If we take the narrative in the old testament
those national sins committed and the punishment brought on were
prophesied before they actually took place. If God only knew that it
would take place, then there would be no purpose in instructing us about
the history of redemption since there would be no reason for that
redemption from sin. The first book of the bible Genesis is as well as
the other books were not written in a sequential time line fashion. The
whole point of the narrative up until the time of the flood was for the
purpose of teaching a theology of sin. How one small sin in Adam and Eve
can lead to a continues declining of the human race in the
understanding of the serpents head being crushed as the back drop of the
power of sin to work so that God had to destroy the whole human race
barring 8 people. That being a picture of redemption. If we can
step back and see, the purpose of the prophets, the time line of
prophecy, the problems with sin, we will find that the OT is an
instruction book about Gods hatred for sin , and HIs absolute
sovereignty in bringing about a relief for His own people in the
covenant of promise, and the understanding that in all of this God was
working out His plan for the coming of Christ without a single
frustrated purpose of determining the outcome through the wills of men. So
we have the nature of the choice of man as the cause of the determinate
happenings in the OT. So that God determined to make man responsible
for sin by imputing sin in the sin of Adam. Now then man sins because he
is a sinner. If man could have chosen to not be born in sin, then man
could have reversed the plan of Gods working out that remedy by the sin.
So that man was destined to sin under a necessity to sin. God made it
impossible for man not to sin by His imputing sin to Adams race prior to
any history of his race. Why did God do this? So that the whole race
would be silenced before God and conclude that God is just in His
working out all things for His glory. And His working out was His
decisioned to reject Esau and accept Jacob before they had any works. It
was always Gods will to have a remnant of people who He would shower
His love and gifts upon and in. So that the history of Gods dealings
with men were brought about by His power and not in mans power. Gods
power is displayed in His graciousness and His everlasting goodness and
love. Grace extended to man in history was that for which God worked in
man to accomplish His good will in the coming of Christ. God made a
covenant of grace with Abraham, and He gave the 12 tribes their
inheritance of land as well as His daily provision out of His bountiful
grace and goodness. He provided a relief for daily sins, and over look
sins that would demand the death penalty. God extended to the remnant
every thing they needed even when the nation went into captivity because
of the national rebellion. God relationship in His covenant people was
always in HIs goodness to uphold them in all of the ot history for the
purpose to bring Himself glory.
|
6227
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Romans and the Flesh Monster.
|
on: June 28, 2008, 09:48:04 PM
|
If I say "no" to a sin, it has to do with God.
So, I guess that is without corruption.
Not saying I'm without corruption. All I'm saying
is that we do have control in our own actions.
Yes. There is no doubt we sin without even being
aware at times; however, that is not what I'm
talking about.
I'm talking about intentionality. If I go into sin
knowingly... then I know that I know there will
be consequences.
If I stay out of sin with intentionality, it is with
God's power.. and it is a decision I make.
We certainly do have more control than sin over
us.
Right?
What
do you mean by going into sin? Maybe its practicing a sin? When you
practice sin is it intentional? When you get control over sin do you
ever not want to do it again? What does the apostle mean when
he says that he does what he does not want to do, but he does the very
thing he hates? Is he continually practicing a sin? Is there
ever a time when you get to a place where you do not have a problem with
sin as all of the ones you know you have done in the past but now you
can list as they were in the past?
|
 Reply
 Quote
 Notify
|
|
|
6228
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Romans and the Flesh Monster.
|
on: June 28, 2008, 07:01:07 PM
|
Biggie,
Are you saying we have no resistance to sin?
I tend to disagree. Gosh, I'd be sinning all over the
place if I had no resistance and control. Not at
all saying me and my life are void of sin. Just the
opposite. I am saying.. I do play a very big part
in that sin. I don't see sin as being so powerful
over me. I make choices, not all of them the right
ones or good ones. I know the difference because
of God. I'm not a total crudbum because there is
God in my life.
I do agree, though .. "good wishes" are definitely
not a measure of anything, except just good wishes,
which get us no where and mean nothing.
I just don't care much to think that sin has more power
over me than God. Though, I am human, and there
are choices far opposite of God's, I know.. but I
know that I know that sin is not the power over me.
I do make the decision.. it's not the sin that makes the
decision for me.
Maybe I'm missing something in what you're saying.
I just really don't care to think sin has power over me
because any and all power is really from God, isn't it?
Talking "power", not choice.
Right?
Thanks, Biggie! You're great! Don't you forget THaT!~
Tuggs-
Are you saying that when you avoid temptation or you do not give in that you do it without corruption?
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
6229
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Romans and the Flesh Monster.
|
on: June 28, 2008, 06:47:20 PM
|
Biggie,
When you say "There is no real working power
in us to effect the natural ebb and flow of sins power as if
it is equal to our ability to watch over our souls with our
natural eyes" ,,,,, I understand that to mean we have
no control in our actions. I think we most certainly do
have control in what we do.. and that would certainly
affect the " cause and effect" of our actions, don't you think?
I may be misunderstanding. Sorry if that's the case?
Please give me your thoughts.
Thanks~
Tuggs-
Thanks
for responding Tuggs. Our resistance is not able to resist the power of
sin. Otherwise we could measure our ability to resist as being part of
our good wishes even tho we actual commit the sin. And if we could in
ourselves resist, then how could we define ourselves as sinners, (having
a connection to sin and not having sin rule over us in an absolute
sense), and yet not be accountable by that cause? For instance i can
tell you that i can resist dying, but death being a part of the
consequence of sin makes me responsible by it being the cause of my
personal experience in the consequence. If you read my whole post, its not a resistance that we need but its a remedy that is the working power over sin.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
6230
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Romans and the Flesh Monster.
|
on: June 28, 2008, 06:14:22 PM
|
Human freedom, or the paradigm of conscious
equilibrium is not expressed in nothingness. Since what happens is a
sequence of cause an effect relationships. And where ever we find
ourselves in that sequence of history, is what goes on in our spiritual
consciousness. How did the concept of negative be expressed in conscious
awareness to our being? So that there is attached a weight of necessity
to experiencing its having an effect on our relational awareness in all
that makes us a separate person of understanding of the image of
ourselves. It is drawn out of the sense of the other and yet the
understanding is personal experience. So there is a cause of being prior
to the experience of being aware of the cause and effect in the
personal conscious understanding. And human freedom has an other cause
and effect longing as the origin of the struggle with negative
paradigms. The natural working of sin in human experience is
diverse in its negativity. That power to work is from an invisible
spiritual paradigm. We cannot fathom the moment of its awakening and yet
we know that there are ebbs and flows as to its power over us. That
spiritual awareness in us is it being matured by the experiencing of its
power. There is a sense in which we find the glory of His pleasure in
understanding how we experience that weight in the matter at hand.
Because our power of having a cause in the freedom over sin is a cause
outside of our experience of that weight. There is no real working power
in us to effect the natural ebb and flow of sins power as if it is
equal to our ability to watch over our souls with our natural eyes. So
that the sense of having that power over sin is eyed in us through
another. We gain a proper perspective of ourselves as sinners when we
are lost in the wonder of His glory and pleasure.
| 6233
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Could Jesus have sinned?
|
on: June 19, 2008, 06:03:07 PM
|
|
Jesus was fully man. He experienced a loss of
energy, a need for spiritual refreshment in prayer, and he was
sorrowful, experiencing grief , and needed physical rest. He experienced
temptation as a man with all of these finite limitations. But resisting
temptation and having a double desire to fulfill temptation was not in
Him. He was unable to sin, it was impossible for Him to sin. We are
unable not to sin, it is impossible in this life for us to be sinless.
We think that resisting temptation is having a certain amount of power
exerted over the power of temptation. You show me a man that believes
this and i will show you a man is having one defeat after another. That
same man will take on all kinds of outward sins with the most exercising
of his will, and in the end will fail.
Temptation is not from
an power of our will equal with the object that is pleasant to us. That
is no will at all. But the will is what is most pleasing to our sight.
What we love the most by our understanding of the object. We cannot say
that the objects power caused us to choose it. In that case there would
be a lesser responsible the more power we exerted even if we fell to it.
And that is how we naturally think about the will from our upbringing.
We play games in our minds as to how we give ourselves a better grade
cause at least we didnt commit adultery even tho we lusted. And then we
think that the amount of time we lusted would be the amount of good we
had over come from our former way of lusting. But this is all a lack of
understanding about the will ,and the cause of why we choose one object
over another.
The truth is that we are unable to resist
temptation in ourselves. We would fall every time if we had to exert
enough power to overcome temptation. If we saw that as the way to
overcome temptation we may be able to resist it with some help from
other people , or with some concentration, but in the end we will only
fall back by doing it in our own power. Or thinking that it is our self
determination that is necessary to overcome temptation.
Even
when Christ sweat drops of blood to resist, yet He did not sin in being
tempted,cause He had the perfect righteousness as the cause of His
choice to resist. He was pleased to resist and that was the cause of Him
being fully able to resist. He was fully praiseworthy throughout His
life, because He was divine. He was fully divine. Every temptation He
resisted was done with the absolute pleasing of His Father. He purposed
to be the perfect sacrifice, and He experienced that perfect choice in
all of its causes and ends so that He was fully praise worthy.
What
we desire most is the cause of what we choose. When we are made new in
Christ we are given a new set of spiritual desires. We are made aware by
a new divine light that opens our spiritual eyes to what is truely
desirable in the spiritual affections. But we still have the remnants of
sin. So that we are corrupted in our desires. And even tho we choose
the spiritual things as being good, yet in ourselves they are only
filthy rags in His sight.
We are in need of a righteousness that is
not corrupted. It does not come from a corrupted soul. That
righteousness is imputed to us in our being justified before God in the
court of heaven. Our sin is imputed on Christ. So we are fully
exonerated of every sin that we ever committed or will commit.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
6234
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Could Jesus have sinned?
|
on: June 17, 2008, 10:33:03 PM
|
Is the understanding that He could have sinned and didn't part of his Deity?
If he couldn't have sinned, does that take away from the work He did on the cross somehow?
I believe that He could have sinned and that was part of Him comining in the flesh,,but He never sinned.
If
He could then He would have defeated His own purpose. His purposes are
never frustrated. He loves righteousness and hates wickedness.
Shalom, mybigGod. Hmmm.... That's not exactly true. Remember that He "was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Heb. 4:15, KJV) If He COULD not sin, then He could not have been TEMPTED to sin! Being ABLE to sin does NOT mean that He WOULD sin! Retrobyter
He
resisted outward temptation because He did not have a cause to sin. If
there was an amount of resistance then there would be a level of good in
him in proportion to that resistance. Every choice He had was fully
praise worthy. Every temptation He denied was fully purposed from the
cause to the end. Other wise it would have been from another nature than
eternal goodness.
|
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
6235
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: The end for which God created the World: Edwards
|
on: June 17, 2008, 08:23:51 PM
|
But how God’s value for, and delight in, the
emanations of his fulness in the work of creation, argues his delight in
the infinite fulness of good in himself, and the supreme regard he has
for himself; and that in making these emanations, he ultimately makes
himself his end in creation; will more clearly appear by considering
more particularly the nature and circumstances of these communications
of God’s fulness. One part of that divine fulness which is
communicated, is the divine knowledge. That communicated knowledge,
which must be supposed to pertain to God’s last end in creating the
world, is the creature’s knowledge of him. For this is the end of all
other knowledge; and even the faculty of understanding would be vain
without it. And this knowledge is most properly a communication of God’s
infinite knowledge, which primarily consists in the knowledge of
himself. God, in making this his end, makes himself his end. This
knowledge in the creature, is but a conformity to God. It is the image
of God’s own knowledge of himself. It is a participation of the same;
though infinitely less in degree: as particular beams of the sun
communicated are the light and glory of the sun itself, in part. Besides,
God’s glory is the object of this knowledge, or the thing known; so
that God is glorified in it, as hereby his excellency is seen. As
therefore God values himself, as he delights in his own knowledge, be
must delight in every thing of that nature: as he delights in his own
light, he must delight in every beam of that light; and as he highly
values his own excellency, he must be well pleased in having it
manifested, and so glorified. Another emanation of divine
fulness, is the communication of virtue and holiness to the creature:
this is a communication of God’s holiness; so that hereby the creature
partakes of God’s own moral excellency; which is properly the beauty of
the divine nature. And as God delights in his own beauty, he must
necessarily delight in the creature’s holiness; which is a conformity to
and participation of it, as truly as a brightness of a jewel, held in
the sun’s beams, is a participation or derivation of the sun’s
brightness, though immensely less in degree. And then it must be
considered wherein this holiness in the creature consists, viz. in love,
which is the comprehension of all true virtue; and primarily in love to
God, which is exercised in a high esteem of God, admiration of his
perfections, complacency in them, and praise of them. All which things
are nothing else but the heart exalting, magnifying, or glorifying God;
which, as I showed before, God necessarily approves of, and is pleased
with, as he loves himself, and values the glory of his own nature. Another
part of God’s fulness which he communicates, is his happiness. This
happiness consists in enjoying and rejoicing in himself; and so does
also the creature’s happiness. It is a participation of what is in God;
and God and his glory are the objective ground of it. The happiness of
the creature consists in rejoicing in God; by which also God is
magnified and exalted. Joy, or the exulting of the heart in God’s glory,
is one thing that belongs to praise. So that God is all in all, with
respect to each part of that communication of the divine fulness which
is made to the creature. What is communicated is divine, or something of
God; and each communication is of that nature, that the creature to
whom it is made, is thereby conformed to God, and united to him: and
that in proportion as the communication is greater or less. And the
communication itself is no other, in the very nature of it, than that
wherein the very honour, exaltation, and praise of God consists.
| 6241
|
Forums / Main Forum / Re: Scandalous Freedom and Church Discpline
|
on: June 17, 2008, 04:53:30 PM
|
Our great Shepherd is concerned with our
spiritual fever before anything else. He is always encouraging us by
forgiving our sins, speaking in behalf of us even tho we are incomplete
in our character, and comforting us by not exposing our weaknesses and
painful places. Cause He is busy changing us by our sinning and being
forgiven. So that the expression of His love is by the unity of the body
in experiencing that sovereign grace and then extending that grace
toward one another. So most of us commit a sin and then confess the same
sin and commit that sin again and confess again. But then when we are
in public we act as if sin is the great burden to be overcome and we are
Gods agents in helping others get past their sins. We love to measure
sins. The really bad sins are more heinous than the little ones we
commit. So there is a real problem with how we measure ourselves and how
we measure others. The truth is most of the people in church do not
want their sins exposed and all of the people in church are very
familiar with bad sins or sins in their families that are bad and then
they put on a face at church. Love would not be practiced if we
did not treat people the way we would want to be treated in regards to
our sins. From our very young Christian lives we struggled with
condemnation more than we realized that we were sinners. The devil uses
the law to condemn us and we learn that we are not able to fight cause
everyone seems to have the same attitude about their lack of
forgiveness. Cause when God comes to us with forgiveness then we
encouraged by the Holy Spirit and we should live in that encouragement
more than we live in the law. So its easy to change grace by being
unfamiliar with the Spirits work on our hearts. Satan attacks us at the
point of sin and we are not aware that Christ forgiveness is greater by
the Spirits fruit in us. We can live in a society where grace
is only an intellectual concept, but its never understood in an en
grafted way. Christ speaks to us through His word by the power of the
Spirit to convince us that we are loved as sinners. So here we are
terribly unable to hear that strong consolation cause we are living in a
world were people are convinced that sin is all exterior and the law is
some principles to keep ourselves in check. So instead of finding our
rest in Christ we look to all these other places. And really, He must
subdue our stubborn hearts by His love before He can convince us of His
forgiveness. So we have grace upon grace cause we are slow to respond.
Over
the past couple of days my mind has been mulling over something that
I've heard from different preachers and authors before about what is
deemed the "fruit" in a believer's life.
There is one facet of
our Christian walk which we tend to overlook; namely, we know that we
are "new creatures in Christ" but I am convinced that sometimes we get
so focused on what has changed, that we lose sight of what has been left
unchanged. Each of us (either by birth or nurture - the debate
rages-on), have certain distinct personality and character traits that
do not fundamentally change when we come to know the Lord. To be sure,
these traits are in the process of being redeemed for His use (along
with the rest of ourselves), but they remain principally the same.
For
example: you have some people who are real go-getters. They have a
natural high-level of energy and put a premium on getting the job done
and getting it done now.They are good at meeting deadlines and
always set very high goals for themselves. They are, in fact, what would
typically be called a "type-A" personality. They tend to be very
forward - even to the point of being abrupt. They are not in the
least-bit shy in social situations and seem to have a comfort zone that
includes all outdoors.
On the other hand, there are those people
who never (except, perhaps when they are young children), have a
high-level of energy; they tend to procrastinate and put things of until
the last minute (or close to it). They tend to be withdrawn, shy,
sensitive (even overly-so) and are generally what are known as
"easy-going" or "type-B" personalities. They do in fact, have dreams and
goals, but tend to reach those in a more in-direct route than a type-A
person would. Sometimes they are even frustrated by their own seeming
inability to meet some of their own goals.
Now, the practical up-shot of all this is: these are the facets of our personality which the Lord (as I stated) redeems
- but leaves fundamentally unchanged. What do I mean? They type-A
person, in the natural, will be using his own natural-given prowess to
"make a name" for him or herself, and will usually not care if he or she
has to treat other people like they are speed-bumps to do so. In the
natural the type-A has a tendency to be arrogant and pushy.
"Sensitivity" is not the hallmark of the type-A personality; meeting
goals and deadlines is. He or she is always looking to get one-up and
one-over somebody else.
When such a person finally comes to the
point where the Lord convicts him or her of his or her sins, and they in
turn give their lives to the Lord, God leaves this personality-trait
(which He gave them) in place; it remains fundamentally unchanged. What
He does instead, is begin to (by His Spirit) temper the crude-matter of
this personality into something which He can and will use for His
purposes and glory. Such a person - with their redeemed personality - is
usually very good at organizing and running ministries. Their natural
sense of logistics lets them do things like bring church members
together for important issues such as funding for missions or homeless
shelters. They are usually very dynamic and charismatic leaders within
the body of Christ.
On the opposite tack: the type-B person, in
the natural, tends towards the slothful; putting things off and letting
responsibility slough-off on others. While they do tend to be the
sensitive and artistic types, this is offset with a certain form of
self-centeredness which other people had "just better understand" or
else risk getting shunned or even abused by this person. While their
sensitivity does allow them to be good friends and great listeners, it
also means that they have a tendency to be easily hurt and misconstrue
comments or remarks which were not intended to put them down.
When
God get ahold of this person and saves him or her, he begins to
likewise refine his or her personality into something He will use to His
glory. These types of people are often the "encouragers" in the church.
They are often involved in ministries of helps can be seen within the
body building other believers up in their faiths. Their artistic
impulses are harnassed to do things like write music and poetry for the
Lord. They are often very good speakers who carry messages which help
those who are hurting and confused. They have a very high capacity for
empathy in understanding what another person is going through.
Now, how this get tied-into what we've been discussing is like this: We have a tendency in our culture to equate worth with output and performance.
We see someone who appears to be on top of things and are just meeting
one goal after another and have the veritble "Midas touch" concerning
everything they put their hands to, and our first impulse is to think
that he or she is also somehow superior in quality or worth as a human
being. On the other hand, a person who seems to have very little in the
way motivation or energy, and is always putting things off - or at least
has a seems to have a hard time finishing things is automatically
labeled as "bad" or of inferior worth.
Now, until something
happens to upset our little applecart of natural assumptions (such as
the go-getter being indicted for embezzlement or the seemingly lazy
person coming out with some award-winning poetry or beautiful painting),
we will go on carrying these assumptions right into our Christianity
and church culture without ever missing a beat.
It will still be
our tendency to assume that the person who is "doing a lot within the
church" is displaying all kinds of spiritual fruit and therefore must be
very "surrendered to the Lord," when in reality, he or she is just
doing what always came naturally to him or her. In the same sense we
will assume that a person who is not "producing a lot of fruit" (that we
can see) is someone who is just being obstinate and is resisting God's
Spirit, when in reality, they are no less (or more) resistant to God's
Spirit than the "type-A" person; it is just that their "fruit" in not of
the variety that is immediately discernable.
These tendencies
which we have to discern everything in the natural is something that we
do not shake overnight as a believer in Christ. It takes time and a LOT
of grace for us to learn that type-A might be every bit as "ungodly" in
his of her zeal as type-B might be "godly" in his or her inactivity.
This is why I am convinced that the only time we are called to judge
another believer is when he or she is engaged in outright, flagarant and
unrepentant sin and at no other time! We simply do not know that what we are seeing in another believer's life is something which God desires in them or not.
As to the very first question, I take it last: God's grace enables His people to freely please and obey Him only after they know they are free and that God is already pleased with them!
Anything else is to get me focused on either my performance or yours.
And since I do not know what type of personality you were graced with I
might make the mistaken assumption that you are sinning when in fact you
are being pleasing to God (and vice-versa).
These are never
easy calls; therefore I believe scripture calls us to refrain (for the
most part) from making those calls and simply focusing on Christ. When
we do that, we will begin to be able to more clearly as to what is right
and wrong in others and ourselves - and then meet those things with the
grace by which we have been met.
This is so terribly
complicated. But growth is from the view of the spiritual application of
the gospel to the soul of a man, which literally changes his natural
view of himself to a supernatural view. A man is as mature as he is.
Thats why these things about a spiritual man are not from what he
demands but from what he is in the presence of other men. Nor is it
necessarily his outward behavior before other men. These natural
personalities are a distinctly self motivated world view. And there is
this gospel grace that cannot be in grafted in an intellectual way. This
paradigm of being first in gospel convictions is what marks a mature
man. So that his natural thinking in how he views himself is settled in
that supernatural paradigm. Here there is this in grafting of
the word that brings about a view of the world of self, contained in a
vacuum of eternal fellowship with the Father, through the Son, by the
Holy Spirit. In this application of these doctrinal realities , a man
grows from a head knowledge to a heart understanding of the
dispositional paradigms of all those people that he encounters. So that
the spiritual awareness is not a moral rectitude , but a shepherd
compassion. As a Shepherd then all of the determinations of workings
with the sheep are from these settled gospel dispositions. |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment