Results 21 - 40 of 130
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Lookn4ward2Heavn Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209491 | ||
Re: ID#209474. 1 Jn 3:2. Although one may include the idea of a “moral perfection” (Doc’s term), that does not seem to be the emphasis here. I think what is the primary reference here is the fact that, at the parousia, it will made evident or obvious to the world that it is we are God’s children. Note the reference to “the world” (NIV) in vs.1. The emphasis is on our glorified state as children of God before the world. However, connected with the expectation of the Lord’s return, John informs us that those who expect it guard the purity of their lives to reflect his purity (v.4). At the parousia, the moral change should not be as significant as the physical change because the believer has already been maintaining, shall I be permitted to say, a heavenly purity. And, again, although Doc uses the phrase “moral perfection” (and I use it only because , I’m not sure this is accurate seeing as how the word “perfect” is misconstrued. I’d opt for “moral blamelessness”. 2 Cor 3:18. Again, I do not see the emphasis on our moral condition, although it obviously should not be ruled out entirely; the emphasis is on our glorified state (i.e. physical). Such glorification, as spoken here and in 1 Jn, refers, if anything, to the whole man, his whole being, physical and spiritual. Unfortunately, that one is not now walking in a state of blamelessness is no proof that such a state has never been or is impossible to attain now on earth. As to ID#209475, to which question is your “No” referring? |
||||||
22 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209469 | ||
If it is insisted that Rom 7 explains Paul’s experience as a believer, I would think one needs to be hard-pressed to explain how this experience as described is consistent with what the Bible affirms is the true state and experience of those who are “born again”. For example: (1) “…sin…produced in me all kinds of wrong desires” (8). (2) “…sin became alive and I died…” (3) “…sin…deceived me and through it I died.” (4) “…sin…produced death in me…” (5) “…I am unspiritual, sold into slavery to sin.” (6) “…sin lives in me…” (7) “...nothin good live in me.” (8) “…I want to do good, but I cannot…” (9) “…I do the very evil I do not want!” (10) "…sin…lives in me.” (11) “…evil is present with me.” (12) “…captive to the law of sin…” Note that in this verse, if it is understood as the apostle’s experience as a believer, Paul admits he is in a struggle with sin but also admits he losses that struggle because sin consistently and always (the only way to undestand it in view of the whole context) overcomes him. (13) “…I serve the law of sin.” Are we to understand that this is the expected and normal experience of believers, to be “unspiritual and sold into slavery to sin”? Is this what is meant by being under grace? Is Rom 7 what is meant by the “new creation” (2 Cor 5:21)? |
||||||
23 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209468 | ||
In the first place, I’m not advocating moral “perfection” but rather, being blameless before God. I do not think Zechariah’s lapse necessarily proves your point (although it does imply the idea that, at least, a moral standing is possible where can be found blameless before God). In any case, that still leaves Elizabeth untouched by such criticism. As such, my point remains valid. Regarding Zechariah: (a) Did such a lapse into as Zechariah’s render him in an unfavorable position before God or, to put it in another way, did it affect the divine assessment of his moral character (Luke 1:6) before God? (b) Even if indeed he lost his (as you – incorrectly – describe it) “moral perfection”, having regained a favorable standing before God (1:63-67), is it not be a possibility that he could regain and maintain his “moral perfection” (cf. 1:6) until his death? (c) Note his prayer in Luke 74b-75: “…we could serve him without fear, being holy and good before God as long as we live” (NCV). Evidently, he believed and prayed, under the inspiration of the Spirit, for a life lived in obedience to God until death. If it were not possible, how could he pray for it and how could it have been an inspiration of the Spirit? As Christ is fully divine, we cannot attain to such righteousness as is found in Christ. As Jesus is fully human, such righteousness is possible; more than that, it is commanded and expected (Rom 6:10-11; Cor 11:1; Eph 5:1-2; 1 Thes 1:6). Second, maybe it is a rare experience, but the point being made is that, contrary to your assertion, it is possible. To answer your third point, you are correct that our judgment may be skewered, yours as well as mine. Furthermore, personal judgment can be skewered because of an improper understanding of the Biblical concept of, as you phrased it, “moral perfection”. If the understanding is erred on this particular subject, of course, perception of personal observation and experience may likewise be skewered. However, I think (thus far) my assessment of those whom I have been personally involved with, especially of the person I’ve known for ten years, is correct; and, for that matter, I find no egregious fault in my general understanding of the Biblical concept of (to use your term) “moral perfection”. In any case, as I stated previously, “[E]ven if we did meet one who followed perfectly the "great commandment," we might end up finding something to accuse him/her of…because our hearts have low expectations, or we are jealous… or refuse to believe” that such a work of God is possible for us here and now. Fourth, “wonder[ing] why Wesley, Finney, and Parham never managed the feat” (although I am not asserting that they did or did not) of loving God with all the heart may be, not so much because they had not attained it, as your having a misunderstanding of what such a “feat” entails. With all the divine promises at our disposal and the life of the Spirit in us in all of His gifts, blessings, and power (Jer 31:33; Ezek 36:27; 2 Cor 5:17; 2 Pet 1:3-4), we should rather wonder why we have not “managed the feat”. Thanks for the encouragement. Even if not attained, hopefully in the eyes of Father, the proof may be in the pursuit itself as well as in the attainment of what is pursued. |
||||||
24 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209291 | ||
First, I think the Bible gives examples of those who have followed God with a love that exemplified the command (Matt 22:37). In the NT, Zechariah and Elizabeth who "were both righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly." To be blameless would, I think, mean that you couldn't say they didn't love God with all their heart, mind, and, soul. And in the OT, their is Job (1:1,8). We certainly can't disagree with God's assessment of his character. Second, with all due respect to Doc, because one has never met a believer who perfectly exemplifies the "great commandment" in his lifetime does not mean there have never been, are not, or never will be one who does so. Our respective corners of the world are very small considering how big it is and how long it has been inhabited by humans. Third, even if we did meet one who followed perfectly the "great commandment," we might end up finding something to accuse him/her of, and it may not be because the accusation is true, but because our hearts have low expectations, are jealous of their walk, or refuse to believe such a work of God can be the experience of a believer (which should be the experience of all believers). It may be that there is a need to revise our understanding ot "perfect". Or, maybe we need to really believe that what we aim for might really happen. Fourth, I believe I have met at least two people in my lifetime who have "perfectly kept" the first commandment, at least as far as I have known them. The first person I knew for about six months, the second for about 10 years. I believe one can keep perfectly the "first and great commandment" because (1) the Bible affirms it; (2) I have had examples set before me; and (3)"My hope is built on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteosness." |
||||||
25 | Adam and Eve Perfect or Flawed | 1 Tim 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208345 | ||
I'm glad we each can come to an understanding of our respective positions. | ||||||
26 | Adam and Eve Perfect or Flawed | 1 Tim 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208307 | ||
StJohn, maybe my comment was not as clear as I thought. I was not contending against the proposition that Eve had transgressed. You did say she was not a sinner before the fall, therefore, I assume you believe she was created without a sinful nature or sinful propensities; that she was created either innocent or righteous. I was challenging your statement: "I don't think you can definitely say it was not in her nature to do so" (i.e. to sin). I contend that one can definitely say it was not in Eve's nature, as created, to sin: God saw his creation of Adam and Eve as good (not necessarily in moral terms but definitely not with any form of sin inherent in their natures). I argue it was in Eve's nature to choose, which included the choice to obey or disobey God's command; it was not in her nature to sin. There is a difference between being created to choose and being created to choose (especially in terms of necessity and inevitability) to sin. |
||||||
27 | Adam and Eve Perfect or Flawed | 1 Tim 2:11 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208294 | ||
1 Tim 2:14 says clearly that Eve was deceived, i.e. she was tricked. To blame her disobedience as an act due to being tricked would be true, although it does not exonerate her. As such, with the bare information as we have it, Eve's sin cannot be attributed any flaw, sinful or otherwise, in her character but only to her deed; it was the act that brought her ruin. I think the same would go for Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-17). As such, I do not think one can contend that it was in her nature to disobey God, that is, to sin. It was in her nature to make choices. Finally, that God knew she would transgress did not make its occurrence necessary or inevitable. |
||||||
28 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208235 | ||
It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath, as Jesus stated and I don't argue that. However, sometimes, in order to do good on the Sabbath, it may have been necessary be break a Sabbath Law. | ||||||
29 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208064 | ||
Azure, by my comment concerning Jesus breaking the Law, he did work on the sabbath (healing) and the time he let his disciples pick (was it?) corn. Although I know the argument is that he did not really break the Law since the religious leaders added to it. However, I do not think that in either case we read Jesus refuting the notion that he was breaking the Law. | ||||||
30 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208063 | ||
Tim, You are right. Jesus is without sin but that does not necessarily mean he did not break an aspect of the letter of the Law in order to fulfill the spirit of the Law, e.g. healing on the Sabbath (was this ruling derived from the prohibition of working on the Sabbath?). In any case, I did say the idea of Jesus breaking the Law is something hard to imagine, especially in the light of scripture (which you provided). As far as dead bodies, I'll look into that when I am able. As far as David, I think your explanation just seems to skirt the issue. If I recall, the Bible does read that what David did was against the Law. But, I’ll look into this, also. The main point I wish to make is that we cannot hastily judge the one who lies in order to save someone's life (there are many instances where Christians in persecuted countries have done so). There are gray areas in life sometimes; no easy answers for every situation that comes across our way, although the Bible does guide us and the Spirit (hopefully) moves in us to make the appropriate choice. I hope I never need to make a decision whether to tell the truth or lie (including omitting to tell the truth) to the One World Police (which organization made inot Law that only one daughter is allowed per family) that my daughter is in the closet hiding. Honestly, I would most likely lie and I don't believe God would hold me to it: my faith, my conscience. FYI: You never have given me the feeling that your picking on me. |
||||||
31 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208062 | ||
I disagree. In any case, Saul was anointed by God. | ||||||
32 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 208006 | ||
Saul was also God's anointed. God tore away the kingship from him because he appropriated to himself the privileges of the priesthood. | ||||||
33 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207955 | ||
Azure, please note: I said, "Jesus even condoned David's breaking the law by eating food that was for only the priests." David broke the law by eating the priest's bread, is what I said; Jesus only condoned it. Besides, there is no place in the NT where Jesus is eating bread for the priest's alone. | ||||||
34 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207942 | ||
I have no problem agreeing with you although I have not done any particular study of whether or not Jesus ever actually violated the Law. What just comes to mind is that he touched a leper and dead a body in order to bring healing. And, I did mention Jesus condoning David for breaking the law eating food that was only for the priests to eat. I don't think Jesus' perfection is endangered if he did break the letter of the Law in some way (although, admittedly, it is kind of hard to imagine; probably just as hard to imagine Jesus in a wedding where the guests are getting drunk and he supplies more wine). In any case, I don't think we can judge those Christians who have lied in order to save another's life as having disobeyed God, be it those who hid Jews during WWII or Christians in China today to try to protect their pastors, congregation, or family. I once read of this Christian women under persecution who, in order to protect her young daughter from being raped and tortured to death, since she had absolutely no other avenue of escape,spoke softly to her daughter, held her, and jumped off a cliff to both of their deaths. Yes, that is extreme - thou shalt not kill' - but I find it hard to see God condemning her outright. I also think about Bonhoeffer in collaborating to kill - murder - Hitler. There are other really rather radical stories of Christians under persecution and the unorthodox things they did to protect others. Some answers don't come as easy as we would like; like I said before, not everything is a simple "black and white". |
||||||
35 | is it ok to lie in certain cases | Col 3:9 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207935 | ||
Steve, having read only your comment, may I point out something to consider regarding Mt 12:12? I think the point Jesus was making was that, in taking the sheep out of the pit on the sabbath, the person does not break the sabbath law - maybe the letter of the law but not the spirit (that for which the law is intended) -because it is lawful to do what is good on the sabbath. Jesus was saying, "You'd break the sabbath in order to save an animal; why condemn me for breaking the sabbath in order to heal the sick?" Jesus did break or allow the law to be broken. Jesus even condoned David's breaking the law by eating food that was for only the priests. It just may be that the one who lies in order to preserve another's life, although breaking the law with respect to the letter, is nevertheless, not breaking the law with respect to the spirit, that is, it's intention. The "evil" of the lie is meant to bring out a good, that is, the saving of a life. Now, I'm not saying that the end justifies the means, at least, not in general or "let us do 'evil' that good may come of it"; but there are some cases where this proverb may apply. I realize this is a sticky situation to be put in but, for me, if my lie would save one's life, I'll either omit the information or, if pressed, I don't think I'll have any qualms in lying. In general, I agree with you. However, not absolutely everything is "black and white" (as much as we'd like it to be). Just something to think about. |
||||||
36 | Heb6:4-6 Loosing salvation or what? | Heb 6:4 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207845 | ||
Beja, You stated it is "not yet determined with any certainty what exactly he is talking about...whether apostasy, or something else..." I would think the writer of the Hebrew epistle makes it clear he is speaking of apostasy. How is it not clear and what else could he be warning about? |
||||||
37 | Heb6:4-6 Loosing salvation or what? | Heb 6:4 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207770 | ||
Beja, thanks for your response. Your point 1 is well said: "... if you are comfortable with the idea you can lose your salvation then this text is no difficulty at all..." I agree. Regarding your second point, I agree that the hypothetical theory is a wash-out. However, I'm a little confused when you said, "I believe that whatever he is talking about here is something that could happen." Holding to the doctrine of eternal security, I assume you mean that "whatever he is talking about could happen" in no way includes the idea that one can forfeit their salvation. Is this a correct assumption? |
||||||
38 | Heb6:4-6 Loosing salvation or what? | Heb 6:4 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207756 | ||
Hi Beja, I apologize if it was not clear my response was specifically for you. I would still like to continue the discussion with you. For your convenience, I am re-posting (with some changes for clarification) my two other preliminary remarks (see below)from my original post (#207644). If it would not be an imposition, I would like your input before discussing the Heb 6:4-6. Thanks. 1. You state you believe in “eternal security” (as defined by the Calvinist theolgical system, I assume). Are you attempting to fit the text in question to fit the doctrine of “eternal security” or are you seeking to find what the intended meaning of the text really is irrespective of whether or not it supports the aforementioned doctrine? 2. As you seem to be in disagreement with the “hypothetical” theory given the text in question, are you under the opinion that the writer of Hebrews considers the possibility of “falling away” (i.e. apostasy) a real danger, something that can actually occur to his Christian readers? |
||||||
39 | Heb6:4-6 Loosing salvation or what? | Heb 6:4 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 207670 | ||
Respectfully, I don't see where I asked "son of god" what Bible version he prefers. My question was directed to Beja's post of 8:21, 2:19pm, #207534. | ||||||
40 | Decretive Will vs. Perceptive Will? | Ps 115:3 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 195554 | ||
Doc, Actually the first line of my post above (#195553) should read: "I don't see how YOUR long response (referring to #195490) relates to my question." I mention this for clarity...just in case... |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |