Results 381 - 400 of 495
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Aixen7z4 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
381 | Balanced, centered, or lukewarm? | Eccl 7:18 | Aixen7z4 | 101184 | ||
So, there is the time dimension. You balance church activities and family activities. You balance time spent on this forum with time paying bills. In preparation for a crunch I suppose you've also set priorities. Interesting because I am always late for everything, because I spend too much time on everything. Interesting because I heard on the radio a few minutes ago that, in the rush of responsibilities, the family should come first. I wonder what you would place first and, more importantly, what scriptures guide that. There seems to be a need for balance. It must be that it says somewhere that we must put our families first or that preacher would not have said it. But Jesus also said, “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me”. Moreover, “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple”. There is a need for. The same wise man who said, “I know that there is nothing better for them than to rejoice and to do good in one's lifetime” also said, of laughter, “ It is mad: and of mirth, What doeth it? The one who said, "Here is what I have seen to be good and fitting; to eat, to drink and enjoy” also said “It is better to go to the house of mourning, than to go to the house of feasting”. But my question really relates to intensity, to fervor, to heat. How fanatical are you concerning the things of God? Are you ready to die for him and the Gospel? Or would you rather live that quiet and peaceable life? Or is there something in between that you have chosen? Doesn’t the very fact you are satisfied mean you are not as hot as you might be? Think about it. On a scale of 1 to 5, where is your fervor? |
||||||
382 | Balanced, centered, or lukewarm? | Eccl 7:18 | Aixen7z4 | 101174 | ||
You are correct. I am not doing enough. I feel certain of that. More than that, I wonder have I done my best for Jesus Who died upon the cruel tree To think of his great sacrifice and suffering And know my Lord expects the best of me It’s a matter of quality over quantity. And yet, you need to be careful with the extrapolations, Compu, for you know not the thoughts of another person beyond what has been written, only your own. In any case, the invitation is to share your own thoughts, not to look into the thoughts of others. For me, it is not a matter of condemnation. Is it for you? For me, it is not whether God loves me or I love him, and I cannot even address the points about doubt or vanity. You say that one can look within oneself too much, and that is getting closer to the point. With what do you balance looking within? And how much is too much? Where’s the balance? You say , “what we do throughout the day can show our love to the Father just by doing daily responsibilities”. Where is the balance, then? I might guess that you think the matter of balance is not important, but I don’t want to read your mind. When you survey the wondrous cross, what do you do? Do you strive for balance in your life? |
||||||
383 | Isn't it a relay race? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 101006 | ||
I must agree, and thereby be consistent. “Dis-agreement, in itself, is not a bad thing”, but if it is among ourselves as Christians, then it is. As Abraham would say, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, … for we be brethren”. I must also agree that a “penchant for being right (regardless of the evidence) … is sinful”. Let God be true and none of us right in our own eyes. I am not right. Yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. I agree that “our Lord engaged in many dis-agreements Himself”. He opposed the Scribes and the Pharisees and they opposed him. But how different he was with his brethren! He patiently and gently bore with them and taught them. So did the Apostles. They disputed with unbelievers. But with the believers, they were “gentle among (them), even as a nurse cherisheth her children”. Yes, I know about Paul and Peter and also about Paul and Barnabas. Let us read those stories again; read the whole stories, and understand. I will agree that “we are to proclaim the truth according to the enlightenment with which we have been blessed”. And we have been enlightened to the fact that we are not the final arbiters of truth. The word is the truth, and it has its own power. We know that Timothy was told to “speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority”. And so we ask, Does each of us then have that same authority? Each one claims the right to correct and professes a willingness to be corrected. But the record here shows that no minds are being changed. No one is in fact accepting correction. So, as the wise man said, you are not doing it if it is not being done. Take, my brethren, the present post, for an example of a plea, suggesting that we stop the arguing. Will it be accepted? If we are not careful, it is likely to stand as an object of correction itself. And so it goes. The idea seems to be ingrained in us that disagreement is good and leads to some greater good. And so we bypass the good things we agree on to strain at the the one point with which we can disagree. I ask you, what is the good? Convince yourself of it. The world stands by listening as believers debate endlessly whether the baptism they had was or was not necessary, after the fact, for their salvation. What is at stake here? Are we trying to get our brother saved? Are we trying to get him to believe that his baptism saved him? Or are we trying to get him to start over again? Does he have to believe that it saved him in order for it to save him? On the other hand, does he have to give up the belief that it was a part of his salvation in order to remove the “works” part and thus correct his salvation. Does he have to go back to the cross again? The issue is not whether we should be baptized. We have been. It is not even whether we should include the need for baptism the next time we preach the Gospel. And by the way, does all this talking leave us time to actually preach the Gospel? Jesus had a way of ending arguments with the authoritative use of Scripture. He would say, “It is written”, and the exchanges in which he engaged usually ended after two or three exchanges. We have exceeded that here, and I am as guilty as any. On the subject of Baptismal Regeneration I do not know how much I’ve said. On the subject of Beneficial Disagreeing I only offer this, that the real benefit comes from looking hard to see what your other brother saw in Scripture. Try that, and this will be a better forum. It might even include threads that make the Gospel so attractive, unbelieving visitors will get saved here. Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel. Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you. |
||||||
384 | Isn't it a relay race? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100890 | ||
Dear John: I hope you won’t be disappointed. I hope too, to give you something to rejoice in, and nothing with which to disagree. When will we know everything about God? I know nothing about that, but thank God, I already know him. I suppose I will know him better tomorrow. We have such wonderful things to look forward to, today and in the hereafter. Tell me what you think. Won't it be fun if the Lord would set us up as teachers, to explain some things to the angels and prophets? Take our salvation, for example. The prophets carefully researched and investigated this salvation. When long ago they spoke about God's kindness that would come to us, they did not understand it. They tried to find out what time or situation the Spirit of Christ kept referring to whenever he predicted Christ's sufferings and the glory that would follow, but it was a mystery. God told them that the things they had spoken were not for their own benefit but for ours. But listen: What the prophets had spoken, the Holy Spirit, who was sent from heaven, has now made known to us, has now made known to us, has now made known to us! Eye had not seen, nor ear heard, nor had it entered into the heart of man, they things which God had prepared for those who would love him. But God has revealed them unto us, has revealed them unto us, has revealed them unto us, by his Spirit. These things, the things that we now know, the angels desire to look into. They come into our assemblies. They look at us. They are still trying to understand. I wonder if they will ever fully understand, even in glory. Some things, I think, cannot be understood except by experience. I think that When I sing redemption’s story They will fold their wings For angels never felt the joy That our salvation brings. They know, I think, that he is holy. I wonder if they understand that God is love. We may have to tell them a few things about him, whom, having not seen, we loved; in whom, though on earth most of us never saw him with our natural eyes, yet believing, we rejoiced with joy unspeakable and full of glory. |
||||||
385 | Isn't it a relay race? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100806 | ||
Dear John: I admire your attitude. And it is good too see this admission that we have so much to learn. But we should not minimize our ability to learn, or the opportunities we have to learn, or the fact that, the Holy Spirit teaching us, we are learning. There is no question about the fact that “Compared to God we know (almost) nothing”. God has not revealed everything to us. “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God". But "but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children”. God has revealed many things to us, things he wants us to know and do. It does not serve the purpose, I think, that you work so hard to make a case for ignorance. You say that we err in our understanding. That is so true. But Jesus says the reason is that we do not know the scriptures. John, that was back there when ordinary people did not even have access to the written word. Today we all have hard copies, and some of us have searchable electronic ones. The excuses are being taken away. Jesus says, “Search the Scriptures” and surely we can do that. The divisions over what orthodox Christians claim to be correct interpretations are manifold and unfortunate, and they are due to our willingness to listen to those proponents rather than going to the Bible ourselves. If we went straight to the word of God we would not be overly influenced by words such as “orthodox” and “interpretation” that are not even in the Bible. We certainly should just ignore the divisions caused by these orthodoxies, and cease our arguments. You ask: ‘Would you mind explaining what you mean by “reconcile in our own minds statements that seem to be”?’ but then you show that you do know what it’s all about as you speak about “harmonizing … verses with one another without sacrificing the truth of either one”. So I do not need to respond to that. Now as for "I am but of yesterday, and know nothing", I could hardly recognize it in that form. By isolating the statement and changing the personal pronoun, you seem to have developed another excuse for ignorance. But John, what had Bildad the Shuhite actually said? "Ask the people of past generations. Find out what their ancestors have learned. We have only been around since yesterday, and we know nothing. Our days on earth are only a fleeting shadow. Won't their words teach you? Won't they share their thoughts with you?” The people of past generations have written, in the Bible. And we can learn from them. It goes well with what the Lord says through Isaiah; to paraphrase: “Have we not been reading? Then why do we not know?” We can read, and read, and pray, and harmonize, and synthesize, and come to a knowledge of the truth. It is written. You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free. Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. |
||||||
386 | Searching for thr truth | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100749 | ||
I agree. Let us put the emphasis on Jesus. Let us give him all the credit. Without him we are nothing. Without him we can do nothing. It is God who works in us both to will and to do his pleasure. God is doing his part. Let us do our part. And to him be all the glory. | ||||||
387 | Isn't it a relay race? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100748 | ||
Dear John: I agree we should keep on learning. However, I think it is unfortunate when we think we are away from the truth and only getting closer to it. Yes, I know that you said "the full truth". But I think we already have it. The word of God is truth, and Jesus is the truth, and we have them both. Nor am I giving trite statements here. It would do us well to ponder. Each of us needs a greater apprehension of the truth. But we do not get that by arguing. When I am faced with the written word of God, I stand in awe and try to take it in. I do not cast it aside or explain it away. Every word of God is truth and it must be accepted. If you want deeper truth, I suggest that we reconcile in our own minds statements that seem to be contradictory. We do not learn by arguing. We do not win anything when we win arguments, for words are wind. We must accept the word of God as truth. We must appreciate a brother who points out a verse to us and incorporate in in our understanding. Only then should we have the nerve to try to teach. For me, the task of reconciling passages that seem to say different things does not bespeak a closed-minded attitude. It shows that we are open to all of the word of God. On the other hand, if we cannot come to a conclusion about anything, if we do not have the full truth on anything, then we are pitiful and unattractive. We are open to the charge that we are “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth”. You don’t want to be like that! Do you, John? Now, I confess I do not know how to deal with statements such as "I am but of yesterday, and know nothing". I hesitate to say I do not agree with that at all. As far as I know it is not in scripture and I think I should not try to deal with it at all. But it does remind me of a question God asks us through Isaiah: “Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?” God is giving us his truth, and we need not remain in the land of ever learning. |
||||||
388 | Searching for thr truth | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100746 | ||
Dear John: I think Robert misspoke a little bit. He did not mean to say that keeping those two commandments would get us into heaven. Did you Robert? Let's agree that we could not keep the commandments, no matter how God broke them down and spelled them out for us. So Jesus came and died and paid for our sins. We repented and trusted in him, so we are saved. We are on our way to heaven. Now, what happens after that? The love of God has been shed abroad in our hearts. We are able to love God. We are able to love our brothers. Let us do it, not in order to be saved, but because we are saved. Let us love him because he first loved us. And beloved, let us love one another. We can do it. It is a little child who needs to be told, "Don't hit your brother", "Don't push", "Hold his hand". A mature person hears "Love one another" and that's enough. Now, a mature brother has immature brothers and that makes the job harder. But we can do it. |
||||||
389 | In Adam vs. In Christ? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100686 | ||
I'm sure you are correct. The writer to the Hebrews says that we should consider him who endured some contradiction of sinners and that will keep us from being discouraged. Beyond considering the fact of being in him, then, we can simply consider him. Paul tells the Corinthians that as we look at him we become like him, so there is a benefit in that. But we may look at him simply because he is attractive. “We behold his glory”; that‘s what one who saw him said. On one occasion it is said that all the people, when they beheld him, were greatly amazed, and running to him saluted him. And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid, but they could not keep their eyes off him. Even when he was on the cross it is said that they sat down and watched him. I was thinking of the place where we are asked to consider him, our Apostle and High Priest, greater than Moses for faithfulness, etc. Should we not do that? I remembered how he said “My people do not consider” and it made me sad. I think that we should think about him all the time. David said, “I have set the LORD always before me: … he is at my right hand”. I think we should do the same. It will keep us from discouragement, but also it will enrich our lives, make us more like him, and simply honor him. That's what we want: to be conformed to his image, to be like him and to honor him. Let him turn and catch us admiring him. My heart is inditing a good matter: I speak of the things which I have made touching the king:... Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father's house; So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him. |
||||||
390 | Where do I find Paul's death in Rome? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100643 | ||
It is the best of callings. It is the worst of callings. The best times are the ones in which one can combine the two. The worst times are the ones when neither one is appreciated. Often, when I am with other psychologists, they think that I am a preacher masquerading as one of them. Sometimes, when I am with Christians, they think that I am too much of a psychologist and not enough a person of faith. One can come to think that psychology is the most fascinating subject there can possibly be, because it is the science of human behavior. It is the realm we get into when we want to understand why human beings do what they do. It is even more interesting, if you can accept it, when one tries to explain why Christians behave the way they do. Those who are not psychologists say it is impossible. Those who are say it is the most fascinating, challenging, and rewarding field of study. If I give a lecture on The Positive Uses of Stress, I think I am doing something useful. If I preach a sermon on Reconciliation to God, I feel it is the very best way to spend my life. If I speak to a group on What Happened to the Soul at the New Birth, I feel that life could not be better. The hard part is when both parts are rejected. The best part is when they both are. But actually, the best times are the times when one can know he is doing the will of God. It is wonderful to be able to help another human being to establish a personal relationship with God or to adjust their behavior, to actually do God’s will. It is wonderful to meet with others who seek his face, and worship him. But actually, the best times are the times when one is alone with God. He is the one who deserves attention, and honor, and praise. |
||||||
391 | Do you have to be baptised to be saved | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100554 | ||
Sorry about the mixed message, Emmaus. I have a passing interest; it is not deep. I have spent many years in the education system and have been struck by the lack of balance between knowledge and application. My present orientation is to action rather than to much more study. However, I do find a need to keep digging into the Scriptures. As for other writings, I browse in order to keep aware. It is simply where I am right now. And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. |
||||||
392 | Do you have to be baptised to be saved | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100534 | ||
The Lord will be happy as well. If you listen very closely you may hear a voice saying, "I am well pleased". It's one of the times when it is better do do than to know. | ||||||
393 | Where do I find Paul's death in Rome? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100526 | ||
Brother Hank, I do agree. It is probably safe to read anything if one is careful to compare it with scripture and dispose of it according to how it comports. Two cautions I should add though. In agreeing that extra-Biblical readings should be taken with a grain of salt, I would say that having to take a grain of salt too too often can lead to hypertension. The second point is that, with the press of time that we experience today, we often have to choose what we read, the Bible or some other book. There is a judgment to be made on how we divide not only the word but also our time. A third caution is not really mine but Paul’s. There are other types of readings in the world. We should (1 Tim 1:4) Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. (1 Tim 4:7) But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. (2Ti 4:4) (Some) turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (Tit 1:14) fables, and commandments of men, (can) turn (us) from the truth. Let me also say that with so many authors of yesterday and today saying so many things, one can possibly become confused. Otherwise one must spend a lot of time sifting error from truth. The Bible writers, on the other hand, they do not contradict each other. Having said all that, I am not saying that all non-Biblical writing is dangerous. For example, a word to the wise is enough. |
||||||
394 | In Adam vs. In Christ? | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100523 | ||
Dear mommapbs, I have thought about it, and I cannot imagine how one could write about it in the space allotted on a forum. There are so many things “in Christ”! In him was life, and the life was the light of men. There is no unrighteousness is in him. In him is no sin. There is no fault in him. It pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell. In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. In him there is redemption and forgiveness and an inheritance. In him there is beauty and grace and righteousness and wisdom. The truth is in Jesus. In him there is love and joy and peace. And in him there’s … us. He is in us and we are in him (John 17). Yep! We are in him, and we are to abide in him. Paul’s goal was to be found in him, and he said we are complete in him. And you ask what it means to be in him. It seems that the parallel of being in Adam is useful. As Levi was in the loins of Abraham (Hebrews 7) so we were all in the loins of Adam. His genes, if you will, are in us, and we were in him in that we came from his loins. There is something of the nature of Adam in us, and likewise there is something of the nature of Christ in us. His divine nature is in us (2 Peter 1). His seed is in us (1 John 3:9). We are a chosen nation, a royal priesthood, in him. We are kings and priests, in him. Before we were put into him we were none of those things. In him, we have inherited those things, and more, promises of more. But the thought remains that we have been baptized into him. We are a part of his body. It sounds trite now to say that refers to the church, but it should perhaps lead us to a deeper contemplation of what the church is. I would say it is analogous to being in the army or the university or in the civil service, or, if you will, the club, or better yet, the kingdom. We are a part of the system with all it stands for; its status and privileges and responsibilities. Christ is what God’s kingdom on this earth is all about and we are a part of it. We are a part of him. In him there is protection and power and hope and all those other spiritual blessings. We are what we are because we are in him. We have what we have because we are in him. We have brothers and sisters, the others who are in him. I have the sense that you and many others on this forum are in him, and that makes this a special place, a holy place, a place to have conversations and share blessings, in him. So, what does it mean to be “in Christ”? It would be safe to say it means a whole lot. I means to have inherited this. It means to be a part of something special. And he is the head of it. It kinda makes one feel good. We appreciate it. But we are not proud. No flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption (and …): That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. |
||||||
395 | Where do I find Paul's death in Rome? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100518 | ||
My friend, Emmaus, I agree that false teaching came early into the church and it is still around today. Peter said way back then (2 Peter 2:1) that "there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you". How do we combat their teachings? I think of the words of the Lord. In Mathew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures". The scriptures. The scriptures. That is what keeps us from erring. We must know the scriptures. I have read a few secular books in my time. In some circles I cannot say this, but I'll say here: I have lost my taste for them. I either find to be in agreement with the scriptures, in which case I find them superfluous, or they are in disagreement with the scriptures and I find them distasteful. I still read one now and then, even as I read the postings on the forums. But mostly, I must say, I read the Bible. |
||||||
396 | Where do I find Paul's death in Rome? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100504 | ||
Dear Emmaus: The extra information seems interesting, although I must confess I only glanced through it. Truth is, I don't know if I can trust that information, or if it is useful. Notice that the questioner asked specifically: "(In) what books in the bible would I find what happened ...?". I wonder why it was not simply "Where would I find information about what happened ...?". This person seems to place information from the Bible in a special category. I would like to get a little taste for the tradition that values non-Biblical information along with Biblical information. What if the person had asked, "In what books in the Bible would I find what happened to Mary next?" Is it enough to say that that information is not in the Bible? Or can we with confidence present other information from outside of the Bible? |
||||||
397 | what type of book is the bible, research | Bible general Archive 2 | Aixen7z4 | 100500 | ||
The Bible is all that. It is also the book of books. It might be true to say it is not one book but many books in one. It calls itself the Scriptures, or the Writings. Holy men wrote as they were moved on by the Holy Spirit. They wrote things thy could not know by themselves and things they could not fully understand. The Bible is God's word to man, written by many men, with wisdom beyond that of any man. It is the Book of books. It is beyond any other. God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16). Eternal (Psa 119:89). The truth (John 17:17). You can base your life on it. |
||||||
398 | Why don't you know for sure? | Eccl 11:6 | Aixen7z4 | 100245 | ||
As I write here I try to be careful. I want to be sure I don't say wrong things, because someone else is reading it and I don't want to lead anyone astray. When I am not sure about something, I say so. I am not sure I should say the following, so I hope everyone understands. I think we should all say what God has taught us and stop there. It is not true that "The Bible doesn't talk about man having free will". I can cite many passages where the Bible says he does. Genesis 2:17 is an example. Deuteronomy 30:19 is a classic. 1 Kings 18:21 says it. Isaiah 28:13 and Isaiah 30:15 prove it. Matthew 23:37 laments it. The fact that some who read this agree and some disagree renders it indisputable. Maybe there are other verses that seem to say the opposite, but to say the Bible never says it is a mistake. And there are others. It was not the tree of life that God said man should not eat of. It was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Check it out. As far as why God allowed sin to happen, that is a question that has been discussed many times and I would guess there is a record of it somewhere on this forum. Someone probably said that it is a matter of logic. There is no way God could have known it would happen and then prevented it, because that would mean it would not happen and God would have been mistaken to think that it would have happened. This type of reasoning can be confusing. It's of the type that ponders whether God can make a stone so large that he can't lift it. It is usually not useful to ask these questions. Someone else might have said that God is Sovereign and we should not question what he does. He knows best and we should accept what he does. In fact, we should be grateful that he reveals his will to us so we can do it. Someone else might have said that it does not matter if God allowed sin since he also gave us the antidote for sin. It's like saying it is OK that God allows us to be hungry and thirsty because he created food and water. There is sin, but Christ died for our sins. Now man, with the free will that God gave him, can choose to remain in his sin or he can repent and receive God's forgiveness. I say it is more useful to accept that than to argue with God. Some will say that God has not given us free will, but they will then exercise their free will to argue. Then someone will ask why God allows us to argue. The fact is we do not have to. We can submit to him. Sometimes I am not too sure about these things, but I will edit this before posting it, to make sure it squares the word of God. Will you also be careful how you answer? |
||||||
399 | Are you quite sure about that? | Eccl 11:6 | Aixen7z4 | 100203 | ||
Thanks you for sharing that. I must say I have met only one other person with the burden you described. Is it widespread, as far as you know? I must say also that that burden seemed to put that brother at odds with almost everyone he met as they did not seem to understand the idea of practical sonship and the need for that type of relationship with Father. Do you think that seeking that type of relationship would help us to more clearly discern the will of God? Is it that we need to have a closer walk with him? |
||||||
400 | What does it mean to be "in Christ?" | 2 Cor 5:17 | Aixen7z4 | 100202 | ||
I am truly amazed, and blessed, by the thoughts that occur to others. Given a thousand years I probably would not have thought of taking off Christ. Even now I cannot imagine how that might be done. I do not know where the subject of taking off Christ is broached in Scripture. Is it seen in those who walk (in Philippians 3:18) as enemies of the cross of Christ? In Gal 3:27 we are informed that we have put on Christ, by virtue of the fact we have been baptized (by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13)) into Christ. That would be a positional or passive fact. We have put on Christ. The Holy Spirit has done it for us. In Rom 13:14 we are asked to put on the Lord Jesus Christ. That would be a practical application of the concept and it would involve our active participation. It would therefore seem that in order to take off Christ (positionally) we would have to be unabaptized (by the Holy Spirit) out of him. And who can imagine that? It’s like being unborn? And how can that happen? From a practical standpoint, what does it mean to put on Christ? Eph 4:24 says that we are to put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. I take that to be that we are to put on the character of Christ. (Someone somewhere has stated that it is not his character by Christ himself that we put on. However, they did not explain it). Jesus had said, “Learn of me” (Matthew 11:29). He indicated it was his character he was talking about by adding, “for I am meek”. In Ephesians 4 Paul mentions some characteristics which are unlike Christ and says, “You have not so learned Christ”. Then, after listing some other unChristlike things to be put off, intermingled in the list with Christlike habits such as speaking the truth, and speaking kind words that minister grace, he lists some Christlike characteristics to be put on: “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving each other, just as God also in Christ forgave you”. From a practical standpoint, how do we take off Christ? Is it that we become liars again? Thieves again? Is it that we stop being kind and tenderhearted and forgiving”. I suppose that putting on Christ involves practicing those behaviors as if they are a part of us until they are a part of us. It would be difficult to unlearn those habits. It may be possible, but experience suggests we would not want to. Would we ever want to take off Christ? It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [25] >> |