Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209516 | ||
First. Where did I alter, let alone give the meaning of righteousness? All already sinned; therefore, such a “moral perfection” as defined by you is, yes, I agree, impossible. And, if you add honest errors or the measuring of “where we are” in comparison to “where we should be” into the milieu, then, I agree, there is no perfection. However, I am not advocating a “heavenly perfection” or a “divine perfection” attainable in this life; nor a perfection per se, but living blamelessly or with a clear conscience before God and maintaining it to the day of one’s death. Second. (a) I fail to see how, in reading my post, you made that assessment that I am building doctrine on experience; and (b) I did not say anyone can arrive at a “sinless state” (cf. above). Third. (a) As a “new creation,” a believer ought no longer to see himself as being “totally depraved” or just plain depraved (2 Cor 5:17). (b) Excepting the Biblical witnesses, the “scholarly witnesses” is not a divinely infallible company. Fourth, I have great regard for “Wesley-Finney-Parham” (especially Finney although disappointed with Parham), but you seem to be assuming a greater attachment on my part to their teachings than is warranted. You seem to confuse the subjective with the objective when you mix the command that demands practical holiness (Heb 12:1f) with the “doctrine of imputation” that in turn confuses your argument (at least, for me). I’m not talking about betting one’s life on the human will but holding firm to the promises of God. Doc, with all due respect and with no intentions of offending, rather than responding specifically to the relevant points or questions posed in my posting, you seem to respond on the basis of assumptions based on whatever you are reading “between the lines” of my post. |
||||||
2 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | stjohn | 209518 | ||
Lookn': You wrote: "I have great regard for “Wesley-Finney-Parham” (especially Finney although disappointed with Parham)" Especially Finney-!? Perhaps you should take a closer look at the teachings of Finney? Excerpt: The Disturbing Legacy of Charles Finney by Dr. Michael Horton " Finney’s doctrine of justification rests upon a denial of the doctrine of original sin. Held by both Roman Catholics and Protestants, this biblical teaching insists that we are all born into this world inheriting Adam’s guilt and corruption. We are, therefore, in bondage to a sinful nature. As someone has said, "We sin because we’re sinners": the condition of sin determines the acts of sin, rather than vice versa. But Finney followed Pelagius, the fifth-century heretic, who was condemned by more church councils than any other person in church history, in denying this doctrine. Finney believed that human beings were capable of choosing whether they would be corrupt by nature or redeemed, referring to original sin as an "anti-scriptural and nonsensical dogma" (p.179). In clear terms, Finney denied the notion that human beings possess a sinful nature (ibid.). Therefore, if Adam leads us into sin, not by our inheriting his guilt and corruption, but by following his poor example, this leads logically to the view of Christ, the Second Adam, as saving by example. This is precisely where Finney takes it, in his explanation of the atonement. The first thing we must note about the atonement, Finney says, is that Christ could not have died for anyone else’s sins than his own. His obedience to the law and his perfect righteousness were sufficient to save him, but could not legally be accepted on behalf of others. That Finney’s whole theology is driven by a passion for moral improvement is seen on this very point: "If he [Christ] had obeyed the Law as our substitute, then why should our own return to personal obedience be insisted upon as a sine qua non of our salvation" (p.206)? In other words, why would God insist that we save ourselves by our own obedience if Christ’s work was sufficient? The reader should recall the words of St. Paul in this regard, "I do not nullify the grace of God’, for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing." Galatians 2:21 http://www.mtio.com/articles/aissar81.htm |
||||||
3 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209527 | ||
Apparently God used him in a way that was inspiring (especially in the light of his alleged errors) and nothing less than amazing in order to lead many to salvation. StJohn, what have you read that was written by Finney? |
||||||
4 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | stjohn | 209534 | ||
What have I read that was written by Finney? Enough to know he was a heretic! Much of what was written in my last post to you my friend, is in Finneys own words, and "quoted" directly from, Finneys own writing. I think I'm done with line of discussion. It's going in circles as do many of your posts. For instance, you wrote in post 209516 in response to Doc; "I fail to see how, in reading my post, you made that assessment that I am building doctrine on experience;" Well, you wrote in post 209291 "I believe I have met at least two people in my lifetime who have "perfectly kept" the first commandment," I believe this what called personal experience. So, pleas stop going down that path of accusing people of reading into what you say because this is NOT what is happening here. Pay attention to what YOU say, and you will have a lot less honest aptness for nonsensical argument. Good day to you sir. John |
||||||
5 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209629 | ||
John, please note: 1. I'm just wondering if you read Finney's works or just what others have quoted and said about Finney. No offense was intended. 2. Unfortunately, you have misconstrued the context of my statement. I presented my experience of what I believe, not as proof, but as an example (and only in answer to Doc's reference to his experiential). Nevertheless, we should admit that experience (to whatever extent) does play a role in what we believe. 3. In any case, even if I never met one whom I thought to be living a blameless life (Doc’s phrase is “moral perfection”), I would still believe it is possible because of how I’ve come to understand the Bible. 4. FYI: Your posting gives me impression that you're upset. |
||||||
6 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | stjohn | 209634 | ||
Lookn' The life-works of Finney have been soundly denounced by orthodox Christianity. Upset? no.. just sad... :-( God bless John |
||||||
7 | Can we live life without sinning? | Rom 6:12 | Lookn4ward2Heavn | 209701 | ||
Maybe you can explain what you mean by "orthodox Christianity". As far as I can tell, there are Christian theologians, scholars, and historians who would disagree with such an assessment as here presented against Finney. |
||||||