man speeding have several values depending on the speed of each sin and so on. Yes indeed, the Beast holds reign over Everybody and Everything, Everywhere on Earth. Sin deeds and good deeds, all subject to the Beast, the Mark and the Number of its name. Money
And if a personal relationship cannot be restored, yet get a free pass with only God’s forgiveness then forgiveness meaning a restored relationship is meaningless. Unless you have some theory about what it means if you only have one source of forgiveness, God’s forgiveness, and not the offended person’s forgiveness and how could you know if you have God’s forgiveness in the absence of the second “need for forgiveness” if a personal relationship is a necessary part of forgiveness.
Something is out of sync or else your theory is inaccurate, not true, wrong or otherwise unknowable.
Personally, while forgiveness can come from without and from within; in either case, forgiveness is internalized so if an external forgiveness is not available, for any reason, it doesn’t matter because it is not required.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 12:42 pm
Naz writes,
Scalia, you have totally misunderstood my points and have taken everything I said out of context. I don’t have the energy to engage you in this in depth.
No, I did not misunderstand you. I fully understand the OSAS (once-saved-always-saved) doctrine. The positive and negative views thereof are inherently contradictory, and that’s why proponents such as yourself often complain of being taken out of context.
I realize that you do not think Christians should commit murder and engage in other acts of mayhem, but your template that a “Christian” can never be lost regardless how that person lives is in direct conflict with that. The only way you can sustain such a belief is to ignore what the Scriptures actually say and repeat your views over and over until you think everything is patted in place.
If you don’t have time for an in-depth discussion, then you shouldn’t reply. You know from our past interaction that I don’t engage in platitudes and bumper sticker dialog. And if you don’t want to be misunderstood, you should answer questions when people ask them and engage the counterpoints being made instead of marching on with your fingers in your ears.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 1:05 pm
Doug Mason, ltg, take away et.al.
Post 82 is summed up in one Bible verse: Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. (1 Corinthians 5:7)
When you comprehend the verse you’ll understand the post.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 1:18 pm
Naz,
I don’t want to beat a dead horse but I watched the video you recommended in post #95. IMO he agrees with me.
The sub title “Jesus plus nothing” seems to confirm my understanding of what I think is the main concern — some believe asking forgiveness from God is a work. The pastor also seemed to add you are doubting your salvation/saving faith saves/OSAS if you ask for God’s forgiveness.
Are you under the impression people like me are saying your name is written and erased over and over in the Lamb’s Book of Life ? Committing sin erases it and asking forgiveness re-writes it ? If so, that is not what I’m saying. I’m saying you don’t have to but you should ask for/seek/grant forgiveness because it’s the right thing to do. If another believer doesn’t feel that’s the correct action I’m not going to condemn that person it’s just one of the many non-salvation issues we disagree on.
Again, I’m saying there’s two types of guilt. If guilt motivates somebody to do the right thing how can it not be Divinely inspired ? Likewise, if guilt drives somebody from God’s presence then it must not be from God.
LikeLike
March 31, 2018 at 8:07 pm
At the risk of being off topic some news is interesting this AN EASTER WAKEUP.
TWO Irish history making events appeared like a miracle one to write history and another to re-write history.
FIRST: Christianity, specifically Catholic Christianity religion, lost out to Secularism in 2018. First time since 1927 (91 years) Irish pubs were allowed to sell alcoholic beer on Good Friday. Cheers took on a new Easter Meaning this year.
According to an op-ed in The Irish Times, Ireland’s Good Friday alcohol ban was first introduced in 1927 as part of a broader legislative act that also prohibited the sale of alcohol on Christmas Day and St. Patrick’s Day, now one of the booziest celebrations of the year. Limited exceptions were granted to travelers, patrons of the theater and hotel guests, who could be served alcohol. In Ireland in The 20th Century, Tim Pat Coogan writes that the Dublin Dog Show was among the few places permitted to sell liquor on St. Patrick’s Day, and “one result was that canine veneration reached heights unequalled anywhere else in Europe.” In recent years, people have flocked to Ireland’s dog racing tracks on Good Friday, when alcohol is scarce.
The 1927 ban was largely influenced by the Catholic Church, which sought to institute an atmosphere of solemnity on the aforementioned holidays. But in 1960, the St. Patrick’s Day prohibition was repealed due to “[w]aning church influence and growing commercial pressure,” according to The Irish Times.
SECOND: A bone fragment discovered 103 years ago in a Clare cave is about to re-write Irish history. Scientists were astounded when tests showed the fragment, from a butchered brown bear, confirmed that humans were active in Ireland earlier than thought.
The incredible discovery by Dr Marion Dowd and Dr Ruth Carden will now re-write Ireland’s settlement history with the bone indicating that humans were hunting in Ireland in 10,500BC – some 2,500 years earlier that previously thought. That is 8,000 years before the Egyptian pyramids were built.
Some scholars propose a date between the 15,000 and 12,000 bc when Moses wrote the ten commandments which is totally out of sync with the lifespan of Moses estimated by Rabbinic Judaism that calculates a lifespan of Moses corresponding to 1391–1271 BCE; Jerome gives 1592 BCE, and James Ussher 1571 BCE as his birth year.
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 9:58 am
Paul, I’m glad you watched the video.
I don’t think the “asking for forgiveness” as a work is the thrust of this. In the context of 1 John, it is more accurate to say that confessing our sinfulness is the first step to repentance and faith in Christ.
We can agree to disagree but I don’t believe God uses guilt, in the pure sense of the word, to motivate His children. Guilt implies condemnation and judgment which we are free from. If you call it “good guilt” then I think we are really saying the same thing anyway. What you would call guilt, I would call correction or discipline.
As far as seeking/asking for forgiveness (from God), why ask for something you already have ? If you mean to confess your failings to God because you feel remorse, then I would accept that as the right thing to do. Otherwise it’s nonsensical to ask for something that’s already been given to you.
With regards to other people, we should always ask/seek/grant forgiveness as these relationships are of a different dynamic than ours with God. We did not shed our blood for our neighbors and they did not shed their blood for us.
Maybe this horse is dead now 🙂 …it’s good chatting with you.
Naz
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 1, 2018 at 1:25 pm
Naz writes:
As far as seeking/asking for forgiveness (from God), why ask for something you already have ?
Because the Bible nowhere says that all your future sins are automatically forgiven. Such an idea is an entirely foreign concept biblically.
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 8:44 pm
The Take Away,
The settlement of Ireland was very late. The first human inhabitants arrived here in Australia (ex-Gondwana Land) 50,000 years ago.
Doug
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 9:03 pm
I found this discussion on “forgiveness from God” very interesting. Thanks.
I am in the throes of discovering and documenting the history of Judaeo-Christian “Salvations”. I use the plural word because there have been any number of models.
The longest running “salvation model” was Augustine’s, which operated for almost 1000 years until Anselm developed his Model. This was soon challenged by Abelard and then by Aquinas. Of course there were several other versions, such as by Justin, Tertullian, Gregory of Nyssa, Lombard, etc., etc.
The recent person with the greatest influence was John Milton.
The model widely used in recent times are variations the “Judicial-Substitution” Model.
Much debate existed and exists over the destination (or rejection) of the Ransom (God or Satan?).
These are all human speculations on supernatural superstition. Does it matter what one believes as long as it gives comfort? Does it matter if one rejects every Model?
How can a God who lives outside time be asked to forgive events within time?
Would there be any Model if Satan had not engineered Jesus’ death? In doing so, was Satan operating as God’s envoy?
Let me know if you want to see drafts of what I have put together thus far on the history of Judaeo-Christian salvations.
Doug
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 9:07 pm
Doug:
Yes I understand. I never thought though that Ireland settlers simply popped up because that brown bear appeared. lol
On the other hand,
group of archeologists studying artifacts from an ancient cave, however, claims to have figured out when humans learned to master fire. For their study published in the journal Science on Oct. 19, Ron Shimelmitz, from the Zinman Institute of Archaeology of the University of Haifa in Israel, and colleagues examined artifact, most of which were flint tools and debris excavated from Israel’s Tabun Cave.
The archeological site, which was declared as having universal value by UNESCO two years ago, documents half a million years of human history and provided the researchers with the opportunity to study how the use of fire evolved in the cave.
By examining the cave’s sediment layers, the researchers found that most of the flints were not burned in layers that were older than 350,000 years old. Burned-up flints, however, started to show up more regularly after this with most of the flints characterized by cracking, red or black coloration, and small round depressions where fragments called pot lids flaked off the stone, indicating exposure to fire.
The researchers said that since wildfires rarely occur in caves, ancestral humans likely had something to do with the burning of the flints. They also said that the increase in the frequency of burned flints indicate the time when humans learned how to control fire.
Shimelmitz and colleagues said that while fire had been in use for a long time, it took a while before humans learned how to control and start it with the study indicating that habitual use of fire in Israel’s Tabun Cave started just between 350,000-320,000 years ago.
“While hominins may have used fire occasionally, perhaps opportunistically, for some million years, we argue here that it only became a consistent element in behavioral adaptations during the second part of the Middle Pleistocene,” the researchers wrote.
Ash was discovered in a South African cave, and this indicates that humans were cooking with fire one million years ago. This is the earliest use of fire but experts say that more proof is needed to conclude that humans were cooking with fire regularly.
Francesco Berna, an archaeologist, at Boston University in Massachusetts, and his team found ash that was composed of burnt grass, leaves, brush and bone fragments in sediments 30 meters deep inside Wonderwerk Cave, in Northern Cape, South Africa. This cave is one of the oldest known sites of human habitation and shows traces of having been lived in from almost two million years ago.
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 10:22 pm
Doug Mason:
A Cheetah and a Gazelle were running for their lives, the Cheetah caught the Gazelle and the Cheetah lived to see another day, the Gazelle did not.
What was the operative here and on whose side did either operative prevail? Was God with the Cheetah and Satan with the Gazelle or vice versa?
It seems to me the exact analogy applies to humans. The operatives in the Cheetah and Gazelle scenario are mere conceptual caricatures used in language to describe situational metaphors.
Neither exist in reality.
However we humans persist in creating metaphorical caricature concepts to explain the unexplainable, giving the created human characteristic caricatures imaginative substance in order to make sense of things that occur without apparent sense.
Thus does the supernatural flourish and we argue about the concepts and talk about them as though they actually exist, and if need be make up stuff like “other dimensions” and “other concepts” into which the caricatures can be mouseholed because we just can’t give up the mythology of caricature concepts that take on a life of its own as it has always done as far as the historical record shows.
Humans it seems, prefer to operate on a belief system of not knowing because they cannot accept the stark possibility of “no hope” for a loss to be made manifest again, a loved one they will meet again sometime, somewhere, perhaps.
Knowledge of finality may be worse than a belief that holds a glimmer of hope and while this may be deliberate; I am not convinced that it is. We may have an innate coping mechanism that allows us to recover from high trauma and tragedy in the form of belief system daydreams (caricature concept creations – WTFantasy) similar to nightdreams that reboot the brain in order to carry on “living for the cause”.
LikeLike
April 1, 2018 at 11:33 pm
The Take Away,
I heartily agree with you. I often wonder what it is in people that makes them so willing to accept myths and superstitions. I agree with those who say: “faith comes before belief”.
People seek patterns and explanations. When there is none, they default to the supernatural. Bizarre.
My research into the history of salvations has proven to me that their ideas were and are human inventions. And when hundreds, thousands, millions of people give credence, the myth is self-perpetuating.
Seeing the range of mythological reasonings confirmed for me there is no God, no spirit world. Since there is no God there is no Satan, nor any need for one. Humans are bad enough without any external Tempter.
Do I want to live forever? Am I looking forward to countless billions of years of existence? Sorry, folks. No. But I have no fear, no sense of guilt, no terror of God.
Death will be the same unconsciousness that preceded my birth.
Doug
LikeLike
April 2, 2018 at 8:16 am
“Because the Bible nowhere says that all your future sins are automatically forgiven. Such an idea is an entirely foreign concept biblically.”
Scalia, so if future sins are not automatically forgiven, how pray tell can they be forgiven ? By asking ? If by asking how do you know God has said yes ? If He always says yes because He promised He would say yes, then why ask Him something that you already know the answer to ?
Do you not realize that all your sins were in the future when Jesus died ? We are perfected forever by one sacrifice. This is not the old covenant, this is the new covenant. There is no progressive forgiveness, that is an old covenant concept. The book of Hebrews goes at length to describe the superiority of the new covenant versus the old.
We have been made perfect for all time, that is why we have confidence to go boldly to the throne of grace even when we fail, even when we sin. It’s a safe haven for us and that’s the whole point. Fear of judgment is gone and God will never leave us or forsake us.
Heb 10:9 then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second.
Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
Heb 10:15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
Heb 10:16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,”
Heb 10:17 then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”
Heb 10:18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.
Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
If God is satisfied by the blood of Jesus which is where we get the word “propitiation”, what can we do further to gain access to this forgiveness once we have already believed in Christ unto salvation ? To add to what Jesus has done by our penance, or asking is a slippery slope back to the old covenant at worst and Catholicism at best.
There is much more I can say about this but if our future sins can nullify our salvation, then Jesus is no better than a goat or an ox and this grace is not so amazing after all.
Naz
LikeLike
April 2, 2018 at 11:05 am
Why do you always cite Paul? He never met Jesus, as far as we know although it is very possible that he attended the crucifixion after which he was a participant in the persecution of others and the stoning death of Stephen. But to constantly cite Paul as some sort of expert on Jesus is merely to authenticate his philosophy about what he believed but he had no special insight into what Jesus’s message was and he did not know anything about Jesus the person so he simply extrapolated his Pharisee upbringing and brought that into vogue as he set about hijacking the following of Jesus for his own purpose.
Paul merely had the ” gift of the gab” like most preachers whose motor mouth can run a mile a minute like a Donald Trump with nonsensical diatribe, like the Andrew guy who you said gave a great dissertation on 1 John which most of what that guy said was merely tangential commentary about certain words and then gave some references about those words as though that information supported the very few things he saiid about forgiveness, none of which made much sense after his drivel on the word “nosso” something or other.
Tell me what Jesus said about forgiveness; I know Jesus, I don’t know Paul and I can communicate about that with you, but using Paul, who has no more credibility that you Naz or Frank for that matter, to support you own philosophy is useless because Paul is no scholar on the campaign of Jesus or his message other than to supernaturalize Jesus in the Pharisaical position of which the Pharisees always accepted the doctrine the resurrection, and that before Jesus was even born don’t you know?
And Jesus walking through the doors or through the tomb walls like a ghostly apparition without flesh and bones completely contrary to Jesus own words when he appeared before the disciples at the safe house that Jesus himself designed with and made use of, the wealthy resources of his best friends and secret disciples.
Are you a Christian or a Paulinist? Well that’s easy by answering this question. Who do you cite the most to support your theories? Jesus or Paul.
I rest my case.
Your theories are hackneyed regurgitations of everybody in the except Jesus himself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 2, 2018 at 1:32 pm
Naz, you really have the gall to ask me questions when you refuse to answer even one of mine. And the reason you won’t answer my questions or address my scriptural arguments is quite obvious: You can’t. You know you don’t have a scriptural leg to stand on, so you simply ignore every passage and every question which disturbs your Never Land. Sorry, but that’s patently dishonest.
I won’t answer a question of yours until you answer mine. That notwithstanding, I’m happy to address any passage you might reproduce. In your post, you somehow think that He. 10:9-19 nullifies every other passage in the Bible or that it evidences the false idea that Christians can live any way they want without jeopardizing their standing with God.
First, that cannot be what the writer of Hebrews taught:
Heb 3:12 Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God.
Heb 3:13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
Heb 3:14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
In fact, later in the chapter you quote, we read:
Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful.
Heb 10:24 And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works,
Heb 10:25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.
Heb 10:26 For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses.
Heb 10:29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?
Heb 10:30 For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.”
Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
The passage you quote is in the context of multiple sacrifices. Since it is impossible for animal blood to remit sins, they had to be repeatedly offered. The old system could never save a believer, even if they followed every precept perfectly. Believers’ sins were never removed, and they needed to repeatedly provide an inadequate substitution. Christ’s sacrifice brings full cleansing for a believer and has forever nullified repetitious animal sacrifices.
We are perfected forever if we remain faithful to Christ. Under the first covenant, faithfulness could not save a believer, but our faithfulness brings the full assurance of eternal life. We have utmost confidence in our salvation because Christ’s sacrifice was perfect. But if we turn from the Gospel, we no longer have that expectation. You must think that living a holy life is pitiful. Christians love living for God because His commandments are not grievous (For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous, 1 Jn. 5:3). A holy life is joyous, Naz. It’s truly lamentable you can’t figure that out.
We did not deserve Calvary’s mercy, but God extended it to us anyway. If you can’t see how “amazing” that is, I pity you.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 5:17 am
Scalia, I apologize if I offended you by not answering your questions. It’s just a matter of not having enough time. I assure you I can answer all your questions including explaining the passages in Hebrews where it appears a Christian’s salvation is in jeopardy.
For now, I just want to be clear that I don’t want to live a life of sin and I know you don’t either. My point is that we will still sin from time to time although the trend of “practicing sin” will surely be reversed in a believers life as he walks in the Spirit and his mind is renewed. I want to live a holy life in practice but I also realize my intrinsic holiness has been bestowed on me by Christ and is not based or founded on my performance/works.
That’s all for now. I hope we can discuss things calmly and peacefully without resorting to name calling or slander. I am as guilty as anyone for that on this site and I know it’s not the right thing to do.
Naz
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 7:20 am
Naz:
In the spirit of not resorting to name calling let me please remind you that Christ did not bestow intrinsic holiness on you, me or anybody. Christ revealed it; and, revealed—— from whom—-and—–from where.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 8:28 am
Leo, you, Scalia and I have different belief systems so we will not all agree.
Albeit Scalia and I are much closer to the same belief than yourself because we at least agree on the physical death and bodily resurrection of Jesus whereas you do not.
Just as you are convinced in what you believe, so to Scalia and I are convinced in what we believe. I can’t speak for others, but I already had a paradigm shift in my belief system that started about 2 or 3 years ago. I’m still getting used to my new normal and my current understanding of the gospel but like yourself I too am convinced that what I believe is true.
That does not mean I am not flexible or unable to gain new understanding etc… on the contrary, the paradigm shift that I have had proves that I am open to new understandings of scripture. Through it all, the foundation has not changed, which is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Naz
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 10:11 am
Naz writes:
Scalia, I apologize if I offended you by not answering your questions. It’s just a matter of not having enough time.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. You’ve logged quite a few posts in this thread, so I don’t accept the excuse that you don’t have time. My questions aren’t hard to answer if you know what you believe (Btw, you still haven’t answered my question about the devout Muslim girl). Besides, I have a pretty good idea what your answers will be for I attended an OSAS church many moons ago, have researched this extensively, and have been in plenty of debates along this line. Whatever answer you provide will be shown to be either in direct conflict with the Scriptures or internally contradictory.
I assure you I can answer all your questions including explaining the passages in Hebrews where it appears a Christian’s salvation is in jeopardy.
And your “answer” will be more eisegesis on your part. You begin with a template and then force that template into every passage. The verbal contortions OSAS proponents go through in trying to explain the “difficult” passages would be comical if it weren’t so sad.
That’s all for now. I hope we can discuss things calmly and peacefully without resorting to name calling or slander. I am as guilty as anyone for that on this site and I know it’s not the right thing to do.
If you want a calm and peaceful discussion, try answering the questions you’re asked and engage the arguments of your interlocutors. That way, you’ll show yourself to be arguing in good faith. My history here shows that I will reciprocate (as you well know from our previous debates).
As to “slander,” there is no logical stopping point for sin under the OSAS paradigm. Once you accept the premise that no sin can nullify the work of Christ in your life (including child molestation, murder, etc.) you oppose the biblical concept of holiness whether or not you realize it.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 10:35 am
Naz:
How flexible are you Naz? I don’t see any flexibility in your narrative that the dead come back to life at all. You are supernaturally skewed and that is how you read and interpret the bible; that’s not flexible, that’s bizarre.
What we know empirically is that people who are dead do not come back to life.
In rare cases this has occurred and we have witnessed those things by exhuming bodies and discovering nail scratching on the roof of coffins for example; obviously those people were alive after being buried.
Revivals of supposed “corpses” have been triggered by dropped coffins, grave robbers, embalming, and attempted dissections.
Nevertheless, patients have been documented as late as the 1890s as accidentally being sent to the morgue or trapped in a steel box after erroneously being declared dead.
Other rare instances is the disease Narcolepsy, Cataplexy the documentary which I have uploaded before and which I believe is the explanation of Lazarus inadvertent entombment. But Jesus knew of his affliction; others did not.
It is probable that Jesus did not know about the planned “escape from the tomb, revival and nursed back to health” after going unconsciousness during the crucifixion but unlikely. Especially in light of his prediction, as was planned, to escape from the tomb within three days.
First known account of the plans for Jesus’s arrest and subsequent crucifixion was in John 6:70 and the dramatic pronouncement of John 7:1 confirms the plot. How did Jesus know about the plot? How did Jesus know who would betray him?
Joseph had hewn out the tomb where Jesus would eventually be placed, over a two year period.
How much influence did Joseph have? Enough influence to have a personal audience with Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus before the soldiers made the customary rounds of breaking the legs of the crucified.
There are lots of bread crumbs from the Gospels to support my scenario but if you have a supernatural eye you will discount the bread crumbs of logic for a supernatural thread but for which there is absolutely no evidence in the Gospels or in the entire world of humanity that the supernatural or superstition is true, for as long as humankind has existed there is not one single shred of evidence for either imaginative concept except from the Church, Hollywood and Comic Books but all three support the mentally challenged who would take the easy but thoughtless way out.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 3:03 pm
Scalia,
I looked for but didn’t see your “question about the devout Muslim girl.” I realize it wasn’t addressed to me but I’ll take a stab at answering it if you wish to restate it. Does it have to do with forgiveness and/or OSAS ? FYI I’ll give a quick explanation of OSAS as I’m using it because I find lots of problems arise in these types of discussions because of different uses/understandings of words (eg. guilt).
Briefly because OSAS is not the topic, I find myself disagreeing with those to the left and right of me/or to much Grace or to much Law. Therefore, on the to much Grace side, I question to see if they think someone with “saving faith” would want to keep the Law as they understand. Likewise, on the to much Law side, I question to see if they think they (ie those with “saving faith”) are saved by keeping the Law as they understand. Usually but not always — I get a similar answer to what I believe (ie. yes keep the Law/no by Jesus’ shed blood). But I guess the devil is in the details because most won’t agree with me even after that. To me it’s clear —- Jesus, James, Paul, etc…. are all saying the same thing — saving faith saves.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 3:41 pm
Hi, Paul.
My question about the Muslim girl is from a much older thread. Jason and I were discussing baptism when a new guy named Naz showed up. In the course of that debate, I asked him two or three times about a hypothetical 15-year-old Muslim girl, and Naz never answered the question (although he asked me several questions about other things).
You write:
Briefly because OSAS is not the topic…
While technically true, Jason argues that self-forgiveness is “unintelligible” under a Christian worldview (CW). Naz’s CW is different from Jason’s, and he argues that self-forgiveness is compatible with his. That leads to a discussion of sin and forgiveness from which I counter that self-forgiveness is intelligible under Jason’s paradigm and irrelevant or contradictory under Naz’s.
… I find myself disagreeing with those to the left and right of me/or to much Grace or to much Law.
I think you meant “…too much grace or too much law,” correct? Since you don’t quite flesh out what you mean, I can’t comment. As you note, the devil is in the details, and as I’m certain you’ll agree, since grace and the law of Christ are both biblical doctrines, they are not opposed to one another:
Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
Tit 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Jud 1:4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
Grace leads directly to holiness, yet even in Jude’s day, there were teachers who perverted God’s grace as a license to sin. I contend that the OSAS doctrine is a similar perversion of biblical grace. As I noted to Naz, the New Testament is replete with passages entirely contradictory to OSAS, and it is jaw-droppingly astounding to read the verbal pretzels its advocates make while explaining them.
OSAS has nothing to do with biblical grace.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 3:47 pm
take away,
Your “faith” proves ill-conceived & misguided. You believe that your “Jesus” survived a Roman crucifixion. But you don’t believe God raises people from the dead. Think how patently absurd that is. You’re in denial of Hebrews 11.
And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. (Heb 11:6)
And He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” And Peter answered and said, “The Christ (Messiah) of God.” But He warned them and instructed them not to tell this to anyone, saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.” (Luke 9:20-22) Do you call Jesus a liar?
“And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.’ “As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: ‘I WILL GIVE YOU THE HOLY and SURE blessings OF DAVID.’ “Therefore He also says in another Psalm, ‘YOU WILL NOT ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.’ (Acts 13:32-35)
Those of the Old Testament looked forward to the events at Golgotha while we living since Messiah’s First Advent look back to all He accomplished there (Matthew 27).
And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect. (Hebrews 11:39-40)
Your “take” on what happened after His crucifixion and death has no basis in historical fact. For that, you must to go to Matthew 28 paying particular attention to
vv. 11-15.
Even the elders of the people & the chief priests acknowledged He died.
Now on the next day, the day after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate, and said, “Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I am to rise again.’ “Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, otherwise His disciples may come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last deception will be worse than the first.”
Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.”
And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone. (Mat 27:62-66)
Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” (John 20:29)
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 8:36 pm
Frank:
“The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be apparently killed and be raised up on the third day.”
Do I call Jesus a liar no and I don’t call him a stupid either but your question shows deficient understanding because you it is slim to none outside the supernaturalfragilisticexpialidocious.
Of course I do not call Jesus a liar but he lied when he had to, omitted things when necessary and deceived men to escape from their deceitful, malicious tactics………..Jesus was a master of deceit and a masterful fabricator for self preservation until he decided when he would be ready and when the time right them he would act, but he did not entrust himself to any man for he knew what was in Man. Jn 2:24. So if Jesus did not entrust himself to any man why do you think that he would spill his guts to you or to them? Do you think he was stupid too?
This happened before in John 7 when his loud mouth brothers wanted him to go to the festival with them so they could bathe in the celebrity glory that some people treated him like and this, after the opening verse tells the reader what the situation was at that time: in John 7:1 Jesus did not walk in jewry because the Jews were out to kill him so why would he not lie about going to the festival and give himself away by his loud mouth boastful ego-filled brothers who wanted some of the glory by association for they themselves had no pizzaz and neither had they belief in Jesus fulfilling his proverbial observation: “Jesus said to them, “One who speaks for God is shown no respect in his own town and in his own house.” in other words; a man is not without honour save in his own country and in his own house because he was expected to be like everybody else, too ordinary to be given any particular credit.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 8:47 pm
Scalia,
I’ll rehash some stuff from previous posts from this thread here to save you from going back and rereading my other ones.
Correct — too much Grace too much Law is what I meant. Since OSAS is not the topic and the question about the Muslim girl is from an older thread I’ll just briefly elaborate further on OSAS as I’m using it regarding forgiveness before talking further on the subject of this post.
For expediency sake my “Protestant friends” get concerned when it seems a work is added— in this case asking forgiveness. My “Catholic friends” get concerned when someone tries to separate Grace + Works — in this case asking forgiveness. Now some of my “Protestant friends” don’t separate Grace + Works either but none of my “Catholic friends” get concerned over adding a work.
I have no problem with saying forgive yourself. I’ve forgiven myself many times — whether I’ve hurt myself, broke/damaged something I own because of not using it properly or trying to fix it, said done something to embarrass myself, etc … There is some frustration over wasting money and public humiliation but since nothing major no guilt residue. But the memory of the event stays with me and when I see a similar situation developing it’s like warning bells go off therefore usually I’ll adjust my behaviour to prevent another mistake or history repeats itself.
Now if I wronged God in some way where the sin just effects God and me I ask forgiveness, make a effort to stop that behaviour and have always felt forgiven with no guilt residue. Now when I wrong God a feeling comes over me — sometimes but not always I’ll change my behaviour because of that feeling I’m calling guilt. If I didn’t change, but continue with the wrong behaviour, later I’ll seek forgiveness from God and ask for strength to behave appropriately in the future. Until this discussion I’ve never really thought about it but briefly — I guess God promised to forgive and forget so I believe He will.
Now if I wrong another person this is where the problem arises for me. As I said previously, if the person can be made whole I’ve never felt any residual guilt. Again, there’s the feeling I’ll call guilt to stop my behaviour and seek forgiveness but I don’t feel guilty after the fact because the situation was remedied. However, there are a few people even though they have forgiven me I still have guilt feelings. My words and actions hurt their spirit and although the situation was resolved it wasn’t remedied. Ironically it wasn’t until my conversion I felt guilt about those situations.
So I have what I call good guilt (motivates me to keep on the right path and go to God for forgiveness as needed). Not what I described as bad guilt ( drives me away from God). But most people I know say guilt is bad so I’ve just kinda went my own way with my good guilt scenario. And I just chalk it up to possible deferring understanding of the word “guilt.”
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 8:59 pm
You see Frank:
The reason you can’t understand the bible in general and Jesus in particular because you are stuck in the rut of muck of literal wit, understanding without emotions, traditional sayings, similes, metaphors; you’re likely to believe every word that your read but nothing that isn’t there because your imagination is skewed by the stupidnatural.
Jesuis did not spill his guts to the world and didn’t tell the Disciples everything either; he taunted the disciple when they said the people were hungry and jesus replied, “well, you feed them”. but they didn’t have the foresight ,the resources or the inclination to think any further than their own stomach.
But Jesus he had prepared a cache of bread and fish food staples brought there by Joseph of Arimathea’s employees for the Retreat, when he fed the 500 people and so without telling them everything they noised around the country of the “miracle” of the loaves and fishes. OMG, did I say 500 people; well, that’s not much of a miracle, there had to be 5,000…maybe even 50,000…wow, now that’d be some miracle——– embellishment Frank, not a lie it’s an embellishment.
Donald Trump does it all the time and from what I hear from my trucking brother his born again congregation buddies all hailed Trump as a God Send but I don’t hear that from them anymore from the shame he has brought to the stupidnaturalists…..
Okay Naz; I’m starting to name call. so I’d better Amen that.
LikeLike
April 3, 2018 at 9:08 pm
Paul V:
I understand you and I forgive you those things you can’t because i too am Everyman and just understanding you, that by itself, communicates forgiveness because understanding and forgiveness are companions in compassion and we are unanimous in that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 3, 2018 at 10:13 pm
Hello again, Paul.
You write:
But most people I know say guilt is bad so I’ve just kinda went my own way with my good guilt scenario. And I just chalk it up to possible deferring understanding of the word “guilt.”
Folks who get twisted over the word guilt need a ready reference to a dictionary:
guilt
noun
1) the fact or state of having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, especially against moral or penal law; culpability: He admitted his guilt.
2) a feeling of responsibility or remorse for some offense, crime, wrong, etc., whether real or imagined.
The reason you’re experiencing problems with people over that word is due to their attempt to rewrite the world according to their presuppositions. The angst over that word has little basis in reality for they focus on but one definition while overlooking everything else. It’s akin to getting twisted over the word black because witches practice “black” magic—truly head-scratching.
We need to stay far, far away from people who don’t feel guilty over their offenses. A guilty conscience is a wonderful gift that helps us to see an offense for what it is and motivates us toward correction.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 4, 2018 at 5:12 am
Paul, a quick comment, you wrote in a previous post,
“…. I get a similar answer to what I believe (ie. yes keep the Law/no by Jesus’ shed blood)..”
I don’t want to misunderstand what you wrote, but are you saying that you believe we should keep the Law ?
Naz
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 4, 2018 at 7:53 am
Naz
Paul is saying that those two dichotomies are the answers he gets from two sides of the supposedly same christian coin.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 12:28 pm
Naz,
I’m making a distinction between a “dead faith” and a “saving faith.” From my pov the problem has to do with how one was taught OSAS. I was taught because I’m OSAS — don’t lie, rape, murder, etc… Later on I heard from others — lie, rape, murder, etc … it’s all good because OSAS.
Yes a Christian should love God and his/her neighbour. A “saving faith” brings forth (ie. produces) good fruits. The good fruits are following Jesus’ example. So regarding this topic, I’m saying — you don’t have to ask God for forgiveness when you sin but you should ask God for forgiveness when you sin.
I got the impression you considered it a work to ask God for forgiveness. That’s why I questioned you to clarify. Based on that discussion I have no problem with your position. Actually, it seems to me we are saying almost the same thing with just different language.
I engaged Scalia because I got the impression he was saying you have to ask God for forgiveness. Besides it seems to me his understanding of OSAS
is different than mine.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 2:31 pm
Paul, you write:
I engaged Scalia because I got the impression he was saying you have to ask God for forgiveness. Besides it seems to me his understanding of OSAS is different than mine.
I most certainly believe that you must ask God for forgiveness. I do not believe that forgiveness is automatic if you sin. By sin, I mean a deliberate transgression, not human fallibility.
The OSAS version you appear to “understand” is one I’m familiar with. As you note, it asserts that because a person is saved s/he either cannot live in sin or s/he willingly chooses a holy lifestyle. A genuine Christian loves righteousness and will always incline toward it, even if occasional straying occurs. Nonetheless, all fallibility and sin are forever purged by Christ’s blood so that nothing can forfeit a believer’s place in God’s kingdom.
This version is inadequate pursuant, in part, to what I’ve argued above. It is unscriptural and unintentionally provides a license to sin.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 4:42 pm
Scalia,
Thanks for your response.
“that you must” instead of “you should” is where we’ll have to agree to disagree. This is where people like myself maintain you are making it a work required for forgiveness and as a result salvation.
I disagree that what I purpose provides a license to sin. How can loving God and your neighbour as Jesus taught be understood as a license to sin ?
OSAS can be stated other ways like — the wheat will be gathered into the barn.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 4:57 pm
“I most certainly believe that you must ask God for forgiveness.”
Completely incompatible, to somebody who does not believe in the Christian God, or any god concept for that matter.
How then can s/he even ask a God for forgiveness, is non sensical since the God s/he believes in, must necessarily already know exactly what you need before you ask but that being said, it is that, it seems to me which makes it unaccessible to human common sense and if it is unaccessible to human common sense then it has no value.
And don’t kid yourself; any God you believe, can only be a God you conceive, which means it must necessarily be a figment of subjective individual imagination and in that respect only applicable to your own personal notion of the god you perceive. It cannot follow that it is a widespread understanding, or else everybody in humanity would be affected in similar ways, if not identical ways.
There would not be the fluctuations as we see existing with every nation and peoples deriving their own pet god of choice. There is a consistency in the human psyche but God in all its various forms is not it.
I see the God concept as being esoteric to capitalize on a characteristic uniquely human by a small number of “controllers” of which that characteristic is more basic, such as the reptilian evolving brain for example, that has yet to reach entirely its highest plateau but we humans generally have not yet arrived.
But I do believe that we have reached the event horizon of exponential growth and as we come closer to that goal, religion and the esoteric factions of control experience an exponential reversal.
“Out with the old; in with the new”, that is where humanity is on the brink of, at the cusp of………..on the threshold, not merely an awakening but an exponential awakening and I wait for that day.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 7:22 pm
The Take Away,
As I’ve mentioned in the past — I don’t have the faith to believe this all came about by chance.
I don’t disagree we all see God differently, that is because of the way the bible is written.
God knows but asking for forgiveness helps so I do.
If a placebo remedies the situation isn’t it a cure ?
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 8:28 pm
Paul, to understand the OSAS you must realize that God did more than forgive your sins. He gave you a new heart and put His Holy Spirit within you. Being born of the spirit changes you at the core so sin is not so much fun any more …..
Although we stumble in many ways, our true desire is to do right and practice righteousness in the day to day sense. Our identity is a child of God, we were born into this, so that can never change and you cannot be “unborn”.
Where one would argue that we need laws to behave and grace just gives us a license to sin, the bible says the exact opposite. We know from scripture that the law arouses sin (Romans 3:20-21) and the grace of God teaches us to say no to sin (Titus 2:11-12). So living by rules actually increases sinful behavior but living by grace being led by the Spirit produces fruit unto righteousness.
Going back to “asking for forgiveness”, I think I understand that it makes you feel better but you must know that truth is not a feeling. You may “feel” God in a powerful way during a worship song service but 1 hour later you will feel nothing in the parking lot as you leave. That does not mean God left you, He resides within you and will never leave. My friendly advice is to be careful about feelings as they don’t always point to the truth of the matter.
Naz
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 9:15 pm
take away,
Re – posts 121 & 123: lame
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 9:16 pm
Paul, you write:
“that you must” instead of “you should” is where we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Well, let’s see:
Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
This was written to the messenger to the church at Ephesus. The Lord is not suggesting repentance; He is commanding it.
Similar commands are found in Rev. 2:14-16, 3:3, and 3:19. Again, these are all written to the messengers of each church. Moreover, at the end of every address, we find that the Spirit is also speaking “unto the churches.” Thus, everybody guilty of the sins Christ mentioned is commanded to repent. You’re implying that they were free to ignore Christ’s command and remain saved. There is no way to sustain that premise in the context of each address.
Jas 5:19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
Jas 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
The epistle of James is written “to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad,” but he is not addressing non-Christians. Like the epistle of 1 John, the content of said epistle makes it clear that James is writing to Christians (see 1:18, 2:1, 5:7-8, etc.). The above passage doesn’t use the word repent, but it is clearly implied. A brother wanders from the truth, and another believer convinces him to come back to the effect of saving him from death and hiding a multitude of sins. In other words, if he doesn’t come back, he will not be saved from death and said sins will not be hidden.
This is where people like myself maintain you are making it a work required for forgiveness and as a result salvation.
Well, I don’t disagree with that because we are saved by works. I know, I know…you’re going to cut-and-paste Ephesians 2:8-9, but hear me out. Jesus calls belief a work:
Joh 6:29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
Why is belief a work? Because you are doing something in order to obtain salvation. You make the decision whether or not you believe the Gospel. You make the decision to be “obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7 and 5:32).
When the Bible speaks of our not being saved by works, it is a kind of work that we’re not saved by. There are the works of the flesh and the works of the law. No good deed a man can do will merit salvation. Helping old ladies cross the street, refraining from stealing, lying, etc., cannot in themselves save you. All of those things are good but that doesn’t ipso facto result in your being born again. However:
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Not only must a person believe, s/he is commanded of God to repent—to turn away from sin to live for God (Acts 3:19)—and be baptized in Jesus’ name (Acts 2:38) in order to be born again. These are most definitely works, but they are neither the works of the flesh nor the works of the law.
Thus, if a person must do something in order to obtain initial forgiveness, it is consistent to find similar commands to Christians who have sinned against God. Though they must repent, said repentance is not the kind of work we are told cannot save us. And if post-conversion repentance is a work under the same category as found in Eph. 2, then pre-conversion faith and repentance are equally works that cannot save. How, then, can a person be saved in a Christian context?
I disagree that what I purpose provides a license to sin.
If you are telling me that no sin or group of sins can forfeit a Christian’s salvation, that most certainly provides license—by definition! If the law reads, “Don’t rob banks, but if you do, you will not be prosecuted,” that reduces the prohibition to a suggestion and automatically green-lights every person who wants or needs extra cash. Note, since you are not suggesting that a true Christian cannot sin, you cannot consistently deny that OSAS isn’t license. If a person is capable of sinning and there are no eternal consequences to any sin, then the only obstacle is societal. That means if I can get away with it, I’ll go to heaven. That’s license, root and branch.
How can loving God and your neighbour as Jesus taught be understood as a license to sin?
Your question is irrelevant because nobody disputes that we should love God and our neighbor. A proponent of OSAS is not merely saying that. What if I decide I’m not going to love the neighbor who committed adultery with my wife? What if I decide to kill him for it? According to OSAS, I’m still going to heaven, even if I don’t repent!
OSAS can be stated other ways like — the wheat will be gathered into the barn.
You’re implying that once something become wheat, it can never be anything else. However, if the remission of sins by the power of God can effect a transformation from chaff to wheat, then the embracing of sin can equally effect a transformation from wheat to chaff:
Eze 18:24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
The usual refrain I hear from OSAS advocates is, “That’s under a different covenant, so it doesn’t apply.” However, the New Testament verses I’ve quoted throughout this thread show otherwise.
1Co 15:1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand,
1Co 15:2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 9:38 pm
Naz (who claims he doesn’t have time) writes:
Paul, to understand the OSAS you must realize that God did more than forgive your sins. He gave you a new heart and put His Holy Spirit within you. Being born of the spirit changes you at the core so sin is not so much fun any more …
This is disingenuous. Practically all Christian groups believe that the new birth results in a new heart and spirit. There is nothing about that, in itself, that validates OSAS.
Although we stumble in many ways, our true desire is to do right and practice righteousness in the day to day sense. Our identity is a child of God, we were born into this, so that can never change and you cannot be “unborn”.
This has been repeatedly refuted from the New Testament. You’re like a broken record that’s incapable of moving beyond the skip. There is no biblical passage which says “you cannot be unborn.” This is a made-up doctrine that has no basis in the Bible.
See? I can repeat myself too, but I’ve at least argued for my position above. You just keep up the, “You cannot be unborn, you cannot be unborn, you cannot be unborn…” ad infinitum.
We know from scripture that the law arouses sin (Romans 3:20-21) and the grace of God teaches us to say no to sin (Titus 2:11-12). So living by rules actually increases sinful behavior but living by grace being led by the Spirit produces fruit unto righteousness.
So, when the Spirit “teaches us to say no to sin,” that’s not a rule? When the Spirit says that liars shall go to the lake of fire, that’s not a rule against lying? This producing “fruit unto righteousness,” does not make us robots. The human will element is not removed by Christian status. If it were, you’d be incapable of sinning. You’re confusing the works of the law with the law of Christ, and that’s partly why your theology is disjointed.
Going back to “asking for forgiveness”, I think I understand that it makes you feel better but you must know that truth is not a feeling.
Since Paul V has stated his agreement with you on that point, why the repetition? He doesn’t believe you have to ask for forgiveness; he simply believes that you should, but you have to come back with this silly “truth is not a feeling” remark as if he’s arguing anything different.
God commanded Christians to repent in the New Testament. Either you believe that Christians can ignore God’s commands or they cannot. You believe the former, the Bible teaches the latter.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 10:44 pm
Scalia,
The bible is clear a “saving faith” saves. don’t/should/must, where should is the correct answer.
don’t — is what unintentionally leads to a license to sin.
must — adds a work and takes away from His all sufficient sacrifice on
Nisan 14.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 10:46 pm
Paul, you didn’t engage anything I said. You’re merely repeating yourself. I know what you believe, so repetition is pointless.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 10:56 pm
Naz,
If I think I should ask for forgiveness that isn’t a work is it ? Because I’m not saying I must ask for forgiveness. And if not a work what’s the harm in asking forgiveness ? Because I can’t see any other reason to be concerned about asking for forgiveness from God unless you think it’s a work.
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 11:42 pm
I want to examine the issue of whether our relation to God proves conditional in any manner. If so, under which covenant? If so, how does it affect our forgiveness from God?
If you haven’t read Isaiah 24 I recommend you do so. Although it was written under the Sinai Covenant it actually deals with the Everlasting Covenant established under Messiah Yahshua. For Isaiah 24 is Scripture written as eschatological prophecy. It’s actually a precursor of the Book of Revelation.
Given Isaiah’s prescient depiction of the Suffering Servant (Isa 52:13 – 53:12)
we must pay heed to his dire warnings found in Chapter 24.
Concerning the Day of the LORD:
Behold, the LORD lays the earth waste, devastates it, distorts its surface and scatters its inhabitants. And the people will be like the priest, the servant like his master, the maid like her mistress, the buyer like the seller, the lender like the borrower, the creditor like the debtor. The earth will be completely laid waste and completely despoiled, for the LORD has spoken this word. The earth mourns and withers, the world fades and withers, the exalted of the people of the earth fade away. The earth is also polluted by its inhabitants, for they transgressed laws, violated statutes, broke the everlasting covenant. Therefore, a curse devours the earth, and those who live in it are held guilty. Therefore, the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men are left. (Isaiah 24:1-6)
The earth is broken asunder,
The earth is split through,
The earth is shaken violently. (Isaiah 24:19)
The earth reels to and fro like a drunkard
And it totters like a shack,
For its transgression is heavy upon it,
And it will fall, never to rise again. (Isaiah 24:20)
So it will happen in that day,
That the LORD will punish the host of heaven on high,
And the kings of the earth on earth. (Isaiah 24:21)
Clearly, the prophet writes of the end of the age; i.e., the Day of the LORD when the Righteous Almighty Judge brings justice to a wicked world. Just as the Sinai Covenant was broken by Israelites here we see that inhabitants of the earth transgress laws, even breaking the everlasting covenant, are held guilty and are punished. Although once part of the everlasting covenant they are denied forgiveness by the Creator. The relationship between God and His entire creation is conditional.
In the Old Testament it’s written:
And the LORD appeared to Solomon by night, and said unto him, I have heard thy prayer, and have chosen this place to myself for an house of sacrifice. If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people; If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (2 Chronicles 7:12-14)
When God judges He provides for forgiveness. It is conditional. As He says, if His people do four things (including humility & repentance) then He’ll do three (including forgive sin).
In the New Testament it’s written:
Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?
Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said,
“I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM;
AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
(2 Corinthians 6:14-16)
“Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE,” says the Lord.
“AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN;
And I will welcome you.
“And I will be a father to you,
And you shall be sons and daughters to Me,”
Says the Lord Almighty. (2 Corinthians 6:17-18)
God tells believers as part of the everlasting covenant He will dwell in us and walk among us. But there are conditions to be met by us. We are to come out from unbelievers and be apart (sanctified by the Holy Spirit) from them. We are also not to touch that which is unclean. We must be unstained by the world (Jas 1:27). We are to remain in the righteousness that has been imputed to us through Messiah. For by His righteousness we receive reconciliation to God. When we meet these conditions God tells us He will even welcome us into His family. He as Father, we as sons and daughters to Him. God is faithful. The Lord Almighty keeps His promises. God is immutable. Amen for that!
LikeLike
April 4, 2018 at 11:43 pm
Scalia,
I did repeat myself but also engaged. You posted verses that you think prove your case — I disagree. If you are familiar with OSAS you should be familiar with the reasons we say — a saving faith saves.
I pointed out your argument my position leads to a license to commit sin was incorrect — do you agree ?
I also pointed out “must” adds a work — do you agree ?
I’m not trying to convince you or Naz you’re wrong I’m just exchanging ideas.
I’m surprised Naz has a problem with my position but not you. But I’ll give a couple of examples I give to the faith + works = salvation crowd.
RC are ones that have the biggest concern with my position. But I see OSAS in their teaching as well as the bible as our apologetics state. The RC teaching about a sinless Mary sure seems like OSAS to me. Also there Once Married Always Married (OMAM) teaching sure seems like OSAS to me.
Their teaching about Mary is pretty straightforward but briefly I’ll discuss the OMAM as it relates to OSAS in case you’ve never heard it before. So the Church is the bride of Christ. So if I say yes to Christ and He says yes to me I’m part of His Church/bride. He never dies and His Church will never die and since we both said yes it’s a valid marriage and He’s stuck with me. Now how do I know He said yes — that’s where you see the difference between a “saving faith” and a “dead faith.”
“They went out from us because they weren’t of us.” They left because they didn’t have a “saving faith.” The Holy Spirit doesn’t jump in and out of us over and over till we die in a state of grace.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:09 am
Scalia:
Your comment to Naz struck a chord with me and stirred a childhood memory.
A bunch of us guys were talking one day and giving anecdotes about how far back in childhood our memory was able to remember. One fellow remembered stepping on a nail that went right through his sneaker and into the foot..ouch–when he was about 5yrs old and someone else remembered when his pet dog was poisoned by a mean neighbor next door, Pinto he said his name was, a husky that used to pull him and his siblings around on the sled in the winter snow; they had to bury him behind the outhouse; that was sad, he said he was only about three; someone else remembered falling into the coal bin and cutting himself between his legs when he was 6yrs old. Oooo that musta hurt.
My memory was quite exceptional and everybody agreed. When my mother was carrying me in her womb;(so this memory account goes back before I was even born) everyday like clockwork she would go upstairs to fetch the record player and play soft and wonderful music and I must admit it was so soothing and that early music will stay with me always; I wondered how she made those beautiful sounds, violins and pianos and tubas and the thumps of the drums always tickled me and made me giggle.
In those early days the records were the old fashion kind, speed was 78 rmp’s, however those hard plastic records, before the soft unbreakable plastic versions got invented were very sensitive to scratches and as a matter of fact if you dropped one on the floor it was more likely than not to shatter into pieces like chinaware.
One day I started kicking with joy as the time came for her to fetch the record player and I could hardly contain myself as she patted my little feet inside her tummy and said “……have patience…darling” in her gentle sweet mommy voice.
And then guess what happened? Oh my goodness as mom came to the bottom of the floor I tumbled and heard the sounds of the record player and records crashing loudly to the floor and mom, just barely able to catch herself from falling totally on the floor herself……. her foot snagging on the bottom step, over and around and back and forth I went, whirling and twirling but thank goodness not all the records shattered and the record player eventually began playing again and my happiness returned to me but I was okay for all the tumbling and turmoil and nothing happened to me– nothing happened to me– nothing happened to me– nothing happened to me———————–nothing happened to me——
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:24 am
Paul V:
Tell me where you think the bible is clear about “saving faith” saves, specifically please quote the bible according to Jesus not Paul’s philosophy because in many instances words do not always have literal meaning.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:30 am
Paul V:
How can something like a word request be considered a work? That sounds so hokey to me, a word from the mouth is merely a thought uttered and how can a thought be a work? the works the bible speaks of are actions that people take pt boast about to show they are good like feeding the hungry once a year at Christmas or Easter, or volunteering at the the Salvation army kitchen… how can a thought or a sentence be considered works, I don’t get it.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:45 am
Paul, If you believe in OSAS then we are probably in close agreement.
I think we have beaten the “asking for forgiveness” horse to death 🙂
When you say you “should” ask for forgiveness I see you are implying that it is the right thing to do that true Christian should do. I get it but I disagree because it takes away from the finished work of Christ. This is not the same thing as saying I should be faithful to my wife, or I should not hate my co-worker etc… those things we expect Christians “should” do.
I know 1 John 1:8-9 is used for this but that must be read in the proper context which I don’t want to get into now. You need to consider 3 questions :
1) Did the cross work ?
2) Are you a completely forgiven person ?
3) How are your sins forgiven ?
Forgiveness can only occur by the shedding of blood. Apologies and saying sorry does not make you more forgiven. In many places in scriptures it states that we “have been” forgiven and cleansed of “all” of our sins. The cross worked and you are a completely forgiven person once and for all for all time. That’s what makes the gospel so amazing.
So the main reason I disagree is only because you are asking for something you already have and the asking appears to be for the purpose of feeling better about yourself where in fact what you should be doing is exercising more faith in what Jesus did for you. You are complete in Him, lacking nothing.
Again, if you are in the OSAS camp I think we are very close even though we may disagree on some of these things. I disagree respectfully and my goal is not to win an argument but to help you realize your freedom in Christ.
Naz
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:45 am
Frank:
There is no such thing as prophecy or psychics; one might predict something from something is trending but prophecy is useless and has no basis of fact but does have quite a basis on fiction.
If prophecy was viable then Pastor or the Church would not have to clamor about looking for tithes they’d just prophecize the lotto numbers when they need money instead of making long sermons on the value of tithing the rewards from God for so doing.
Get that supernatural malarkey out of your mind and replace it with common sense.
You mind will thank you is my prophecy but not to worry, that won’t work either because you have no faith…Have no faith? WTFanaticsm is that all about? Faith and Prophecy? Healing by Faith is a church placebo trying to make you believe that faith is something special to swallow is an exercise attempt by Paul of Tarsus to make nonsense sound sensical. And the Church inserting “faith” into biblical books is another tactic way to push the dogma down the throats of gulls.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:49 am
Scalia, I’m sorry but I don’t have time to argue in the wrong spirit which what ends up happening when we exchange opinions.
The fact that you would not accept my apology further confirms that we should part company with regards to comments to each other on this blog.
Naz
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 8:17 am
Naz writes:
Scalia, I’m sorry but I don’t have time to argue in the wrong spirit which what ends up happening when we exchange opinions.
Well, if you have the wrong spirit, you need to repent. The quickest way to fix that is to argue in good faith. You don’t argue in good faith because in your heart you realize that your position is unscriptural…but your pride won’t let you admit it.
You claim to be able to answer all the scriptures I’ve offered, but in the couple of instances you offered a rebuttal, you were clearly reading into the text what it didn’t say (you must have graduated from Eisegesis Academy).
The OSAS doctrine is scripturally indefensible, and that’s the real reason you’re tap dancing around it and repeating yourself ad nauseam.
The fact that you would not accept my apology further confirms that we should part company with regards to comments to each other on this blog.
Your apology means nothing because it is dishonest. You claimed that you didn’t have time to reply to my arguments (disproved by your repeated posts). You now claim that you don’t have time to argue in the wrong spirit (easily corrected if you’re a true Christian). If you were sincere, you would answer the legitimate questions I’ve asked. If you were sincere, you would have either attempted to address my arguments or stated that though you believe OSAS, you’re not knowledgeable enough to properly exegete the passages in question. I can respect that, but this bob-and-weave when you run out of arguments while adding the lame, “I don’t have time,” stuff is nothing an honest person can respect.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 10:03 am
Naz,
We seem to be saying po-tato pot-ato and as far as I’m concerned it’s all good.
To answer your questions — 1) yes 2) yes 3) Jesus’ shed blood.
For me should isn’t must so I don’t consider it a work taking away from Christ’s finished work.
“Love God, then do what you want” — one of the things he and I agree on. So if some one loves God and they want to ask for forgiveness or not isn’t it all good ?
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 10:31 am
The Take Away,
The good thief on the cross proves a saving faith/OSAS as far as I’m concerned even though he only lived a short while after asking Jesus to remember him. Luke 23: 41. Could’ve happened to a by stander if s/he asked Jesus the same question except He would’ve given a slightly different timeline on when that person would be in paradise.
I’ll give you my interpretation of Matthew 16: 18 — death has no power over those people who put their trust in the completed work of Jesus Christ. There’s also similar verses to this in other parts of the bible. But in Matthew 7: 21 He says not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, … So the difference is those in Matthew 7: 21 didn’t have a saving faith. To which some say but they had to do works but that’s not compatible with my interpretation of Matthew 16: 18 and other statements — “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14: 6.
So saying — you must ask for forgiveness, which implies it won’t be granted unless asked for is not a work ? We’ll have to agree to disagree on the definition of work.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 10:32 am
Paul writes:
I did repeat myself but also engaged.
Then your definition of engage is different from mine.
If you are familiar with OSAS you should be familiar with the reasons we say — a saving faith saves.
Of course I’m familiar with the reasons, but your appeal to “saving faith saves” is irrelevant since every Christian believes that. There is nothing uniquely OSAS in that statement, and given the fact that you and Naz are both OSAS advocates and disagree over whether one “should” ask for forgiveness, we cannot make assumptions about what you mean unless you define your terms.
I pointed out your argument my position leads to a license to commit sin was incorrect — do you agree ?
You stated that in the post I replied to. Your repetition did nothing to address my counter argument, so you didn’t “engage” my point at all. You simply ignored it and repeated yourself. If you call that engagement, you live on a different planet.
Do I agree? With what? I agree that you repeated yourself, but I do not agree that you addressed my argument.
I also pointed out “must” adds a work — do you agree ?
Again, I replied to that. You (again) ignored my reply and repeated yourself. Repetition is not enegagement.
I’m not trying to convince you or Naz you’re wrong I’m just exchanging ideas.
But repeating yourself isn’t exchanging ideas. Repetition is not necessary because I remember your statements. Moreover, if you’re not trying to convince me that your view is correct, why do you keep replying, and why do you cite Scriptures in support of your view? I’ve engaged every verse and argument you’ve proposed while you have steadfastly side-stepped mine. If you’re not going to address my arguments, just call it quits. I don’t need to be reminded of what you believe.
As to your comments about RCs, though I subscribe to Thomistic metaphysics, I’m not RC. Like Jason, I’m a Oneness Pentecostal (just so you’re clear about where I’m coming from).
So the Church is the bride of Christ.
Well, the church is espoused (betrothed) to Christ (2 Cor. 11:2), so we’re not there yet. Recall that in an espousal relationship, the husband may send away an unfaithful wife (Mt. 1:19).
“They went out from us because they weren’t of us.” They left because they didn’t have a “saving faith.”
Like Naz, you just quote verses without any kind of supporting argumentation. Anybody who leaves the church is no longer “of us.” When a person develops a rebellious spirit, s/he will resist, grieve and finally quench the Holy Spirit. Being no longer “of us,” s/he’ll simply leave. Anybody who maintains a faithful walk will remain in the church. This is a typical example of OSAS advocates stripping a verse completely out of context because it “sounds” like a validation of their template. It clearly isn’t.
The Holy Spirit doesn’t jump in and out of us over and over till we die in a state of grace.
Show me a legitimate quotation from any credible non-OSAS theologian who argues that the Holy Spirit jumps “in and out of” a believer. You’ll be looking for a long time because it doesn’t exist.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 12:03 pm
Scalia,
So you are saying the Holy Spirit does not jump in and out of a believer ? That proves my case for OSAS.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 12:15 pm
Paul writes:
So you are saying the Holy Spirit does not jump in and out of a believer ? That proves my case for OSAS.
Correction: Nobody says that the Holy Spirit jumps in and out of a believer. The fact that you think that proves OSAS demonstrates your total ignorance of the debate. At this point, I’m not questioning your honesty. I hope you’re simply ignorant of the debate, but given the fact that you are STILL refusing to engage my arguments, I’m beginning to wonder.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 12:42 pm
Scalia,
Thank you for not questioning my honesty.
That’s because we are talking apples and oranges — you seem to be saying a believer can lose his/her salvation. I’m saying if some one loses their salvation they weren’t saved in the first place. That’s why I’m ignoring your evidence because it doesn’t prove what you think it proves.
Now I define saved as being born again which means to me the Holy Spirit is dwelling in the believer. Now since by your own admission the Holy Spirit doesn’t leave the believer once He dwells in said believer how am I wrong ? Because once the Holy Spirit dwells in the believer they are saved and since the Holy Spirit doesn’t leave the believer until death they don’t lose their salvation — which we state as OSAS.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 12:48 pm
Paul, you need to pay attention to your words as well as mine. Your original statement is:
The Holy Spirit doesn’t jump in and out of us over and over till we die in a state of grace.
The key words are “over and over.” No theologian says that the Holy Spirit jumps in and out of a believer over and over. That is what I’m replying to. If you’re familiar with the debate, we wouldn’t having this silly side discussion.
I’m saying if some one loses their salvation they weren’t saved in the first place. That’s why I’m ignoring your evidence because it doesn’t prove what you think it proves.
That doesn’t hold water, Paul. The verses I cited most clearly refer to Christians who had saving faith. I cited no verse which addressed those who were never converted.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 12:54 pm
Paul,
Moreover, I argued more than whether believers can be lost (they most certainly can), I argued faith/works, the bride, a license to sin, and repetition. For some reason, you’ve decided to ignore my arguments. Fine, just quit replying to me. If you’re not going to really address what I’m saying, then we have nothing to talk about. Carry one with somebody else.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 5:01 pm
Scalia,
A believer can’t lose their salvation based on what you agreed with that’s why I’m ignoring your arguments, ie the Holy Spirit doesn’t stop dwelling in the believer according to your own words.
Only some one that said yes to Jesus and Jesus didn’t say yes back can lose their salvation because they didn’t have it at all because the agreement wasn’t finalized by both parties — as per the example of the good thief.
I agree no use continuing the conversation but I find it hilarious you won’t admit we agree.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 6:31 pm
Paul writes,
A believer can’t lose their salvation based on what you agreed with that’s why I’m ignoring your arguments, ie the Holy Spirit doesn’t stop dwelling in the believer according to your own words.
You claim to find it “hilarious” that I insist we don’t agree, but the real hilarity is your inability to not only properly represent what I’ve said, you don’t even understand what the debate is—even after the clues are dropped into your lap!
You’re not “ignoring my arguments” because of what I “agreed with” because you were ignoring them before I said anything along that line. And since you were ignoring them before I said anything about God’s Spirit jumping in and out of believers, you’re lying.
This is what I said:
Post 151:
Anybody who leaves the church is no longer “of us.” When a person develops a rebellious spirit, s/he will resist, grieve and finally quench the Holy Spirit. Being no longer “of us,” s/he’ll simply leave.
Post 155:
The key words are “over and over.” No theologian says that the Holy Spirit jumps in and out of a believer over and over. That is what I’m replying to. If you’re familiar with the debate, we wouldn’t having this silly side discussion.
What part of “quench” and “over and over” don’t you understand? You clearly aren’t even aware what the counterargument is, and even when you’re told, you pretend to believe otherwise.
You write:
Only some one that said yes to Jesus and Jesus didn’t say yes back can lose their salvation because they didn’t have it at all because the agreement wasn’t finalized by both parties — as per the example of the good thief.
This has been refuted numerous times from the New Testament. Anybody can read the plethora of citations above. You won’t address them because, like Naz, you’re incapable of doing so. If you so much as tried to warp them to fit OSAS, you’d tie yourself in a pretzel. After all this time, if you could prove otherwise, you would.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 7:28 pm
Scalia,
Your own words from you post #153 prove my argument — “Nobody says that the Holy Spirit jumps in and out of a believer.”
If the Holy Spirit doesn’t leave the believer s/he is saved.
News flash — you believe OSAS.
LikeLike
April 5, 2018 at 10:28 pm
Paul writes:
Your own words from you post #153 prove my argument — “Nobody says that the Holy Spirit jumps in and out of a believer.”
It proves nothing of the kind. At best, it proves inartful wording on my part. Under no rational standard can my words be construed to advocate OSAS. First, I have clearly stated that I do not believe OSAS. Second, I have clearly argued against its concepts. Third, I was replying to your remark that the Spirit doesn’t jump out of believers “over and over.” I clarified that was my intent, and I averred from a post previous to 153 that a believer can “quench” the Spirit.
For you to turn that into an endorsement of OSAS is patently dishonest. I gave you every benefit of doubt and treated you with respect, but you’ve shown your true colors. Again, the very best you could honestly argue is that I worded a couple of my replies inaccurately. Instead of having the integrity to state that, you manufacture a bald-faced lie.
It’s at least a good thing that the readers of this blog are seeing how the OSAS doctrine manifests itself in the lives of its advocates. They argue that their doctrine isn’t a license to sin, yet they don’t hesitate to lie when caught in a logical vice. It’s a textbook example of the sloppy grace doctrine.
Paul, if you were going to lie, you should have made it less obvious. If you had any credibility, you’ve thrown it completely out the window.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 11:46 am
Scalia,
You don’t see the humour in this situation ? I think it’s hilarious — let me give you some help.
You are lumping all believers together and saying some will be not be saved so this is proof OSAS is false. I agree with your comment in post #153 and I agree that not all believers will be saved but I disagree this disproves OSAS because as I’ve said before those believers had a “dead faith.”
OSAS properly taught separates believers into two groups — those with the Holy Spirit/a saving faith (see post #153) which will be saved and those without the Holy Spirit/a dead faith as per the group of believers we both believe will not be saved. And briefly “be saved” meaning will be part of those resurrected at the Second Coming.
Now how do you know your evidence proving those believers that aren’t saved is not referring to those with a “dead faith?” Because if you are saying it applies to those believers with a “saving faith” do you see my concern ? “I will never leave you or forsake you.”
So let me sum it up — 1) you and I agree the Holy Spirit will not leave a believer 2) seems we also agree some believers don’t have the Holy Spirit dwelling in them and will not be saved 3) saying some one can answer an altar call continue as a contract killer for the mob and be saved is a false teaching — which I call a perversion of OSAS.
I find this hilarious because you and I agree on the cornerstone of OSAS as per your own words in post #153 and the other two points I summed up above but are fighting tooth and nail to not agree with me.
I’ll give you the last word if you want. I don’t have a closed mind but I’ve not seen anything from you disproving OSAS as I outlined here. You only seem to me to be providing evidence the perversion we both believe is false. I’ll even prime the pump for you —- Paul, a believer that has the Holy Spirit dwelling in them can lose their salvation because ……..
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 12:36 pm
Paul, by definition, a believer is a person that has received the Holy Spirit. The bible does not speak about “saving faith” or “dead faith” in particular. There is no such thing as a true believer who does not have the Holy Spirit living in them.
The scripture clearly contrasts sheep and goats, light and darkness, believers and unbelievers, the righteous and unrighteous etc ….
There is no hybrid animal, like a geep or a shoat 🙂 It’s a black and white concept. There is no scripture to determine the “quality” of one’s faith as saving or dead. Rather, another way to look at it which is scriptural is asking having you “opened the door” of your life to Jesus because He stands at the door and knocks.
These are all pictures to help us understand the spiritual concept, It really doesn’t matter if you like to call it “saving faith” or not. I’m not going to die on that hill, I get your meaning. The bottom line is that God knows those that are His and His children are SEALED with the Spirit of promise.
Naz
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 12:53 pm
Paul,
I have zero regard for you. At this point, I really couldn’t care less what you believe because you’re an arrant liar. I see no humor in it whatsoever, and your latest post is further evidence that your reading skills are monumentally challenged. The only reason I’m replying to your post is for the benefit of any reader coming late into this thread.
You are lumping all believers together and saying some will be not be saved so this is proof OSAS is false.
Wrong. I never cited those who were not genuinely born again as an example that OSAS is false. Every one of my biblical citations relevant to the OSAS doctrine relate to born again Christians. When I say believer in that sense, I mean those who were once truly born again but for whatever reason have rebelled against God’s word and refuse to repent.
OSAS properly taught separates believers into two groups…
Already known and entirely irrelevant. It’s irrelevant because anybody not born again isn’t saved.
Now how do you know your evidence proving those believers that aren’t saved is not referring to those with a “dead faith?”
I’ve argued why above. You either didn’t read my arguments or you’re lying again about what they say—not surprising at this point.
So let me sum it up — 1) you and I agree the Holy Spirit will not leave a believer.
No, I DO NOT agree with you. The Holy Spirit WILL LEAVE a person who was once a true believer if said person rebels against God and refuses to repent. What I believe is that the Holy Spirit will not jump in and out of a believer “over and over.” Of course I already explained that, but you’re conveniently forgetting (sarc). God will try to bring an errant believer back to righteousness, but if said person refuses God’s repeated call, He will leave.
2) seems we also agree some believers don’t have the Holy Spirit dwelling in them and will not be saved
No, we do not agree here either. Every true believer has the Holy Spirit. I don’t count anybody else as a “believer.”
3) saying some one can answer an altar call continue as a contract killer for the mob and be saved is a false teaching — which I call a perversion of OSAS.
I never said anything about answering “an altar call.” Is it impossible for a true believer to murder somebody? Is it impossible for a true believer to grow cold and live a life of sin? If not, then what is Revelation 2 & 3 all about? Everybody in all “seven” churches were non-born again “believers”?? If they weren’t really born again, why didn’t the Lord “counsel” them to get saved? He never gave a hint that they were never saved. In fact, the messenger to Ephesus was chastised because he had left his first love. So, if a true believer can grow cold and live in sin, there is no logical stopping point within the OSAS template. A true believer can grow cold, allow hurt feelings to make him bitter at the church, get into financial trouble, join the mob for the money, and start knocking people off. Under OSAS, he’s forever saved no matter how many people he kills.
I find this hilarious because you and I agree on the cornerstone of OSAS as per your own words in post #153 and the other two points I summed up above but are fighting tooth and nail to not agree with me.
If you find your lying hilarious, you need serious help. You’re the one fighting tooth and nail to justify your dishonesty.
I’ll give you the last word if you want.
Yes, please. Let’s stop it here. I don’t have an ounce of respect for you.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 1:03 pm
Naz writes:
…by definition, a believer is a person that has received the Holy Spirit. The bible does not speak about “saving faith” or “dead faith” in particular. There is no such thing as a true believer who does not have the Holy Spirit living in them.
Although this is mostly true, you’re missing Paul’s point by a mile. My disdain for him doesn’t affect my reading comprehension. I say “mostly” because the Bible most certainly speaks of believing in vain (1 Cor. 15:2) and faith sans works being dead (Jas. 2:26). Such persons are believers in name only. That’s what Paul is arguing with respect to his classifications that separate nominal Christians from those who are truly saved.
The bottom line is that God knows those that are His and His children are SEALED with the Spirit of promise.
Yet those same children can quench that same Spirit (1 Th. 5:19).
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 1:04 pm
I forgot to add this to Post 164:
Naz writes:
I get your meaning.
If you really understood him, why did you reply??
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 1:20 pm
Naz,
When we get down to the details some differences appear but not all of these differences are critical because the bible doesn’t provide that much clarity in areas. So we end up with differences that divide but not in a detrimental way unless we make it so. I use the example of the Nisan 14th controversy not to start a new discussion but to clarify how church disagreements should be handled. Anicetus and Polycarp disagreed, neither could change the others mind and they decided to celebrate differently.
Are all believers sheep ? No, so that means some believers are goats.
How about if I say:
“saving faith”=sheep
“dead faith”=goats
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 1:48 pm
Why is faith worthy of so much respect? Would someone show me the calculations because I just don’t get it.
When the truth is that faith is nothing more than the deliberate suspension of disbelief. It’s an act of will. It’s not a state of grace; it’s a state of choice. Because without evidence, you’ve got no reason to believe apart from your willingness to believe.
So why is that worthy of respect anymore than your willingness to poke yourself in the eye with a pencil? And why is faith considered some kind of virtue, is it because it implies a certain depth of contemplation and insight? I don’t think so.
Faith by definition is unexamined, so in that sense it has to be among the shallowest of experiences and yet if it could it would regulate every action, every word and thought of every single person on this planet
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 1:55 pm
The Take Away,
I’m using faith as the complete trust or confidence in someone or something ie. Jesus.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 2:09 pm
Paul, that’s fine, I guess it depends how you define “believer”. Our definitions of the term “believer are different.
For example, the ones that “went out from among us” and the ones that “believed in vain”, are not true believers in my opinion. These were people that perhaps had an interest in Christ, maybe even a curiosity but did not continue unto salvation. They certainly did not receive the Holy Spirit.
You can find these people in any church today and even in the churches in Paul’s day. There are people that sit on the fence and appear to have some sort of belief or faith but are not fully invested in the gospel. There are even people on this blog that talk a good game about God but don’t even believe in the resurrection. I would not consider these people believers. Perhaps they are on their way to becoming believers (hopefully) but are not there yet.
We must give Paul room to address those on the fence and not think that he is always speaking exclusively to Christians. Surely Paul had an evangelistic heart and his goal was to reach as many as he could with the gospel. We must keep this in mind when reading passages that appear to address Christians when if fact it is addressing a different group altogether.
It’s a case of if the shoe fits, wear it. For example, when I read 1 Corinthians 15:2 I know it’s not addressing me because I have not believed in vain and know that I am already saved. I have assurance of my salvation based on a large body of other scriptures such as John 10:28-29, 1John 5:13, John 3:16, Hebrews 7:25, Ephesians 4:30, to name only a few. So when I come across 1 Cor 15:2, I read it in light of the full body of scripture so I don’t take one verse out of context.
Naz
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 2:29 pm
Naz writes:
It’s a case of if the shoe fits, wear it. For example, when I read 1 Corinthians 15:2 I know it’s not addressing me because I have not believed in vain and know that I am already saved.
Funny how you’re getting me mixed up with Paul.
1 Corinthians 15
1 Now I would remind you, brothers,[a] of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand,
2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
Paul is primarily addressing true believers. He states that he preached to the Corinthians the gospel, that they had received the gospel, and that they are standing in the gospel. He then adds in verse 2: and by which you are being saved…, so in no manner is he speaking to nominal Christians. However, he places a condition on their salvation—they are saved IF they hold fast to the word that Paul preached, unless they believed in vain.
The gospel will continue to save a person if that person holds fast to the faith. If s/he forsakes it, s/he will not be saved. A person can “believe in vain” one of two ways: Starting with genuine faith and abandoning it or never really having it. The nominal part is only in the latter.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 2:33 pm
Naz,
It’s just the different in language we use:
dead faith=believed in vain
saving faith=true believers
Every once and a while I’ll hear a pastor preach about do you have a “dead faith” or a “saving faith” so I use those terms.
When interpreting those scriptures based on — “I will never leave you or forsake you” I also believe they are for those who “believe in vain.”
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 2:44 pm
Naz:
“……There are even people on this blog that talk a good game about God but don’t even believe in the resurrection. I would not consider these people believers.”
I do not call people believers because they believe in the resurrection of Jesus; I call believers like that having a form of mental illness.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 7:53 pm
TRUE BELIEVERS are those who believe Paul? You got to be kidding citing 1 Corinthians to support Paul’s position? That is Pharisee ideology that every written word is Godly scripture.
Paul was a miscreant. He preached his own ideological belief system and attributed his preaching and labeled those people who believed Paul as the true believers. And Christians now follow Paul’s (Pharisee) ideology because people who believed Paul’s preaching, believes Pharisee ideology, Jesus’s arch enemy.
When Paul infiltrated the groups following Jesus, his intention was to hijack the followers, who after Jesus left the country, in effect were sheep without a Shepherd. Paul wanted to fill the boots of Jesus.
That’s when Paul devised his plan to become that Shepherd and took the name of Jesus in vain to accomplish that goal on the road, not to Damascus as you might imagine, his original ploy, but the road up the ladder toward the Christian hierarchy of a ready-made congregation already a growing force.
Paul’s perfect storm preached the Resurrection of Jesus to take over using Jesus words about rising from the place of the dead on the third day and subsequent appearances to chosen followers to prove he had risen for the place of the dead and was indeed, alive.
Paul used Jesus’s escape from the tomb for his resurrection plan, not because he believed Jesus was raised from the dead, lots of people did because of Jesus’s post-entombment live appearances and the masses skewed theory of supernaturalism taught by the Pharisees.
Paul used his own religious upbringing and bragged about it. When he thought it would help him at trial he boasted and told how his perfect storm plot conspiracy and vividly described it (Acts whole chptr 22 and 23:1:6) Paul thus obtained two fold credibility 1. from the enemies of Jesus and 2. from the stupendous gullibility of the already indoctrinated masses steeped in the supernatural and magic trick miracles of Pharisee tradition which the Pharisee gave oral laws as being equal to God’s written Laws.
The tenets of the Pharisees; hence of Paul; hence of today’s Christians by Paul’s persuasion:
1. They believed that God controls all things, yet allowed that decisions made by individuals also affect life’s course. (Free Will)
2. They believed in the resurrection of the dead (Acts 23:6).
3. They believed in an afterlife, with appropriate reward and punishment on an individual basis.
4. They believed in the existence of angels and demons (Acts 23:8).
5. Pharisees gave equal authority to oral tradition and attempted to defend this position by saying it went all the way back to Moses. Evolving over the centuries, these traditions added to God’s Word, which is forbidden (Deuteronomy 4:2), and the Pharisees sought to strictly obey these traditions along with the Old Testament. The Gospels abound with examples of the Pharisees treating these traditions as equal to God’s Word (Matthew 9:14; 15:1-9; 23:5; 23:16, 23, Mark 7:1-23; Luke 11:42).
Anything sound familiar to you Christians as you promulgate Pharisee traditions, claiming it is Christian tradition and citing Paul as your guiding source.
So please, when you quote scripture think maybe; What Does Jesus Say? Not Paul.
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 8:39 pm
take away,
Those who reject the written Word of God reject the Living Word of God also.
So when Jesus came, He found that he had already been in the tomb four days.
Now Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off; and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary, to console them concerning their brother. Martha therefore, when she heard that Jesus was coming, went to meet Him, but Mary stayed at the house. Martha then said to Jesus, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. “Even now I know that whatever You ask of God, God will give You.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?” She said to Him, “Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world.” (John 11:17-27)
[So then Jesus had a form of mental illness?]
Therefore, when Mary came where Jesus was, she saw Him, and fell at His feet, saying to Him, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died.” When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews who came with her also weeping, He was deeply moved in spirit and was troubled, and said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to Him, “Lord, come and see.” Jesus wept. So the Jews were saying, “See how He loved him!” But some of them said, “Could not this man, who opened the eyes of the blind man, have kept this man also from dying?” (John 11:32-37)
[You’re a Sadducee then?]
So Jesus, again being deeply moved within, came to the tomb. Now it was a cave, and a stone was lying against it. Jesus said, “Remove the stone.” Martha, the sister of the deceased, said to Him, “Lord, by this time there will be a stench, for he has been dead four days.” Jesus said to her, “Did I not say to you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. “I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me.” When He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth.” The man who had died came forth, bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.” (John 11:38-44)
Therefore many of the Jews who came to Mary, and saw what He had done, believed in Him. (John 11:45)
[Again you show your “faith” to be ill-conceived & misguided.]
For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased”— and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. (2 Pe 1:16-18)
LikeLike
April 6, 2018 at 9:58 pm
Frank you quoted Peter about hearing the voice on the mountain. Is not that the same Peter who saw Elijah and Moses on the mountain talking to Jesus? lol see when you read literally you see only the supernatural Moses and Elijah dead entombed and long ago gone. Yet the same Peter who heard the voice of God saw the Moses and Elijah. Please don’t quote scriptures that you don’t know what you are talking about. Actually that particular time Jesus learned when and where and how he was to be arrested and taken into custody for his trial. You know who he was actually talking to who told him the where, the how and date and the time of his arrest and who would betray him and how the betrayal was to take place. Do you think that it was Moses and Elijah really? To you that might make perfect supernatural sense but to me the more natural common sense wisdom about who gave Jesus that information was Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea; you know why?
Because both men were best friends with Jesus, both were his secret Disciples, both men were rulers in the Jewish Council, members of the Sanhedrin and they knew who it was betraying him, bow the betrayal would take place, how much Judas was paid, when the arrest would happen, date, time and place (Gethsemane) How did they know? because they attended all the important meetings and functions and decisions because they were the rulers who voted on the main issues facing the Council and the fact is that they both kept Jesus apprised of all the positions being discussed, voted on and enacted and they warned Jesus in secret meeting places such as on the mountain where it just so happened Jesus took Peter, James and John his brother on this occasion. And on the way down after the meeting: “And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, Jesus swore them to secrecy. “Don’t breathe a word of what you’ve seen. After the Son of Man is raised from the place of the dead, you are free to talk.”
How do you extrapolate your mental illness and relate that to Jesus?
Jesus knew that Lazarus was prone to a disease. Most people with cataplexy have narcolepsy type 1, or narcolepsy with cataplexy. Stricken by paralysis victims cannot move, their breathing in not detectable certainly not with medical instruments of 2000 years ago and some end up in the morgue.
This is why I have posted the documentary about this condition several times
but of course the documentary was narrated by doctors providing knowledge and not religious preachers promoting non knowledge so of course you would have no interest in knowledge, only belief and that’s why you are stuck with a skewed thinking process that immediately attributes unusual events to the paranormal supernatural that does not exist. You are on a different planet than Jesus I can assure you of that.
That’s why you suffer from the mental illness and can’t understand that the people who believed Lazarus was dead believed he would be stinking after four days too but of course he wasn’t stinking because Lazarus was no more dead in his tomb than Jesus was dead in his tomb or Jonah dead in the stormy sea (you think he was in a belly of a fish) you’re like a child who hasn’t grown out of the Santa Claus phase Cinderella and Prince Charming. You’re stuck where you are and too stubborn with belief to allow truth to penetrate your mind and there you stay.
Why don’t you ask for knowledge or ask why your miracles are not miracles. As long as your inclination leads you to literal scripture you most always will be wrong. Not all scripture is to be taken literally, sometimes words and sayings and peculiar grammar render words and phrases to mean something differently than the literally implied meaning but you’re blind to it.
You see it because you believe it; I believe it because I see it. Belief will never make you see knowledge; only knowledge will make you see it then; then you can believe it with surety.
Here’s a little literal test for you. Here is a passage about John the Baptist
“For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.'”
So literally this sentence literally means that John the Baptist never ate and never drank. How then could John live, neither eating nor drinking?
Well, you might say, in your religious egoism, it was a miracle and he did not need food or water, so he didn’t eat or drink. You see when you only see the miraculous, the paranormal, the supernatural, that’s all you’ll ever see so that seeing you perceive not and remain blind.
WOW Frank that’s a big miracle isn’t it? Not having to eat or drink means you would never starve to death or be hungry.
What do you think of that miracle Frank? It says so in the bible doesn’t it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 7, 2018 at 9:22 pm
take away,
The Scriptural reference is Luke 9:28-36. It was His Transfiguration. There were three witnesses: Peter and John and James. Then a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!” (Luke 9:35)
At that time the disciples came to Jesus and said, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And He called a child to Himself and set him before them,
and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
(Matthew 18:1-6)
LikeLike
April 8, 2018 at 1:21 pm
Frank I know what it’s called and where it’s at but you still don’t get anything about my message because you can only see the literal meaning.
But Frank you don’t know anything; but, you believe everything.
The Transfiguration of Jesus is an event reported in the New Testament when Jesus is transfigured and becomes radiant in glory upon a mountain. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 17:1–8, Mark 9:2–8, Luke 9:28–36) describe it, and the Second Epistle of Peter also refers to it (2 Peter 1:16–18). It has also been hypothesized that the first chapter of the Gospel of John alludes to it (John 1:14).
Don’t you know that on top of the mountain is the place where the sunset shines the last before disappearing on the horizon?
That’s exactly where Jesus was standing when he was bathed in the radiant glory and they called it the Transfiguration. It could more appropriately have been called
The Tri-Meeting of Jesus, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. Jesus still could have stood on the highest perch and been bathed in the sunset’s golden radiant light.
And what did the Disciples hear and from whom and from where. Get some knowledge for a change and stop showing your ignorance.
Have you ever heard of the megaphone used to magnify a man’s voice? Well that’s what the disciples heard here Frank take a lesson in reality: You’ll believe anything faster than a hornet’s sting. It’s been around since the echoes in the mountains.
EVEN Moses was afraid when he heard the megaphone about “take off your sandals for this is holy ground as the Elders scared the hell of him”….. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.”””
A megaphone, speaking-trumpet, bullhorn, blowhorn, or loudhailer is usually a portable or hand-held, cone-shaped acoustic horn used to amplify a person’s voice or other sounds and direct it in a given direction. The sound is introduced into the narrow end of the megaphone, by holding it up to the face and speaking into it, and the sound waves radiate out the wide end. A megaphone increases the volume of sound by increasing the acoustic impedance seen by the vocal cords, matching the impedance of the vocal cords to the air, so that more sound power is radiated. It also serves to direct the sound waves in the direction the horn is pointing. It somewhat distorts the sound of the voice because the frequency response of the megaphone is greater at higher sound frequencies. The rodeos used them long before radio.
Since the 1960s the voice-powered acoustic megaphone described above has been replaced by the electric megaphone, which uses electric power and a folded horn to amplify the voice.
LikeLike
April 8, 2018 at 5:36 pm
The Take Away,
Considering were way off topic let me throw this out there. If you don’t want to discuss —- no worries. I don’t remember us discussing this angle and I’m not sure if I’m using proper lingo but you’ll get my drift. I just want to try the gospel based totally on your scenario being 100% correct (ie. no supernatural happenings).
“For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.” Acts 23: 8. So based on that let’s say Jesus is with the Sadducees, those that helped Jesus with your scenario are Sadducees, the 12 apostles (11+ Matthias) are Sadducees, the main believers are Sadducees, they’re almost all Sadducees before Paul gets involved.
So let’s hit rewind and ruminate — very few take Paul’s side and the Sadducees not Pharisees win the day. So it’s others not Paul that make up the New Books of the early church. With out any resurrection, angel, spirit being preached, just WDJS explained without supernatural —- so would we have even heard of Jesus of Nazareth ? Wouldn’t this movement have died out or perhaps remained as only a tiny sect of Judaism ?
LikeLike
April 9, 2018 at 9:21 am
Paul V:
The problem with that Paul, is that you are going way overboard with your analogy about everybody being Sadducees. And the Sadducees did die out. And here’s why:
Because the Sadducees were more concerned with politics than religion, they were unconcerned with Jesus until they became afraid He might bring unwanted Roman attention. It was at this point that the Sadducees and Pharisees united and conspired to put Christ to death (John 11:48-50; Mark 14:53; 15:1). Other mentions of the Sadducees are found in Acts 4:1 and Acts 5:17, and the Sadducees are implicated in the death of James the brother of John in Acts 12:1-2. They are also connected to the death of James, the brother of Jesus, by the historian Josephus.
The Sadducees ceased to exist in A.D. 70. Since this party existed because of their political and priestly ties, when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70, the Sadducees were also destroyed.
The Pharisees: In contrast to the Sadducees, the Pharisees were mostly middle-class businessmen, and therefore were in contact with the common man. The Pharisees were held in much higher esteem by the common man than the Sadducees. Though they were a minority in the Sanhedrin and held a minority number of positions as priests, they seemed to control the decision making of the Sanhedrin far more than the Sadducees did, again because they had the support of the people.
Though the Pharisees were rivals of the Sadducees, they managed to set aside their differences on one occasion-the trial of Christ. It was at this point that the Sadducees and Pharisees united to put Christ to death (Mark 14:53; 15:1; John 11:48-50).
Both the Pharisees and the Sadducees earned numerous rebukes from Jesus. Perhaps the best lesson we can learn from the Pharisees and Sadducees is to not be like them. Unlike the Sadducees, we are to believe everything the Bible says, including the miraculous and the afterlife. Unlike the Pharisees, we are not to treat traditions as having equal authority as Scripture, and we are not to allow our relationship with God to be reduced to a legalistic list of rules and rituals. “Hence when Christ entered into the world he said sacrifices and offerings you have not desired”; in other words, the pragmatic, externals of mere religion are not satisfying to you Father. It isn’t that a man goes once a week in a piece of real estate. Or simply undergoes as a matter of tradition and form certain sacraments. Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired but instead Father you have made ready a body for me to offer you, father. You say thank you Lord. You may need hands, here they are; you may need feet, here they are; you may need lips, here they are; you may need a mind to think with, a heart to love with and I’m available. Thank you.
While the Sadducees ceased to exist after the destruction of Jerusalem, the Pharisees, who were more concerned with religion than politics, continued to exist. In fact, the Pharisees were against the rebellion that brought on Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70, and they were the first to make peace with the Romans afterward. The Pharisees were also responsible for the compilation of the Mishnah, an important document with reference to the continuation of Judaism beyond the destruction of the temple.
The Pharisees therefore prevailed in their supernatural indoctrination of the masses and Paul used the resurrection ruse to fabricate the story about meeting Jesus, being blind, sight restored when he met Ananias of Damascus and subsequent infiltration of the Jesus following, especially in light of the appearances of Jesus, ALIVE, thereby perpetuating the Pharisaical hoax of the resurrection of the dead and used literal interpretation to circumvent idioms, metaphors, sayings, and even the symbolic parables of Jesus to present a moral simile like the Aesop Fables, were used literally for hoax embellishment and still used by Christians for the same reason.
Example Acts 1:9: ( “…..and a cloud hid Him from their sight…..” (of dry dirt rising to the sky from earthly beasts kicking up the dust such as horses or wagon trains and in modern day, vehicles traveling on dry, dirt roads cross country) Most of us are very familiar with dust clouds, especially on unpaved country roads.
LikeLike
April 9, 2018 at 2:30 pm
The Take Away,
“The problem with that Paul, is that you are going way overboard with your analogy about everybody being Sadducees.” Fair enough, and as I stated I may not be using the proper lingo but we’re almost talking apples and apples now. Let’s say — Sadducees=Natural and Pharisees=Supernatural or you pick the terms you like.
Was it 2 years ago we last discussed the resurrection ? I couldn’t move past your Jesus as a good guy and kept going back to that over and over but now I can because:
So Jesus’ sans supernatural discussion with Mary now goes — Mary don’t touch me my wounds haven’t healed yet. Go tell the others I’m not dead and I’ll explain everything to them. But we must keep this secret from the Pharisees because I’m still in danger.
See the Pharisees won the day and the winners write the history, but what I just stated would be how that conversation went considering it happened and your scenario being 100% correct.
So later Jesus discusses the situation with His followers and they agree He must leave the area and they’ll stay and spread His message here and He can head east and spread it there. Therefore, Jesus is also a good guy in your scenario.
So if you agree — now we’re talking apples and apples about your scenario and although I still disagree I don’t see any major holes with it.
So if the resurrection is a carrot and hell is a stick you could possibly eliminate “the stick” but without “the carrot” the movement would crash and burn or only remain as a small sect.
LikeLike
April 9, 2018 at 6:11 pm
Paul V:
I am please that you can accept other “common sense” viewpoints besides the supernatural skew. I think you are not far from Kingdom Jesus talked about regarding the life and times of this mighty man and his rightful place in the Record of Mankind as a true champion revolutionary in the interest of humanity.
I think Jesus never explained the reality of the escape other than to about four people because first, he entrusted himself to no man pre crucifixion (as per last 3 verses of John’s Gospel, 2nd chptr) and post crucifixion that cautious approach would not have changed.
I estimate that besides Jesus, Nico and Joseph no other disciples where told about it, save Lazarus, Mary, Martha her sister and possibly Mary Magdalene who would also have formed part of the entourage who left with Jesus for greener pastures after he was sufficiently healed from the crucifixion ordeal.
Where did Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha live? In Bethany?
Where did the so called ascension of Jesus take place from? Bethany.
I don’t call it the ascension; I call it the day when a cloud hid the entourage from the watchers’ vision as they galloped across the dirt dried road sending clouds of billowing dust upwards to heavens, to turn a phrase, as we see often today especially in country roads.
LikeLike
April 9, 2018 at 9:13 pm
The Take Away,
I have no problem exploring scenarios I disagree with if they don’t have major problems. With all world views there is some problems but as long as they’re not major I don’t have a problem discussing them. As I’ve said before just because I believe in the supernatural I do not attribute everything to the supernatural. Likewise I do not exclude the supernatural either.
According to the Natural scenario crucifixion ordeal the fewer told about the plan the better — I would agree with that.
Now keeping with the Natural scenario during His ministry — Jesus would’ve taught from day 1 the Natural way of thinking and His main disciples would’ve believed in the natural way of thinking — agreed ? Possibly Judas and some disciples on the fringe may not have understood and believed in the Supernatural but the majority would have to believe in the Natural way or His ministry wouldn’t have had a chance — agreed ?
Now keeping with the Natural scenario after the crucifixion ordeal — Jesus would’ve briefed the disciples before His departure on spreading the Natural way — agreed ? And keeping with a Natural scenario the Ascension to heaven could not have occurred — in that case it could happen as you suggest or possibly slightly different but it’s not a deal breaker keeping with the scenario as we’ve defined for this discussion.
So after Jesus departs His followers should be preaching His Natural way —agreed ? So was it Paul that brings in the Supernatural ? And we have kind of a fight for the movement and Paul wins so the resurrection is taught ?
So if Paul did bring in the Supernatural and teach the resurrection what would’ve happened if Paul didn’t get involved in the movement. Wouldn’t this Natural movement have just died out ? Poor people would love the WDJS Natural way movement but the majority of rich/powerful not so much because no resurrection.
It seems the only way WDJS Natural movement would even be considered is if the poor are armed and revolt or everybody has enough and our technology is even more advanced in the future. But in the 1st century and even the foreseeable future people will never sacrifice as per WDJS if no resurrection. It would be eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. dog eat dog. the other golden rule — he who has the gold makes the rules. might is right. etc….
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 8:39 am
Paul V:
Thank you for your well thought out position. I appreciate the reflection it provided me.
Now keeping with the Natural scenario during His ministry – Jesus would’ve taught from day 1 the Natural way of thinking and His main disciples would’ve believed in the natural way of thinking – agreed ? Possibly Judas and some disciples on the fringe may not have understood and believed in the Supernatural but the majority would have to believe in the Natural way or His ministry wouldn’t have had a chance – agreed ?
Neither of your analogies follow. For example: Jesus taught to love your neighbour, this does not require natural or supernatural belief. To the Samaritans, Mt. Gerizim is their “Jerusalem”. This has caused the Jews to hold the Samaritans with contempt to this day. The Samaritans and the Jews are historic enemies. The Canaanites hated the Jews and were in turn hated by them. A religion scholar stood up with a question to test Jesus. “Teacher, what do I need to do to get eternal life?”
26 He answered, “What’s written in God’s Law? How do you interpret it?”
27 He said, “That you love the Lord your God with all your passion and prayer and muscle and intelligence-and that you love your neighbor as well as you do yourself.”
28 “Good answer!” said Jesus. “Do it and you’ll live.”
29 Looking for a loophole, he asked, “And just how would you define ‘neighbor’?”
The Good Samaritan parable follows.
Now keeping with the Natural scenario after the crucifixion ordeal – Jesus would’ve briefed the disciples before His departure on spreading the Natural way – agreed ? The does not follow. What Jesus briefed them on was: “…. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. (Mat 28). Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (Mk 16) Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, “……And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the place of the dead the third day that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them.(Lk 24). When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. (Acts 1)
The rest of your commentary that Paul brought the supernatural is erroneous extrapolation. No, Paul did not bring the supernatural, supernaturalism and superstition; he believed, preached and promoted it but those imaginations have always been imbedded into humanity’s mindset as humanity evolved and sought to find its place and meaning within the higher powers and life forces. Since before the mythological gods were created; since indigenous peoples used nature, animals, fish and virtuous names with spiritual significance they believed to be imbued accordingly, to those so named; since the heavenly bodies, constellations and planets were named as gods; since the 33 million gods of Hinduism which leads me to recount:
According to an old Hindu legend…
..there was once a time when all human beings were gods, but they so abused their divinity that Brahma, the chief god, decided to take it away from them and hide it where it could never be found.
Where to hide their divinity was the question. So Brahma called a council of the gods to help him decide. “Let’s bury it deep in the earth,” said the gods. But Brahma answered, “No, that will not do because humans will dig into the earth and find it.” Then the gods said, “Let’s sink it in the deepest ocean.” But Brahma said, “No, not there, for they will learn to dive into the ocean and will find it.” Then the gods said, “Let’s take it to the top of the highest mountain and hide it there.” But once again Brahma replied, “No, that will not do either, because they will eventually climb every mountain and once again take up their divinity.” Then the gods gave up and said, “We do not know where to hide it, because it seems that there is no place on earth or in the sea that human beings will not eventually reach.”
Brahma thought for a long time and then said, “Here is what we will do. We will hide their divinity deep in the center of their own being, for humans will never think to look for it there.”
All the gods agreed that this was the perfect hiding place, and the deed was done. And since that time humans have been going up and down the earth, digging, diving, climbing, and exploring–searching for something already within themselves.
And what I believe Paul, is that Jesus found the godhead as noted in Luke 17 20-21:
And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Those are the principles upon which The Order of Worldwide Reverence, A Perspective So Different is based and what guides me in my understanding Jesus and the bible he taught from without a supernatural slant which dissertation you can read if you click on my username to go to my page; then, click the appropriate title.
When Jesus first began his mission after reading from Isaiah and then speaking to the tradition of the supernaturalism of God directing the prophets, he gave two examples that provoked the congregation’s wrath because it discredited the supernatural aspect that traditional religion espoused. The 1st was the Famine & Widow of Sarepta; the 2nd was Naaman The Syrian & Leprosy.
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 11:47 am
Paul V, you’re a trooper my friend.
Does the word “futile” register with you right about now 🙂
Naz
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 1:41 pm
Naz,
As you know very few people are open to change at this level of discussion. I’m one of them but because most people can’t explain away my concerns there comes a point where I can’t follow their argument any further.
I still subscribe/read Theo-sophical Ruminations but haven’t commented as much as I did previously. This one really interested me and all things considered I’m glad I commented this time.
So it is “futile” that I’ll change some ones mind but I do enjoy exchanging ideas and sharpening my arguments.
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 2:49 pm
The Take Away,
“Neither of your analogies follow. For example: Jesus taught to love your neighbour, this does not require natural or supernatural belief.”
Let me clarify — I agree “love your neighbour” “does not require natural or supernatural belief.” But my point is Jesus wouldn’t teach the supernatural because in this scenario He didn’t believe in it. He would’ve clouded His teaching to avoid trouble with the leaders but to the inner circle He has to reveal His true Natural way or His teaching wouldn’t have even been properly transmitted to them and therefore to the people. It would have died out immediately. Besides, new atheists tell me all the time the golden rule — “do unto others” was taught way before the 1st century.
So just to clarify — it sounds like you agree with me Jesus briefed His disciples before leaving them —- is this correct ? If so, He wouldn’t have told them to preach a supernatural resurrection, because He didn’t agree with
that — agreed ?
“The rest of your commentary that Paul brought the supernatural is erroneous extrapolation.” Fair enough, but that’s the impression I got from you. So let’s explore this — based on your statement — “but those imaginations have always been imbedded into humanity’s mindset” is it logical to assume it was in the WDJS Natural movement from the beginning ? And the supernatural just grew faster and stronger and choked out the WDJS Natural movement very quickly after Jesus departed ?
Again, for purposes of this discussion you don’t have to convince me — I agree Jesus is a good guy and that He did not preach the supernatural but the natural way. For the sake of this discussion I’m agreeing 100% with your scenario. We’ve now reached another impasse — I’ll explain latter but just want to throw one more thing out there.
For the WDJS Natural way you have to have a specific type of government for it to flourish. It would have to have rule of law and protection for minorities with the strength (police/military) to back up it’s rules and laws. Some types of gov’t would kill the WDJS Natural way on site and they’d never flourish — convert or die ? The 1st century gov’t wasn’t very receptive of the supernatural Jesus but at least the beleivers had the carrot and stick (ie heaven/hell). Would a god-emperor be more upset with a group that said not only is he not their god but he isn’t even a god ?
So now the impasse — there’s no carrot in your scenario. it doesn’t have to be a supernatural carrot (ie the resurrection) but there has to be a carrot. Peter and the others had to see this isn’t going to work and just went back to their old lives. better to be a fisherman live out your life —- because you’re just gonna die anyway, why get crucified ? and I can’t see how the WDJS Natural movement even make it to the people — these 1st century people were steeped in the supernatural the only thing they have going for themselves is the after life. So even if you’re correct, the supernatural would’ve had to be added pdq after Jesus left or we never would’ve heard about Jesus of Nazareth.
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 6:57 pm
Paul V:
You said “……it sounds like you agree with me Jesus briefed His disciples before leaving them —- is this correct ? If so, He wouldn’t have told them to preach a supernatural resurrection…….
OF COURSE THIS IS CORRECT.
I gave you four (4) scriptures with scriptural references from the bible about what Jesus briefed his disciples on, none of which touched on the supernatural resurrection.
(Mat 28), (Mk 16), (Lk 24), (Acts 1).
The early Christians were not a government; it was Constantine who brought them together to stop arguing about what Jesus was or who he was and what he was…..to stop the bickering but that didn’t mean their compromise was any more valid because of Constantine’s desire to unite them just because he himself became a Christian.
So I miss your point because you are not making one.
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 7:00 pm
By the way Paul V,
it will be more manageable if you ask one question at a time instead of 5 or more.
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 7:14 pm
And for Naz:
Here is an idea about futility of belief from the bible:
‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing , they do not hear or understand.’
“You will listen and listen, but never understand. You will look and look, but never see.”
How then can you even grasp that which I speak to you? Your ancestors said the same things about Jesus and worse than that, accused him of having a demon and being possessed and blasphemous.
Do you really think you can deter virtuous reality because of supernaturalism that does not exist in the thousand centuries of mankind without a shred of evidence, but lots of anecdotal belief stories of superstitious ignorance?
Just because Jesus fed the thousands and the people noised that a miracle occurred throughout the land, does that make what Jesus did, a miracle? If you believe that you are a dolt, a daft person indeed. And that’s what belief systems do to people. The tyranny of religion is that it takes away a person’s discretion to think for themselves in order to fit into the cliche and you are to be pitied and comforted but you need to accept your plight of ignorant tyrannical brainwashing before you can escape from it.
HUH
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 7:21 pm
The Take Away,
“OF COURSE THIS IS CORRECT.” Thank you for clarifying, because of recent conversations here and elsewhere I just wanted to confirm. I realize you gave me those verses but a simple <> and I wouldn’t have even asked the question.
And that’s a good idea to just ask 1 question at a time and as it just so happens I just have 1 question left.
Constantine did bring them together but this was a supernatural Jesus and not the WDJS Natural way. The supernatural had taken over long before that.
I think I’m making the only point. Why should I sacrifice to follow the WDJS Natural way if in the end it’s just death anyway ?
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 7:23 pm
typo should have been — “but a simple <> and I”
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 7:24 pm
that’s weird agreed keeps disagreeing
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 8:20 pm
take away,
If not a Sadducee, perhaps a Muslim? Your notions aren’t original nor do they conform to the facts. Ever hear of Nikos Kazantzakis?
Note: When they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.” (Acts 5:27-32)
LikeLike
April 10, 2018 at 10:37 pm
As usual your comments make no sense. Muslims did not come on the scene ’til the 7th century. And no I never heard of that guy of your question nor do I need to.
It is stunning how you think quoting scripture regardless of its context somehow supports your position of which you never disclose. You are impotent because you have no position; you can only give someone else’s position,not your own so you have no standing at all. A house without foundation.
LikeLike
April 11, 2018 at 5:15 pm
Paul V what would you be sacrificing to come out from the supernatural mindset and come into knowledge instead of belief which can never set you free for never and never; only knowledge can release you from the non knowledge of belief and when you come to that truth, that truth will set you free, from the tyranny of belief that does nothing for the believer but everything for those who live off the avails of prostituting the belief system belief to the neglect of knowledge in order to fill their coffers through those people willing to give them a piece of the beast they crave by any means possible.
But what mystifies me to this day is how an only nominally charismatic salesman or holy man is able to persuade otherwise reasonable people to part with their will and their wallets with nary a whimper. Does the oft-quoted line from P.T. Barnum about the prolific birthrate of fools really explain our susceptibility to schemes and scams and eschatological hoodoo? Perhaps we are not the “political animal” that Aristotle dubbed us, but the credulous one. We are built to believe.
And don’t think there aren’t plenty of sharks out there profiting by our need to attach ourselves to something bigger than our own little lives. One of the more heartless spiritual hustles of the last 75 years is the “prosperity gospel”—promising miraculous returns to those faithful enough to “plant a seed of faith.”“You need to give to get” is the implicit and incessant message—the Big Guy looks askance at those too cheap to Visa-swipe their faith, but he does train a beneficent eagle eye on any garden-variety sinner who coughs up a hundred a month to an overfed, Bible-clutching multimillionaire like Benny Hinn, Mike Murdock, Creflo Dollar or Peter Popoff, my personal “favorite.” Popoff is as close as real life can get to a Saturday Night Live skit: His bathetic pleading and unctuousness is a hoot—especially if you go in for that old “throw away those crutches!” routine. Yes—just a few measly drops of his “miracle spring water” will cure what ails your body, soul and bankbook alike
But Popoff and his ilk are hardly breaking news—magician-healers like Oral Roberts have been around since the dawn of religion. But what if a particularly gifted grifter could merge televangelism and retail infomercials into a hybrid genre, wedding a for-profit sales platform with a cosmic plea for faith-based living? Enter infamous man-of-the-tattered-cloth Jim Bakker, a convicted felon who is back on television (via DirecTV, Roku, Apple TV) to warn his minions that the dreaded end days are fast approaching, and that they’d better start stocking up on dehydrated survival food ASAP.
LikeLike
April 11, 2018 at 6:56 pm
The Take Away,
Fair enough, but you’re not just saying give up the supernatural and step into enlightenment, many people are doing that in my lifetime. Your asking people to give up believing in life after death/resurrection and accept the sacrifice of the WDJS Natural way in the 1st century. Jesus went way beyond be nice unless we’re not agreeing on what the WDJS Natural way means. Most people I know are nice to family and friends and don’t mind giving a hand up if it’s not a hand out to their neighbours.
So let me explore to see if we’re still talking apples and apples —- there’s a big difference between sharing with family/loved ones from your plenty and giving away all of your worldly possession if your rich to the poor and go preach the WDJS Natural way when there’s no pay off in the after life. And let’s not forget not only sacrifice for family, loved ones, fellow citizens even free loaders but your enemies. Not gonna happen, besides you don’t need Jesus for a social democratic society that will help the poor and needy.
I can only think of 2 possibilities consistent with your scenario being 100% correct. Jesus’ followers misunderstood His WDJS Natural way and mistakenly believed He taught the supernatural/resurrection so they followed Him in error. The other is His followers added the supernatural/resurrection because that is the only way His ideas would spread. No supernatural/resurrection no way I’d have heard about Jesus. Again I can’t see past this hurdle — even if I was an atheist I wouldn’t follow the WDJS Natural movement if the carrot is just what you outlined in your last post and I definitely wouldn’t die for it by being crucified, burnt at the stake, tortured to death, etc… Convert or die why not convert if your a new atheist ? many theists even convert.
People just won’t sacrifice if that’s the reward as you just stated. These people were steeped in the supernatural — their dream was the after life.
LikeLike
April 11, 2018 at 8:07 pm
ltg,
My foundation is built upon the Rock’s faithfulness. Due to the fact you suffer a flawed understanding of what that Rock means for sure you’re confused & hapless. Muslims’ arrival had certain consequences since you do often mouth a number of their duplicitous misconceptions concerning Yahshua Messiah whether you realize it or not. It appears they’ve influenced you and you’re unaware; like with Kazantzakis.
Why wouldn’t I refer to Scripture? The Subject is the Living Word of God. He Himself quoted Torah regularly, especially when dealing with The Adversary.
He began His ministry quoting Isaiah 61:1-2a and He ended it quoting Psalm 31:5. Truth has its context but those without love of the truth, without discernment given by the Spirit of Truth are blind to it. You strike me as one of those.
You’d benefit from knowledge derived from original sources rather than fabrications concocted from your own deviant predilections & misappropriation of others fiction. You might try backing up your half-wit ramblings with something of more substance than your own morose fancies. Otherwise remain incredulous and retard your potential.
Plenty has been said about the cost of Redemption but what price Salvation?
The Berean: Luke 14:25-27
http://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Home.showBerean/BereanID/6523/bblver/NKJV/Luke-14-25-27.htm
From the above article by John W. Ritenbaugh:
Is being a disciple of Christ free to us? These verses say that we have to give up everything! That is not cheap! Moreover, He mentions this in the context of things that are normally the most dear to us of all—our flesh-and-blood relatives! There is no greater price a human being can pay than to give up his family, and yes, his own life! That is not cheap! That is not free!…
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 2:17 pm
Paul V:
I am not saying for people to give up believing in life after death/resurrection. I have never said that, I do say to give up the supernatural because if there is life after death / resurrection it will be through natural processes and nothing to do with the paranormal supernatural or the entities invented from those imaginations.
Personally I believe in the possibility of immortality without dying because I believe that this has been the dream of every man woman and child: that the last enemy to be conquered is death itself and I believe this will follow the precursor, elimination and/or control of diseases resulting from pathogens or processes we have not yet learned to mitigate.
The Father I believe Jesus was referring to is that ‘there is that beyond which a greater cannot be thought’ and further that, that essence must necessarily be within us and it will, if possible, be that that Source and the processes, if they exist, have always existed and will therefore be available regardless of what we believe or despite what we believe; in the end, what is, is!
Jesus in the meantime wanted to put an end to egotistical chalatanism and expressed the view that living a righteously and following good will be most conducive to achieving that end without the necessity of death because goodness and righteousness will allow humanity’s civilizing to rise to the exponential level necessary to achieve the dream of every man woman and child. Without righteous abounding the evil that permeates society will delay and delay and delay the leavening of the righteous yeast within the whole of Humanity and if you recall the kingdom of heaven in like the yeast in the cough that grows until the entire batch is leavened throughout (read Humanity as the entire batch).
Imagine all the talents and skills and gifts in the mindset of all humanity working on the genome factor instead of wasting their lives, developing nuclear ways of having to kill the evil in the world who will not come out of the ego shells long enough to live for the cause of life and the sanctity of life and how many billions have died for the cause of unrighteousness wearing the belt of death.
The followers did not choose the supernatural to promote their cause, the unrighteousness of death and supernatural remedies for everything not understood already exceeded their ability to escape from their imbedded habits of the thousands of years crawling in convenient belief instead of walking in the light of knowledge.
When Jesus fed the thousands what did the disicples do; they noised it as a miracle throughout the land; they didn’t question how it could have happened that one man could perform a feat already being performed by the government in feeding thousands in the military at a time but Jesus seized the same opportunity, sought the resources from his wealthy secret disciples, organized the event, fed everybody at the Retreat and OMG it’s a miracle ws the reaction….same thing when he rose from the place of the dead ALIVE!
How did the disciples react when they told Jesus to send the people away because they were getting hungry? Jesus saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?
6 And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do.
7 Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little.
8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, saith unto him,
9 There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?
Because this is the way the disciples reacted this was all they knew if you had money go tot the store and buy the food nut all these people? uh uh.
Jesu was prepared for the retreat he was prepared to feed them too by natural means which since nobody thought of anything else…..it was a Miracle. Most all the miracles are explained the same natural way but you have to seek to find, ask to receive and knock to have the door to knowledge opened, But belief and the supernatural cannot open any doors for never and never amen.
I have searched all my life and now I know almost everything in the bible the natural way; the supernatural has no hold on me nor does any religious affiliation. And I can explain every miracle by similar, logical, reasoning means the way Jesus did.
The Lord Jesus said, I’m free. I’m free. Because in my humanity I’ve entered into no contract, I have submitted myself to no obligation, I have indebted myself to nobody in such a way that I could not at all times do only exclusively what pleases him in my search. That’s freedom.
You are free ladies and gentlemen when you have entered into no contract, indebted yourself to nobody, or any organization or denominational group, you’ve entered into no alliance that would make it at anytime impossible for you to do other than please him, then you’re free. Free. That’s perfect freedom.
Breathtaking isn’t it?
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 2:33 pm
take away,
Stale breath.
You need your ears unstopped.
The Berean: Mark 7:32
http://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Home.showBerean/BereanID/8658/bblver/NKJV/Mark-7-32.htm
From the above article by Martin G. Collins:
The man’s deafness was absolute; he could hear nothing. This greatly limited him, especially in those days when sign language and other communication helps did not exist as prominently as they do today. The poor had no access to speech therapists, and the medical practices of the time offered no hope at all.
His deafness also put him in danger, as people use their hearing more than they realize to avoid harm. Spiritual deafness is no different: When we cannot hear or refuse to hear the Word of God, we endanger ourselves greatly, not hearing the warnings of God’s ministers against the enticement and pull of sin and its curses and penalties. While physical deafness is a very limiting disability, it does not normally lead to death, but spiritual deafness is infinitely worse, leading to eternal death….
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 2:36 pm
Frank:
What really stuck out to me from your withering tree:
“There is no greater price a human being can pay than to give up his family, and yes, his own life! That is not cheap! That is not free!…”
Just picture going back a hundred generations within your own family, maybe just a hundred people. Picture your father’s father’s father, mother’s mother’s mother’s father, father’s father, on back. I don’t care how cultured you are, how well educated your family, you can be Matthew Chapman whose great great grandfather was Charles Darwin but if you just keep going, in no more than a hundred conversations you’re going to meet someone who thinks that sacrificing your first born child just might be a good way to control the weather.
Now I’m obviously not saying that all religious people are psychopaths and psychotics but this to me is the true horror of religion. It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions what only lunatics could believe on their own. If you wake up tomorrow morning thinking that saying a few Latin words over your pancakes is going to turn them into the body of Elvis Presley, you have lost your mind. But if you think more or less the same thing about a cracker, and the body of Jesus, you’re just a Catholic Christian.
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 2:51 pm
As usual Frank:
You have no depth within yourself and must go to others for you to describe what they believe.
My major in univerity was psychology. In psychology there are thoughts and beliefs you have on your own called first order thoughts/beliefs.
When you use the thoughts/belief of other in the absence of first order thoughts/beliefs, that is called second order thoughts/beliefs.
You, Frank are second order regurgitator. Or a second order Christian or whatever you are bot of the first order, you can never be a leader so how can you expect to have followers? HUH?
‘Nuff said.
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 2:53 pm
Frank:
My guess is that when you went to school and played tag, I bet you were always “IT” until the bell rang. tee hee
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 11:11 pm
The Take Away,
I’m really confused now, I totally misunderstood what you are calling supernatural and natural. We can bend the heck out of things but we can’t break them — we have to come to an understanding of what’s supernatural and what’s natural.
Let me go back to your post #195 — I was expecting a short response some thing along these lines — sacrifice for truth, freedom from the supernatural yoke for future generations. Which is kind of what I believe you said, the rest of that post is a condemnation of improper practices by supernatural peddlers that we both agree are wrong.
My response would be — but the sacrifice is persecution, prosecution, torture, imprisonment and lose of life when rejecting the supernatural. You’d only do that if the present situation you are in is intolerable. And although living in submission under the romans would have been unpleasant but for the vast majority not as unpleasant as being stoned by the Jews (eg Stephen) or crucified by the romans. It’s my understanding accepting the WDJS Natural way would’ve got a Jew kicked out of his/her synagogue so that would mean enemy of both Jew and roman. And the reward wouldn’t be worth the punishment since no resurrection (as I understood what we both meant by resurrection — see below). Hardly anyone would sacrifice that especially when the WDJS Natural movement is not required for the kind of society you want to bring about.
Not the point of this discussion but I believe the rebellion against roman rule in the 1st century by the Jews was probably with the belief God (ie the supernatural) would give them victory.
Post #198:
“I am not saying for people to give up believing in life after death/resurrection. I have never said that, I do say to give up the supernatural because if there is life after death / resurrection it will be through natural processes and nothing to do with the paranormal supernatural or the entities invented from those imaginations.” Here’s where I’m confused — resurrection of the dead is supernatural. I’m just talking for myself but the resurrection I’m talking about is people that died long ago and are dust being brought back to life not somebody in a coma people mistakenly think are dead and snapping out of it — which would be natural. Or somebody that drowned in cold water for 15 minutes is dead and given medical treatment and revived — which is natural.
Again, no reason to mention the natural explanation for feeding “the thousands” because for this discussion I’m agreeing 100% with a natural way.
Through science we can possibly extend human life greatly — indefinitely I don’t know but greatly from what I’ve read — I agree that would not be supernatural. But this would only be possible for a living person or if we had their DNA to make a clone. And unless we could some how capture their memories before they died, genetically it would be the same person but not really if their memories are lost. But definitely it’s not possible with those who died and we don’t have their DNA — because we couldn’t even make a clone of them.
So here’s my questions, sorry I can’t just give 1 but they are all kind of related —- are you saying “life after death/resurrection” of dead people who have become dust where we can’t find any DNA and don’t have their memories is not supernatural ? Or are you saying “life after death/resurrection” for dead people who have become dust where we can’t find any DNA and don’t have their memories is supernatural so these people can’t have “life after death/resurrection ?” Or are you saying “life after death/resurrection only will apply to those who are alive when we have the technology to store a persons memories and either clone them with memories added/extend their life ?
Because this wasn’t possible in the 1st century so I’m still at my impasse. The WDJS Natural movement has to have the resurrection to work and since the natural way wasn’t possible at that time the supernatural way would have to have been added immediately by mistake or on purpose by others after Jesus left.
LikeLike
April 12, 2018 at 11:57 pm
take away,
You wrote, “…you’re going to meet someone who thinks that sacrificing your first born child just might be a good way to control the weather.” That’s why the God of the Bible specifically repeatedly commanded His own not to do it. He’s way ahead of you. ‘You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the LORD. (Lev 18:21) If you truly take these matters seriously then you’ll investigate Scripture.
Don’t be a sloth. Do the research.
You’ll never come into a mature coherent relationship with Messiah unless you learn concerning Him through Scripture. There’s the Written Word of God [(2Ti 3:16) Scripture] and the Living Word of God [(Rev 19:13) Messiah Yahshua]. You cannot understand One without the Other. They are inseparable.
Think Prophet spoken of by Moses (Deu 18:15), Priest High Priest in the Order of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 6:20) and King of Israel King of Kings (Luke 1:32-33) when considering Messiah Yahshua.:
“Then say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. “Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.”’
(Zechariah 6:12-13)
The Person and Work of Christ—Part V:The Ministry of Christ in His Life on Earth — John F. Walvoord
http://walvoord.com/article/85
From the above article:
The four Gospels provide our principal source of information concerning Christ in His life on earth. Though the narratives are selective, in keeping with the principle governing each Gospel, and though only a fraction of the incidents which might be of interest are related, the picture provided in the inspired Scripture is intriguing to all classes of scholars and is replete with theological significance.
Though the historical character of the Gospels makes them easy to understand, their theological interpretation is by no means uncomplicated. Few sections of Scripture require more careful analysis and precise interpretation. The reason does not lie in the complicated narrative, but rather in the fact that the incidents recorded are more than just history. They constitute a revelation of God and His purposes….
““““““““`
“He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.” (John 16:14-15)
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 9:17 am
Paul V:
You may be challenged for the answers as your series of questions suggest but there are things that I do not know and while it is said that it is a smart person who knows what s/he does not know, I can believe that there are things one does not know but does not know what those things they do not know, are. That this is convoluted I know and you might have to read it a few times.
If immortality exists in reality outside of our imagination or can exist in reality I imagine (believe) that we have the capability to reach immortality ourselves eventually and prolong life but only to the extent that we would eventually have to migrate to another planet with another younger sun if and when our sun reaches the point of cinderizing planet earth and we would then transit merrily to another place in the universe capable of supporting life which may even explain why the Asian, Negroid and Caucasian races ended up on the same planet centuries ago.
The imagination is a conundrum and a very weird place, as some philosophers have postulated, if anything exist in the imagination it actually already has existence and need only to manifest in reality to become reality, like jumping out of Dizzyneeland into Humanityland, another way of saying “….thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven…..” perhaps.
So trying to speculate on old dead dust being resurrected into its former live dust self, it might be that when the Ghost (Spirit/Life Force) departs one human it jumps into another (conception) and presto resurrection or maybe more appropriately called transference or at the same time or even exist in two or more places at the same time as Quantum mechanics states and those places maybe on another planet in another galaxy and we could go on and on speculating and jump into a Nano Gods scenario.
And we could stop there as we have already done, called religion, and start writing those ideas as though that was the “be all – end all” which brings me to the 1605CE Shakespeare quote in Macbeth. The mechanics of the phrase may have changed a bit, but the effect is still the same. We use this phrase to mean the limits of something, just in the way that Macbeth does. It turns out, no matter how you get there, the end result is the same. It’s the “be all and end all” of it.
Macbeth speaks of an action, not a person or thing; he wonders if that action will be all that is required and end all that he must go through to be king (read Resurrected). We refer to what is all it can possibly be and ends all competition, or to something that overrides all the normal limits. That’s where we are with religion these days.
The higher powers of Life and actions in the Cosmos to me are the “be all – end all” beyond which a greater cannot be thought, the ultimate end of imagination and so we continue to speculate how to get to knowledge before we arrive.
This is where our conversation must end in order to carry on communications; in other words, the above ideas are merely a maze of mushy imaginations that cannot end speculation but it is as you say, speaking “apples and apples”.
Absolute Certainty is a drug of profound effects and to say that I or anybody have all the answers to all our questions would be bad manners for certain.
I hope I have not answered all your questions but Jesus was a revolutionary who despised hypocrisy and stepped on the toes of those principalities and powers in high places and there is no more scathing condemnation of those principalities and powers in high places than Jesus’s, of which the entire chapter 23 of Matthew is dedicated. That’s why they pursued Jesus to the nth degree to arrest, scourge and crucify him, not to fulfill biblical mouse-hole prophecies for your sins.
The scriptures always talked about a Champion that one day will come to lift society out of the tyranny it was living in is a constant dream of the poor and downtrodden so Jesus was the idol religion hit upon………..in modernity that champion came in the form of the Book called the Comic Book and Superman became the virtual Messiah to champion the cause of the poor against the continuous evil in society and we’re not out of the Corruption/Dream enigma yet, witness the poisoning of people who steped on the toes of principalities and powers in high places (Democracies/Hierarchies/Monarchies, Autocracies) today, people marching in peaceful uprisings for a voice to better conditions, slaughtered by bombs and chemical gases, corruption, greed and scandals abound in those same circles today and still we search for the comfort of a Champion.
The Christian world believed it found its modern messiah when they rose up en masse and voted for their Champion President and still support Donald Trump despite his untoward behavior.
A Time Capsule moment of Ancient, CE, Medieval and Modern Mankind.
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 9:50 am
FRank:
You do err greatly. On Sacrificing children; I was not quoting scripture I was talking about how people did such things despite scripture.
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 9:54 am
Frank:
From the above article:
”
The four Gospels provide our principal source of information concerning Christ in His life on earth.”
That is true so why are you always referencing Paul? and almost everywhere else but the four Gospels?
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 12:48 pm
The Take Away,
We past the 1st hurdle very painfully — how can the natural Jesus be a good guy only for me to see the next hurdle very quickly — where’s the carrot in your scenario ?
It seems you’ve done your best to not answer my questions and that’s okay it’s your scenario. I’m not asking you to explain all of these life after death/resurrection questions — just asking you to clearly state if we don’t have some ones DNA and memories bringing that person back to life falls under the supernatural or natural category according to your definition. For me it’s impossible we could bring that person back to life therefore it falls under the supernatural in my books. Why — how could I even know who was alive, how could I even guess at their genetic make-up DNA even if I knew they lived, how could I possibly even guess what was their favourite colour let alone their thoughts/intimate secrets.
Let’s say Jesus of Nazareth and some 1st century leaders saw a brewing rebellion against roman rule. If this happened they estimated much damage and death to the Jewish people because rome was still very powerful. They knew from history occupiers come and occupiers go so if the people live peaceably under roman rule eventually they will get their freedom. The talk amongst the people was with God on our side we can defeat rome now. They (the natural way) didn’t believe in God so they decided to preach a love your enemy do good to those who hate you to prevent the damage and blood shed a Jewish rebellion against roman rule would cause the Jews.
Again keeping with your scenario being correct, either the supernatural resurrection (as per my definition) was either mistakenly perceived by the people and not corrected because they bought into the plan or was added pdq by others to spread the love your enemies (ie especially romans) to prevent lose for Judaism.
This is not a slam/insult —– I don’t know much about the Sadducees but from what I do it sounds like you’d be right at home there. Basically it sounds like you’re saying in the future when the Messiah comes He will bring about this wonderful world where we’ll all love each other, peace and justice will reign etc… As per the example of Isaiah 11: 6-9. But if looks like you died already you are sol.
If so please work on your presentation because your coming off sounding to me like — there’s something wrong with people that believe in the supernatural and in your next sentence you describe something that can only be explained as the supernatural.
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 2:24 pm
As far as Messiah goes, in my opinion, there are Messiahs in different generations as required, mighty men who rise to the occasion when courage and, insight and foresight are needed which is why Jesus was not referring to himself when he referred to the Son of Man in “his” day; he did not ask when the Son of Man comes, will “I” find faith on the earth? He did not speak in the first person but in the third person.
And again:
For the Son of Man in “his” day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other.
Jesus was not speaking about himself anymore than Abraham was speaking about Jesus when Jesus said Abraham rejoiced to see my day and was glad; that is Abraham looked down the corridors of time and expecting that a champion would appear one day gave Abraham great joy in that hope. Jesus was such a one, the first I one I knew about.
Now I am not sure what carrot you are looking for if not the carrot of life itself. I don’t know what the stick is either if not the stick of death. Now we know that every person alive today comes from a blood line that has always existed on earth and since DNA is passed into posterity our ancestors are still alive virtually at least, in that realm of the those living today, maybe that’s the carrot; maybe the bloodline that ceases to exist is the stick when all the leaves and branches of one’s life tree diminishes to such an extent it no longer exists to pass itself along and dies out.
While some good people perish, other branches of the lifeline remain as all living today are evidence of that; nevertheless, evil among us eventually outdoes itself and continues to the path of extinction and maybe that is the stick.
We can see old trees diminishing and out of the sprouts new little baby trees carrying the lifeline of the parent onward, maybe that’s the carrot of the tree; maybe we have similar carrot…nobody knows and you don’t know either.
“…..the supernatural resurrection (as per my definition)” is the same definition I believe as the people two thousand plus years ago and they were mistaken then as all believers are mistaken now. Something that exists is provable and should be able to be proven, eventually, if not today, someday; while nothing is not provable such as belief and cannot be proven over thousands of years the supernatural, paranormal, psychic powers, levitation prophecy has never been proven and can never be proven for never and never.
Knowledge can supplant belief but belief can never supplant knowledge; that’s just the way it is, the “be all- end all”.
LikeLike
April 13, 2018 at 4:40 pm
The Take Away,
I mentioned the Messiah in connection with Judaism as a coming leader to usher in your perfect world. Keeping with the natural way scenario being 100% correct — Jesus of Nazareth is gone — “out of the blue and into the black.” Actually if He didn’t have a supernatural resurrection He lost big time. Only if He defeated death as we profess did He have a victory.
You don’t know what carrot I’m looking for — really ? I’m not going to die to better a society that by your scenario I won’t benefit from. Besides we die and win what happens in 100 yrs ? It could revert back to the old ways and our sacrifice was for nothing.
How many people of sound mind and body will take a bullet in the head (quick & painless death) to deny a supernatural resurrection in Canada to promote the supernatural is false movement ? Let alone be tortured to death —- I’d bet the farm zero. And why not — because Canada isn’t that bad and people only take drastic measures if it’s really bad and there’s hope they’ll win especially when it’s just death/oblivion for them. Is that proof the supernatural exists — No, but it proves people will die if their reward is a supernatural resurrection.
Hey the ancient world had problems but if I was a new atheist in the 1st century I’d mind my own business, offer my gift to the god-emperor and try and stay out of trouble. Are you saying you’d scream out the emperor is not a god there are no gods knowing you and your family could be thrown to the lions ? where you’ll all horribly die and go into oblivion to better a society that you, your wife and children won’t benefit from. My wife isn’t Christian and she would be screaming —- I’m not with him, hail Caesar my god-emperor. And if you went to your death how many of your fellow believers would join you in your fate after watching you be ripped to pieces ? Again, I’d bet the farm zero.
Instead of just bowing to Nebies statue when the music played you’d stand straight and tall and get thrown into the fiery furnace ? I’d bow if I was a new atheist. But if you’ll get 72 virgins in the after life/resurrection you and your fellow believers will charge the statue and gladly win or die trying to destroy it. Again, I disagree with them and that doesn’t prove they are correct — just that they’ll die for their belief.
See watching people acting bravely as they get eaten by the lions when they are preaching love your enemies would bring about compassion but not in all societies. ISIS would only stop beheading people that don’t submit if they got tired. But after a good nights rest they’d get right back to the killing — convert or die. And if no supernatural resurrection the smart thing to do is convert and wait till you have an opportunity to escape.
But new atheists would get scared pretty quick watching those that believe as they do (ie deny a supernatural resurrection) being torn to pieces by the lions and keep their mouths shut until they had the upper hand. Again, and why not — why die for even a friend let alone some one you don’t know or even who hates you if it’s oblivion — the greatest instinct is for self preservation based on most of the people I’ve meet in my life. You’d only protest if there was only a tiny chance you’d be tortured/murdered it’s the logical thing to do and if you don’t believe in the supernatural you’d do the logical thing.
If I was you I’d ruminate on this hurdle — would I die so people reject a supernatural resurrection when I seem to be saying technology in the future could bring about a very similar out come ? Why not just denounce all the abuses those that believe in the supernatural perform ? Again, I’m just speaking for myself but a lot of people I know agree with you and me about many of these abuses.
LikeLike
April 14, 2018 at 6:57 pm
take away,
There’s much more to Messiah Yahshua than His life on earth. John wrote, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book. But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30-31) That’s why Paul wrote, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”. (2Ti 3:16) Given the fact that Paul’s epistles compose a significant portion of the New Testament it shouldn’t be any surprise that his writings are frequently referenced regarding Messiah Yahshua. Consider Romans alone. Paul was a hard hitting, take no prisoners sort of person. He had his mission and he was determined to fulfill it. He suffered mightily for it. He was true to his cause even unto beheading. Since you’ve brought up this clearly exaggerated “why are you always referencing Paul?” contention numerous times you appear to harbor suspicion/mistrust of him. Do you take offense in his character? Is it something he said? Is it because of his beliefs? Are you envious (an emotion usually rooted deeply in pride)? What drives your decided ill-will and animosity towards him?
As to the Gospel Scriptures indeed they are essential to understanding Messiah’s earthly Life & Ministry. Each emphasizes a different aspect of Him. Therefore they must be taken all together to obtain the most effective composite of His story. Truly the Written Word of God and the Living Word of God are inseparable. What was the timeline of our Messiah’s death and resurrection? How do we reconcile the verses that suggest the Last Supper was a Passover meal, and those that suggest it was not?
LikeLike
April 14, 2018 at 9:13 pm
Frank Adamick:
What Paul wrote was not scripture; it was philosophy about scripture; the Old Testament precisely. And the Old Testament the Pharisees indoctrinated the masses with was exactly what you just espoused in your comment: the written word of God and the living word of God are separable because the living word of God was what the Pharisees decreed as their law and they made their laws equal to the written word of God: I wrote about this in earlier testimony to Paul V.
Religiously, the Pharisees accepted the written Word as inspired by God. At the time of Christ’s earthly ministry, this would have been what is now our Old Testament. But they also gave equal authority to oral tradition and attempted to defend this position by saying it went all the way back to Moses. Evolving over the centuries, these traditions added to God’s Word, which is forbidden (Deuteronomy 4:2), and the Pharisees sought to strictly obey these traditions along with the Old Testament. The Gospels abound with examples of the Pharisees treating these traditions as equal to God’s Word (Matthew 9:14; 15:1-9; 23:5; 23:16, 23, Mark 7:1-23; Luke 11:42).
Paul’s interpretation of the Old Testament scripture was from the Pharisees. If you want to know anything about the Old Testament scriptures see Jesus because the only bible that Jesus had was the Old Testament.
What Paul wrote were letters to different churches and people expressed his philosophy about the Old Testament. Paul knew nothing about Jesus except what he heard about him as he went about persecuting and killing the followers of Jesus including the stoning of Stephen. Acts 8 1-2 Saul approved the stoning of Stephen. Some faithful followers of the Lord buried Stephen and mourned very much for him.
Saul Makes Trouble for the Church
At that time the church in Jerusalem suffered terribly. All of the Lord’s followers, except the apostles, were scattered everywhere in Judea and Samaria. 3 Saul started making a lot of trouble for the church. He went from house to house, arresting men and women and putting them in jail.
When Paul was on trial here are a few pertinent and relevant things he said: “Acts 22 King James Version (KJV)
1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you.
6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.
And Paul continued his ruse thusly:
17 And it came to pass…….even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;
18 And saw him saying unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me.
And then Paul’s admissions:
19 And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee:
20 And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.
21 And he(Jesus) said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.
Obviously Paul turned his life around when it became obvious to Paul that a ruse could elevate him to a certain level in the New Church Catholic Hierarchy and the ruse devised a pretense encounter with a “resurrected” Jesus after Jesus left the country. Leaving the flock without a Shepherd as Paul saw it; Wow! a flock without a shepherd was a perfect opportunity to make his move and the Road to Damascus proved a winning hand gamble that led to his rise.
Eventually having his letters and writings incorporated in the new bible edition which today we refer to as The New Testament. So Paul it seems, have most Christians commenting on his philosophy.
Now how did Jesus handle the Old Testament compared to others. even Paul by comparison leaves something to be desired.
So it was the Old Testament the Lord Jesus took in his hand and yet the amazing thing is this: though this was that book from which the others were accustomed to preaching, when they listened to the Lord Jesus they were astonished,. For it says in the last verse in that chapter that he taught them as one having authority. Not as the Scribes; in other words, when the Lord Jesus got up, he spoke as though he said what he meant and meant what he said and had the right to say it. Nothing apologetic; he didn’t throw out a few suggestions. He didn’t say “I suppose”, “Maybe”, “I think”. His was a proclamation, not like the Scribes. When the professional preachers got up the congregation nestled in the corner of their pew and went for a quiet doze hoping they’d wake up just before the benediction and preferably after the offering. But when the Lord Jesus,; when he got up, everybody was on the edge of their seat wondering what AMAZING thing he’d say next. He was an astonishing preacher.
If you were to turn on to the 13TH chapter of the same gospel, in the 54th verse of that 13th chapter of Matthew: “When the Lord Jesus was come into his own country he taught them in their synagogue insomuch that they were astonished and they said whence hath this man this wisdom, whence hath this man these mighty words and you recognize what they meant by “this man”.
You see he was altogether too ordinary, some of us remind others that they’d known him as a little baby, nursed in his mother’s arms, that seen him clinging to her skirt, they’d seen him romping in the streets with his village pals, crying and clinging to his mother’s skirt when he fell and scraped his knees and elbow and shins; he was the one, who as an apprentice at the bench, was learning his trade, he was the man who came and fixed the window when it jammed, “this man”. And they tried to rationalize. You see, it would have been so much easier if he of had sort of a genius for a father or a mother, if he’d been born with a silver spoon in his mouth, everything that money could buy, he’d come back from this university and the other having gathered every kind of academic distinction and degree but he was too ordinary, “this man”. Is not this the carpenter’s son, is not his mother called Mary and his brethren James and Joses and Simon and Judas and his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath “this man” all these things?
Now why were they astonished? You might quite sincerely say, “Well they were astonished because they did not know that he was God”. But I think you’d be wrong. They were not astonished because they did not know that he was God; they were astonished because they did not know that he was……man. Not man as they were, not man as you and I are….but man as he reflected God, created man to be.
And Christians snuggle up to Paul as a hero because he preached the Pharisaical Old Testament Traditions that Jesus railed against; even the Pharisee doctrine of resurrection proved easy enough to convince followers that Paul actually believed in Jesus and Paul who was well educated waxed philosophical to the small church followings, squeezing himself into the Shepherd’s shoes and taking over so to speak.
LikeLike
April 15, 2018 at 8:35 am
Given the evidence of religious cultural mindsets, even today in our so-called cultured, civilized society the religiously violent are not far away; however, in the era of “biblical” days, pre & post CE, it is no small wonder that few people put their life into their own hands by publicly disobeying religious decrees. In fact displaying blasphemous behavior in word or deed in disobedience by omission or commission, the first four religious decrees of the Mosaic Commandments demand capital punishment.
1st & 2nd. Commandments, Exodus 20:3 “Thou shalt have no other gods before me”. Old Testament punishment – Deuteronomy 17:1-5 “And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heavens, which I have not commanded. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing and shalt stone them with stones, till they die”. Among the three cardinal sins for which the penalty was death, idolatry stood first (Talmud Pes. 25a and parallels).
3rd. Commandment, Exodus 20:7 “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain”. Old Testament punishment – Leviticus 24:16 “And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death”.
4th. Commandment, Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy”. Old Testament punishment – Exodus 31:15 “Whosoever shall work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death”.
LikeLike
April 15, 2018 at 11:04 pm
ltg,
Try reading and quoting from Romans 2 and learn what it has to say about the traditions and precepts of men. Romans is in direct opposition to Pharisaical legalism and judgments: There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God…. (Romans 2:9-11, 12-16ff) Remember Saul becomes Paul. He’s reborn. Although you consider his writings “philosophy” the Apostle Peter considers Paul’s epistles Scripture: Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. (2 Peter 3:14-18) Yahshua said, “He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.”
(Matthew 12:30) Are you an unprincipled man; i.e., one who scatters or do you
grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?
As I told you the Written Word of God (Holy Scripture) and Messiah Yahshua (Living Word of God) are inseparable. You will not understand Scripture without Messiah. And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. (Luke 24:25-27)
Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new unleavened batch, as indeed you are. For Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed. (1 Corinthians 5:7)
Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, “These who are clothed in the white robes, who are they, and where have they come from?” I said to him, “My lord, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. For this reason, they are before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them. They will hunger no longer, nor thirst anymore; nor will the sun beat down on them, nor any heat; for the Lamb in the center of the throne will be their shepherd, and will guide them to springs of the water of life; and God will wipe every tear from their eyes.” (Revelation 7:13-17)
LikeLike
April 16, 2018 at 12:56 pm
Frank Adamick:
“What was the timeline of our Messiah’s death and resurrection?”
You mean what is the timeline of Jesus placement in the tomb and when he was seen alive again in disguise of course which is why Mary did not recognize him and supposed him to be the gardener.
Jesus’ suffering may have lasted for less time than that of the men hanging on either side of Him and far less than many who were crucified before and after Him, insomuch that Pilate marvelled if he were already dead,…. For death, by crucifixion, was a slow lingering death; persons that were in their full strength hung a great while before they expired; and the two thieves, which were crucified with Christ, were not dead when he was: It was not common for persons crucified to expire under two or three days, sometimes not until the sixth or seventh and calling unto him the centurion; who was set to watch him: he asked him, whether he had been any while dead; he inquired of him, whether he was dead, and how long he had been dead.
Ever think that Joseph knew the centurion? The guards set to watch over Jesus were those centurions who were given to the Jews for their own watch, to guard the Sanhedrin and the Jewish Council members and Joseph and Nicodemus could beckon the centurions to do whatever they demanded as the assigned centurions were at the beck and call of the Council Members, especially the very wealthy ones like Joseph and Nicodemus.
LikeLike
April 16, 2018 at 5:40 pm
If one cannot pay (or forgive) a debt to oneself, then Jesus’s death could not pay a debt owed to God.
LikeLike
April 17, 2018 at 9:06 am
Jbesuden:
Some of the worse conspiracies devised by man devised.
However unchristian it may seem, I do not even bear any ill feeling towards myself.
In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.
It was Christianity, with its heartfelt resentment against life, that first made something unclean of sexuality: it threw filth on the origin, on the essential fact of our life. nietzsche
If forgiveness is for something wrongly done then one needs to find what it is that was wrongly done. Enter the Bible
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
—————————————————————————-
And yet we find in the very next chapter of the bible what was wrongly done that affects everyone and everybody, everywhere on earth. Talk about creating a marketing audience for your services.
Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.
9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
Does anybody in their right sane mind think this narrative is about everything but sexuality? The very essence that perpetuates the life is thoroughly tarnished and stains alive is shameful.
Is it any wonder then why the Corporate Religious Collective (six in all) is among the wealthiest entities in the world? Second only to Charitable Organizations sandwiched by Educational Institutions Third and the Companies Entity Fourth led by 7 top World Banks? Apple is Fifth.
LikeLike
April 21, 2018 at 9:38 am
jbesuden,
Jesus’ death does pay the debt owed to God, and much more.
The Berean: Leviticus 16:20-22
http://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Home.showBerean/BereanID/9374/bblver/NKJV/Leviticus-16-20-22.htm
From the above article by David C. Grabbe:
Scripture also describes the Messiah’s “bearing” of transgression as acceptance, forgiveness, and pardon (Job 42:8-9; Psalm 25:18; 28:9; 32:1, 5; 85:2; Micah 7:18). The Hebrew word means “to lift up,” “to carry,” and “to take away.” It is tied to forgiveness because it is as if He carries the sins out of sight. While the Bible also uses it to refer to what men do—such as “carry” (Genesis 47:30) and “forgive” (Genesis 50:17)—it is never used to refer to Satan.
Christ’s bearing of sins goes beyond paying the penalty, fitting perfectly with one of the meanings of azazel, “complete removal” (compare Psalm 103:12). In Isaiah 53:12, the bearing is linked with intercession. They are not the same thing, but the parallelism indicates that an active work occurs in carrying the sins until they are completely removed from view, figuratively “as far as the east is from the west.”
““““““““““
15 When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “What if Joseph bears a grudge against us and pays us back in full for all the wrong which we did to him!”
16 So they sent a message to Joseph, saying, “Your father charged before he died, saying,
17 ‘Thus you shall say to Joseph, “Please forgive, I beg you, the transgression of your brothers and their sin, for they did you wrong.”’ And now, please forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father.” And Joseph wept when they spoke to him.
18 Then his brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.”
19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not be afraid, for am I in God’s place?
20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.
21 So therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones.” So he comforted them and spoke kindly to them. (Genesis 50:15-21)
LikeLike
April 21, 2018 at 3:37 pm
Frank Adamick:
You should stop relying on other believers interpretation of scripture.
The crucifixion of Jesus did not pay the debt that Joseph’s brethren required for having rendered evil unto Joseph so I have no idea why you used the Joseph forgiveness of his brothers as some kind of reference. Especially since the brothers fabricated a lie to Joseph about Jacob telling the brothers to implore Joseph to forgive them in the first place after Jacob died..
I cannot see any connection other than a random connection as Christians are prone to do without anything more than their own imagination to pick any scripture and use it to make a Jesus connection with nothing more than their own dogma that claims every previous scripture is connected to every post scripture leading up to Jesus life and crucifixion.
You call it Jesus’s death; the reality of his campaign’s end is Jesus’s crucifixion.
And it is noteworthy that you neglect to mention that the brothers were forgiven by Joseph not by God and even the lie the brothers fabricated implored Joseph to forgive the brothers, not God.
So your commentary scriptures are as disjointed as pieces of puzzles as conversations between Donald Trump and James Comey.
Think of it this way. Genesis 2:17 “……you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, (That is SIN) for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
So therefore the wages of sin is death. So if the crucifixion of Jesus wiped out the sin to be remembered no more than the logical extrapolation of that is, if it wiped out the sin it must necessarily have wiped out the penalty of sin which is death so why is it that you all still say that everybody must die for how can a man once forgiven of a sin yet still pay the penalty for the sin?
You see, when logic and reason don’t make common sense in the natural world of the human brain, what can believers say then? to explain why the penalty is not wiped out with the sin and that the sin penalty, death still applies and yet to be borne by the sinner? Enter the dimension of superstition and supernatural where every delusion prevails…ahhh…THEN you can attribute any improbable and impossible idea to those fantastic imaginative dimensions where flying carpets, glass slippers and rivers of milk and honey flow; and, where spirits rise from the cemeteries, graves and tombs to be re-fleshed, re-boned, re-brained and re-memorized into immortality. But not until the Messiah comes back again, he couldn’t do it first time around.
Couldn’t do it the first time around? No, that was an excuse for being wrong. So they simply came up with another solution when he world doesn’t end, or start; or simply, when the believers are wrong.
LikeLike
April 29, 2018 at 8:06 pm
ltg,
You wrote, “Think of it this way. Genesis 2:17 “……you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, (That is SIN) for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
So therefore the wages of sin is death. So if the crucifixion of Jesus wiped out the sin to be remembered no more than the logical extrapolation of that is, if it wiped out the sin it must necessarily have wiped out the penalty of sin which is death so why is it that you all still say that everybody must die for how can a man once forgiven of a sin yet still pay the penalty for the sin?”
I’ll clarify. You should study open source original resource material such as Romans and other apposite Scripture.
6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die.
8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
11 And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned–
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 5:6-21)
24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him. (Hebrews 9:24-28)
Our aim is to avoid the second death.
‘He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death.’ (Revelation 2:11)
Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. (Revelation 20:6)
Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:14)
“But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev 21:8)
“Come now, and let us reason together,”
Says the LORD,
“Though your sins are as scarlet,
They will be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They will be like wool. (Isaiah 1:18)
Pilate’s Dream
I dreamed I met a Galilean;
A most amazing man.
He had that look you very rarely find:
The haunting, hunted kind.
I asked him to say what had happened,
How it all began.
I asked again, he never said a word.
As if he hadn’t heard.
And next, the room was full of wild and angry men.
They seemed to hate this man.
They fell on him, and then
Disappeared again.
Then I saw thousands of millions
Crying for this man.
And then I heard them mentioning my name,
And leaving me the blame.
[Songwriters: Andrew Lloyd Webber / Tim Rice]
[Pilate’s Dream lyrics © Universal Music Publishing Group]
Will Pilate’s judgment be the second death?
The Righteous Almighty Judge decides.
WHY YESHUA IS THE MESSIAH
Israel has been waiting for their Savior, their Messiah, for a long time. There have been multiple individuals called “Messiah” in the past; some believe Yeshua (Jesus), was that Messiah. Here are 3 reasons we believe why Yeshua is the Messiah of Israel.
LikeLike
April 29, 2018 at 8:16 pm
ltg,
Re: post 220.
Brit Hadasha: Why Yeshua is the Messiah
Click to access BH_Why_Yeshua_is_the_Messiah_transcript.pdf
LikeLike
April 29, 2018 at 9:07 pm
THAT
LikeLike
April 29, 2018 at 9:35 pm
Romans doesn’t say anything but repetitious nonsense with confused rhetoric trying to hang a hat on and he cannot do it. Paul is saying the same thing over and over again hoping that some of it will stick. but he doesn’t say anything except that there are two deaths which is exactly what I said; the first death and the second death because redemption was not redemption; it’s just Paul philosophizing and making things so that death is split in half. There are two deaths but Paul doesn’t know anymore than you know about that.
Using repetition nonsense doesn’t answer the question about why it is appointed for all men to die because of sin which itself is nonsense because the very essence of life, sexuality, and yet the church lays it bare that sex is to blame for all sin and all death and that’s just a bunch of baloney; so the church thrives against very life itself laying blame for life through sex as the guilt against every man, woman and child that ever was born and will ever be born.
And all mankind must cater to the whims of Ancient Religious Tradition:
God’s will, so called, is revealed in the “holy” scriptures. The sacred book formulates the will of God and specifies what is to be given to the clergy. Clergy become parasites. “… All things of life are so ordered that the clergy is everywhere indispensable; at all the natural events of life, at birth, marriage, sickness, death. Natural values become utterly valueless. The Clergy sanctifies and bestows all value. Disobedience of God (the clergy) is ‘sin.’ Subjection to God (the clergy) is redemption. Clergy use ‘sin’ to gain and hold power.
Sex without Clergy permission is sinful, lust, fornication, adultery.
LikeLike
April 29, 2018 at 9:53 pm
What is the point of a Messiah who saves mankind from sin but does not save mankind from the penalty of sin, Death? Paul explains nothing because he doesn’t know; Paul never met Jesus as far as anybody knows except the apparition that was conjured up by Paul to infiltrate the early church to become the wannabee he wanted to be.
Anybody who would say that “…. faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” makes a bizarre statement; that is to say a mere belief is evidence of anything more than a belief. That doesn’t give faith any special status just because it is a belief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 30, 2018 at 6:25 am
“What is the point of a Messiah who saves mankind from sin but does not save mankind from the penalty of sin, Death? ”
Leo, you are absolutely correct ! Not much of a Messiah if you ask me.
However, Jesus does save mankind from sin and the penalty of sin as well.
Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
Joh 11:26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Leo, do you believe this ?
Cheers mate.
Naz
LikeLike
April 30, 2018 at 8:27 am
Naz:
“The one who believes in me will live, even though they die;,,,,,”
“I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,……”
This can only be true metaphorically. Barbara Bush died recently. So did lots of innocent children and others. You see, you cannot believe this without splitting death into two deaths….the wages of sin death and the death from Judgment.
It can be true metaphorically for example, if you believe in the message of Jesus your life will take on a new vibrancy and that is true living and true life. The old self without the intervention of Jesus sound reasoning operating in it will die upon the awakening of a lively life in spirit and in truth.
Since we cannot understand this purely in literal common sense, one needs to resort to the supernatural in order to accept things, in vain, that do not make sense. If it does not make sense maybe you need to worry about why you follow a belief system.
The bible talks of the resurrection that is to come and it also speaks about the many that rose from the graves when the veil was rent at the crucifixion which never happened and if it happened where are they who rose go after going to their loved ones or did they rise for a time just to say hello and then re-die?
Belief cannot explain anything because only knowledge proves a belief to have been true and when a belief is proved to be true by knowledge; belief goes out the door and vanishes; knowledge once had supplants belief. Belief can’t prove belief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 30, 2018 at 5:14 pm
ltg,
Consider your attitude:
Do not be rash with your mouth, and let not your heart utter anything hastily before God. For God is in heaven, and you on the earth; therefore let your words be few. (Ecclesiastes 5:2)
Having a Right Attitude by John O. Reid (1930-2016)
Forerunner, September-October 2000
https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.sr/CT/artb/k/65/Right-Attitude.htm
From the above article by John O. Reid:
Though God calls us from different backgrounds and is infinitely patient with us, He views us and our attitudes much the same as we view those we deal with. We could go so far as to say that, if over the years we fail to develop a positive, thankful attitude about what God is doing in our lives, we may not be in His Kingdom!
LikeLike
April 30, 2018 at 5:32 pm
Frank
Don’t believe everything Clerics tell for by that have deceived many shutting up the kingdom not going in themselves and preventing others by hiding knowledge….Jesus words. They have ulterior motives prime of which is money and power of fear of the unknown.
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 12, 2018 at 1:30 pm
Naz:
You wrote:
“Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
Joh 11:26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Leo, do you believe this ?
Naz you ask the wrong question in your simple, literal way.
The fact is that you don’t give any context to show you understand what Jesus meant by what he said without which you cannot possibly ask such a question”….do you believe this…….?
Because even you do not believe this text literally and nobody can. Without the substance of your understanding the question is irrelevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 12, 2018 at 1:34 pm
“………….it’s not possible to forgive oneself………”
This statement is not only wrong, it is a slap in the face of the person you claim to follow. Any “Christ”ian who believes that ………….”it is not possible to forgive oneself…..”goes against the very common sense teachings of Jesus “Christ”.
Not only is it possible to forgive yourself; it is essential that you forgive yourself.
If it was not possible to forgive yourself, how could it be possible to love yourself.
That is tantamount to saying “………..it is not possible to love yourself…….? And that cannot be right either. Do you understand?
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 12, 2018 at 1:34 pm
Why?
LikeLike
August 12, 2018 at 6:03 am
Romans 2:14-15
Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.
They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.
A book on forgiveness must deal with both theist and atheist viewpoints. Both Faithful and Gentile.
For those who do not believe in gods, from their viewpoint, often they themselves are the only ones aware of their uncharitable thoughts about others. They do not express them. They overtly act as if they were the perfect beings they’d like to be, charitable all the time, that much they can manage. But not to think unkindly is not always within human powers. They are not the people they’d like to be, they’re subject to anger, pride, speaking unkindly to those who are cruel, writing aggressive blog comments to win some argument rather than educate and be educated – they are merely human.
Forgiving others? Trivially easy, no matter how bad the offense. Forgiving oneself, with the complete knowledge of just how terribly imperfect they are, that’s much harder. But needed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 12, 2018 at 7:58 am
Zoe Brain:
Sunday’s Sermon: Serving Simple Saints Seeking Safe Secure Shelter So Smart Sanity Supplants Supernaturalism.
“For those who do not believe in gods,……………” yada yada:
I believe you made a typo and inserted a “not”. It should read: “For those who do believe in gods…..”
Because the rest of your quote describes believers so full of self righteousness who believe in not only the gods but more importantly to their peril is their smugness that resort to the supernatural rather than their brain to solve the madness of miracles they so fondly recall to justify themselves not seeking the knowledge that would relieve them from the burden of supernatural folly.
Christians don’t believe that one can forgive oneself because they concede that function to the supernatural, conveniently excluding believers from using their own common sense. So Christians defer forgiveness to the wisdom of the ancients who knew more about the gods and the ritualisms of sprinkling themselves with animal blood for the forgiveness of sin than they did about the weather cycle, the impotency of human sacrifice and the principles of infectious disease
Except for Paul’s statement about the gentiles(atheists) having the common sense in their hearts to do by nature what Christians only learn from religious dogmatic Law, everything else in the post applies to believers.
And as an aside, the quote of Paul from Romans is one of the few things Paul recognized as the truth; most everything else he said was for the promotion of his personal pharisaical religious upbringing that promoted the belief about the resurrection, not because Paul was converted, that was a ruse to infiltrate the early church. Paul used the early Christian misguided concept of the resurrection of Jesus as proof to support the Pharisee dogma of the resurrection, the foundational concept doctrine upon which the Pharisees hung their proverbial hat. He hailed the the resurrection not because he believed Jesu resurrected but because his followers believed it and Paul seized the opportunity to exploit their belief for his own purposes because the reality of the Pharisaical resurrection was that the resurrection was something one could never witness while they lived. Smart, then you could never prove it was correct or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 12, 2018 at 8:21 pm
Thank you, Zoe, for an intelligent comment.
Zoroastrianism exhorts us to:
Think kind thoughts;
Use kind words; and,
Do kind deeds.
These are worthy goals for people with all kinds of beliefs including those who believe that there are no Gods. It’s easy to show kindness to those who show kindness to us; it’s much more difficult to show it to those who’ve injured us physically or mentally. Forgiveness does not come easy for believers and non-believers alike.
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLike
August 12, 2018 at 8:32 pm
Thank you, Leo.
You have given a concise and clear analysis of the difficulty for Christians to forgive. I would add that most regard themselves as sinners which has a negative impact on their ability to be good people. As you rightly point out, they defer to God the act of forgiveness as they are often unable to do it themselves and any good that they do is considered to be the fruits of the Holy Spirit acting through them.
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLike
August 12, 2018 at 11:18 pm
Thank you Dino:
Leo’s Quiz of the day. Can you Guess this Author?
LeotheGreater Rebuking Christians again? NOT. Uh uhh.
“Listen to my Message, you Sodom-schooled leaders. Receive the Higher Power revelation within you, the common sense you were born with, you Gomorrah-schooled people.
“Why this frenzy of sacrifices? Don’t you think I’ve had my fill of burnt sacrifices, rams and plump grain-fed calves? Don’t you think I’ve had my fill of blood from bulls, lambs, and goats? When you come here, whoever gave you the idea of acting like this, running here and there, doing this and that-all this sheer commotion in the place provided for worship, reflection and meditation of what is good for humanity?
“Quit your worship charades. Your pretentious self righteousness. I can’t stand your trivial religious games: Monthly conferences, weekly Sabbaths, special meetings-meetings, meetings, meetings-I can’t stand one more! Meetings for this, meetings for that. I hate them! You’ve worn me out! I’m sick and tired of your religion, religion, religion, while you go right on sinning, playing church instead of praying for guidance to do what’s good, right and proper for all the people in all the land, in every way.
When you put on your next prayer-performance, I’ll be looking the other way. No matter how long or loud or often you pray, I’ll not be listening. And do you know why? Because you’ve been tearing people to pieces, and your hands are dirty. Go home and wash up. Clean up your act. Sweep your lives clean of your evil doings so I don’t have to look at them any longer. Say no to wrong. Learn to do good. Work for justice. Help the down-and-out. Stand up for the homeless. Go to bat for the defenseless, the downtrodden, the dreamers.
Oh My Goodness, OMG! Can you believe it? The chaste city has become a whore! She was once all justice, everyone living as good neighbors, And now they’re all at one another’s throats. Your money is as worthless as counterfeit. Your booze is watered down. Your leaders are turncoats who keep company with crooks. They sell themselves to the highest bidder, grab anything not nailed down and boast of the bribes that make them wealthy. But they never stand up for the homeless, never stick up for the defenseless.” Isaiah 1:10 Woe to you who stumble to your end, when you are caught unawares.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 15, 2018 at 5:11 pm
Hi Leo!
The answer’s easy – it’s Psalm 50 (49 in the Septuagint) written by Asaph or David.
I liked your rendition of the Psalm. Below is a link giving more detail in plain English for anyone who’s interested:
https://www.easyenglish.bible/psalms/psalm050-taw.htm
Peace and love to all,
Dinos
LikeLike
August 15, 2018 at 5:42 pm
Dinos:
Actually the commentary in the quiz was not Psalm 50; it was from Isaiah chapter 1 starting at verse 10 to 17…and then verse, 21 to 23, The last sentence is basically of 3,4,or 5 phrases put together from memory.
The bulk of the variation of Isaiah 1: 10-17; 21-23 is from the Bible version “The Message (MSG)” with my few variations, notably”Higher Power” substitutes for ear of the (“LORD”) , Law of our (“GOD”) because to me Lord, God, Zeus, Brahma etc are all metaphors for the Higher Power (beyond which a greater cannot be thought).
Cheers but you certainly don’t get an “F”; you get a double “EE”, Excellent Effort.
Peace and love to all,,,,,,,,,,,men of good will.
leo
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 15, 2018 at 5:56 pm
Or, Peace and love to all S/he/we of good will. Shewe (Shuheewee) love.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 15, 2018 at 7:43 pm
Does it not puzzle you or any person who claims s/he is a Christian to be constantly citing Paul’s philosophy for biblical guidance instead of Jesus the person who you claim to follow? I don’t get it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 16, 2018 at 6:53 am
Hi Leo!
I think that the main reason for citing Paul’s philosophy is that he is a better writer than most of the others. He has a style that engages the reader. He starts with a greeting to hook the reader and poses questions to keep the reader alert. Not much to do with following Christ; more to appeal to Paul’s philosophy.
Jesus engaged with the full spectrum of humanity and He certainly did not tell the women who followed Him to “Be quiet in church,” nor to “Obey your husbands.”
Peace and to all,
Dinos
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 23, 2018 at 8:59 pm
Hi Dinos:
From where forgiveness for self, emanates, from where I sit and from where you sit, in my understanding.
The Hole in the Bucket, you must understand, you can never “see”, only perceive because the “Hole” you are looking for, like the Supernatural most believe in, isn’t there!
Believing in the Supernatural is like believing there is a hole in the bucket. You know that water will leak out of the hole you “apparently” see in the bucket but there is no hole in the bucket; what you think you see as a hole is really “nothing”, the “hole’ is merely the absence of a piece of the bucket that would otherwise, without the hole, be whole and leak-proof.
We say, we “see” the hole for convenient communication but there is nothing of a “hole” to see; in that sense, the Supernatural is a hole in a person’s mind only, in the same way that Satan is a hole in the mind, the essence of absence like darkness is the absence of light. Darkness has no existence by itself any more than a mirror that reflects your image; your image is not in the mirror, the image is a mirage, it is not there, you think it is but it’s not.
And holes never existed since the beginning. Get out of the hole and into the bucket! This is the message; “the light of the world is all there is that’s real and the world receives it not because the world prefers the “Hole in the Bucket” of supernaturalism instead of THE IMMANENCE within you because the truth is “All there is of Good is available to S/he who us available to all there is of Good.” How available are you? Lk 17:21
Peace to all s/he of goodwill.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 24, 2018 at 7:41 am
Thanks for the “like” Dinos.
Peace to s/he of goodwill.
LikeLike
March 11, 2019 at 12:00 am
God is a loving God, he does not blame so he does not need to forgive us for our arrogance and seperation. The thought of a angry God keeps us separated from him even more.so it makes sence to me that we need only to forgive ourselves and loose the illusion that we are separated from God and our higher self. The major problem seems to be to love God more than the things the world can offer us. It takes practice and discipline it seems.or suffering enough to start getting enough of the world.these are my thoughts on it. Love
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 18, 2019 at 8:37 am
Madeleine writes:
How do you know that God is a loving God? How do you know He doesn’t “blame” us for our sins?
LikeLike
March 19, 2019 at 8:20 am
Dear Scalia,
Since nothing is really “known” about the monotheistic God, often referred to as “the only true God” everyone who regards themselves as a Christian or a Jew who believes in YHWH should be free to have their own opinion of God’s characteristics. This is just common sense; witness the thousands of denominations of Christianity.
Within the world view, one of God’s characteristics is Omnibenevolence! It is quite acceptable and liberating to accept Madeleine’s view in the context I’ve described above.
Peace and love to all humanity,
Dinos
LikeLike
March 19, 2019 at 9:01 am
Dinos writes:
And how do you know that nothing is really known about God? Where did you get that knowledge?
Since nobody here, including yours truly, said that people shouldn’t be “free” to have their own opinions about God or anything else, are you referring to somebody else? Who said people shouldn’t be free to have opinions about God?
Opinions are not necessarily facts (except the fact that you have an opinion). Madeleine told “us” that God doesn’t need to forgive us because He doesn’t blame us for our “arrogance and seperation” [sic]. If she’s merely stating an unsupported opinion, it bears no relevance to anybody else. She is telling us what God is, so there’s nothing out of bounds in asking her how she got that knowledge.
Within what world view? Besides, since you’ve just stated that “nothing is really ‘known’ about…God,” then you don’t know that God is omnibenevolent, do you?
LikeLike
March 20, 2019 at 4:03 am
Dear Scalia,
Thank you for your comments.
My intention was merely to defend Madeleine’s expressed opinion and not to engage in what would be likely to turn into a lengthy string of exchanges with you. For that reason, I choose not to refute your arguments even though they can be refuted. I prefer instead to leave room for other people to give their views.
I express my love to all humanity and I appeal for Christian understanding to all who use Jason’s website to exchange their views on Christian topics with tolerance, goodwill, courtesy and politeness.
Yours in Christ,
Dinos Constantinou
LikeLike
March 20, 2019 at 7:54 am
Dinos,
There was no need to defend Madeleine’s right to have an opinion because nobody challenged her right to have one.
You say you “choose not to refute” my arguments, but if you’re referring to Post 247, I didn’t offer any arguments; I merely asked questions. You asserted that nothing is really known of God and then asserted that God is omnibenevolent. I merely asked you the warrant for that.
LikeLike