Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Tearing down walls > A Lamb who Spoke like a Dragon: God &Homosexuality

Forum Quick Jump

43 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 1/22/2002 1:33 PM (GMT -6)

Semeia, the fact that you are presently discussing a topic that is higly emotional for you should not mean that Jewgrass cannot quote the Bible verse he did without you placing conditions in his way. (Taht was a sure sign for me about how emotional this is for you!) You placed another sin besides it, and effectually said "double or nothing."

He quoted: "Should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? ... Just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives"(Rom 6:1-2,4b). Because of Christ, we don't have to continue in sin. Instead, "when you are tempted, God will show you a way out so that you will not give in to it [sin]" (1 Cor 10:13).

What we really, really, really, really need to do is get that verse down pat, and then let it apply to EVERY sinful thing.

In the early church the catacumate process was really, really long. Good reason. The "death" they were baptized into really, really, really could mean quick physical death, or at least permanent social death.

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 1/22/2002 7:43 PM (GMT -6)

Jewgrass said:

Third, homosexuality is addressed in the Bible far more than remarriage.

Semeia:

How do you figure? Jesus said remarriage in most cases is adultery.Thou shalt not commit adultery is one of the Ten Commandments, and is spoken of far more frequently than homosexuality.

Jewgrass said:

Divorce, like homosexuality, is an awful, ungodly thing that should be resisted. The question is, should living in remarriage be seen as a continual sin like homosexuality, or should the divorce be seen as a forgivable yet irrevocable act like murder?

Semeia:

Jesus said that in most cases divorce and remarriage is adultery. Adultery is about sex. It is completely illogical to say that a person who remarries only commits adultery once, the first time they have sex, and every time they have sex after that they are no longer committing adultery. When someone has an affair, they are not committing adultery only the first time they have sex, but every time they have sex. If you are going to take Jesus at his word, that remarriage is adultery, then you also must agree that remarried people by definition are living in sin. Jesus also said that if you even have lust in your heart you are committing adultery.

Jewgrass said:

Remarriage is not as black & white of a subject as homosexuality.

Semeia:

Jesus was crystal clear: in most situations remarriage is adultery - living in sin - breaking one of the Ten Commandments again and again - and yet in his wisdom and love and forgiveness he still allows people to move forward, even in the midst of sin, and he does not forbid it.

And yet neither subject is black and white. Few are.

Jewgrass said:

I do not believe we should accept remarried leaders in our church because the questions regarding the issue are so abstract. Divorce, like homosexuality, is an awful, ungodly thing that should be resisted.

Semeia:

Twenty years ago that's exactly how it was in most churches. But people changed and developed compassion. Personally, I find it impossible to hold other people to a higher standard than I hold myself, and when I read the Sermon on the Mount I see over and over how I am guilty, guilty, guilty. I just can't get that darn log out of my own eye, to judge someone else. And yet I'm not gay, and I'm not divorced, so no one would keep me out of church leadership. And yet I'm just as sinful as the divorced person, or the homosexual person. That strikes me as unfair, and hypocritical. I truly don't understand how people who are themselves full of sin (by virtue of being a human being, with angry thoughts and careless thoughts and lustful thoughts--not to mention the words and actions that frequently go along with those thoughts) have no problem at all telling other people how they need to lead their lives differently.

Writerdad said:

how one treats one sin as opposed to another is irrelevant as to whether or not the act itself is a sin.

Semeia:

I have never argued anywhere that homosexuality is not a sin.

Writerdad said:

If someone were to read your posts here or in other places, one might get the impression that you view divorce differently than other sins, considering how much you bring it up.

Semeia:

One could only get that impression if they willfully ignored the point that I make over and over again: that we are all full of sin; that Jesus Christ makes it clear in the Sermon on the Mount that we are all guilty of serious sin; and that we are simply hypocritical in how we apply our judgments to other people's sinfulness: as in the Log and the Speck.

Writerdad:

I would be interested in seeing how you would make a case that affirms homosexuality from the scriptures.

Semeia:

I am not here to "affirm" sinfulness of any stripe. I am here to affirm treating people with compassion and justice. Homosexuality is not a crime, any more than remarriage or lust in your heart or gluttony are crimes. But they are all ongoing sins that people suffer from. My point is, and always has been, that we are totally hypocritical in the different stances we take on these things. The church allows overweight pastors and remarried pastors and arrogant pastors and envious pastors, and it should, but homosexual pastors would never be allowed. I find that hypocritical and disturbing. I have yet to meet someone who is not living in sin. What I mean by that is that we all sin constantly in ways that Jesus unequivocally says are VERY serious. And even though we are aware that we have these serious sins, we feel ok about treating other people's sin differently from our own. How is that any different from what the Pharisees did?

My main message has been that we are all sinners, and God asks us not to judge our brother, but to love our brother. I know a lot of gay people, I know a lot of divorced people, I know a lot of overweight people, I know a lot of angry and lustful and careless and greedy and proud and envious and impatient and bossy and uptight and relaxed and silly and funny and strange and insensitive and oversensitive and friendly and alienated and smart and not so smart people. And they are all pretty sinful and broken and human. And God asks us to love every last one, including ourselves.

So, what are the objections to this:

One. But, Semeia, aren’t we supposed to love the sinner but hate the sin?

Yes! You should absolutely hate the sin that is happening to someone because it is hurting them. Just as you should hate the fact that someone is born blind or that someone has lost a loved one. You should hate what sin does to a person. You should NOT hate their sin. To do this is to judge them. To condemn them for doing things they ought not to do. It is to hate them. Again, this is what the Pharisees did and it is why Jesus came down so hard on them. And notice what it led to: they could look at Jesus in no other way than to determine if he was good or bad.

Two. But, Semeia, what about the murderer? Are you saying we shouldn’t hate their sin?

We should certainly stop them from murdering, because that is a crime against an innocent victim. But on the cross Jesus said about his murderers, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” His concern even as he was being killed was for the person, how their sinful action was hurting them. And he himself was taking action, and that action was to seek forgiveness for them.

Three. But, Semeia, doesn’t Paul tell us that we should judge someone for being homosexual?

No! This is a total misunderstanding of what Paul is saying. Why is this so confusing to people? Jesus says Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged. Paul says we should judge those within the church. Who is right? Both are right! But NOT because Jesus forgot to mention that it is OK to judge people within the church. They are both right because they are speaking about two different kinds of judgement! Jesus is talking about the spurious activity of judging that is NOT an action – and this is exactly what we are doing when we judge homosexuals the way we do – just like the Pharisees – it is not helpful action – it is accusation and condemnation – the very name of Satan! Paul is talking about the kind of judgement that is action itself. Action aimed solely at helping our brother to go forward in his brokenness in this life – just like God did when he allowed us to continue to live in this world in our brokenness after the fall. A specific example of this is God allowing us a “writ of divorce” because of the hardness of our hearts when it clearly was not his intent and is, in fact, sin. So, what specifically is Paul talking about with this judgement of those in the church. He is talking about helping each other. If your brother is a raging alcoholic, has lost his job and is about to lose his family, what are you going to do??? Are you going to do nothing because you can’t judge him – each to his own??? That would be cruel both to your brother and to his family. And this is exactly the sort of thing that was going on in Corinth and is exactly what Paul is getting at. The specific case was a person sleeping with his stepmother. This is family destroying and therefore community destroying behavior. It must be stopped. It requires a stopping action. Now, does this mean that it is OK to judge this person in the sense of condemning him? Absolutely not! To judge / condemn this person – to feel disgust at their sin (thank God that I am not like that!) is exactly what Jesus is talking about when he says Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged. To condemn another for their sin is, in fact, to condemn yourself for your sin. Paul says this as clear as day in Romans exactly like Jesus says it. So, why is this so confusing???

I apologize for coming across so intensely. I am frustrated by my inability to communicate this clearly.

PoW said:

He quoted: "Should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? ... Just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives"(Rom 6:1-2,4b). Because of Christ, we don't have to continue in sin. Instead, "when you are tempted, God will show you a way out so that you will not give in to it [sin]" (1 Cor 10:13).

What we really, really, really, really need to do is get that verse down pat, and then let it apply to EVERY sinful thing.

Semeia:

Doc brought this up in one of his recent sermons. He showed clearly that we are never to judge one another. He then showed how this powerful message of Jesus’ and Paul led to the fallacious belief of: each to his own, anything goes! He also showed how Paul doesn’t come back at them and change the doctrine by adding all sorts of new detailed laws – as though we can be saved by the law and judging people according to it! Paul comes back and refocuses them on their identity in Christ. When we focus first ourselves and then each other on our identity in Christ – then – and only then – do we allow the new law to start taking effect and transforming us. To judge someone like the Pharisees did – to accuse and condemn - is to “pile on a hefty burden while not lifting a single finger to help” (paraphrase).

Doc – did I get that right?

Jewgrass said:

Rejecting homosexuality as sin does not mean that you hate homosexuals. Honestly: homosexuality disgusts me. If I was in a locker room with guys that I knew were gay, I would be highly uncomfortable... just like a woman would be uncomfortable getting changed in a locker room full of guys. I detest the sin and it disgusts me... but that doesn't mean I hate homosexuals.

Semeia:

I would submit that you would be highly uncomfortable because of two combined issues. One which you say here and one which you do not. The one you mention is really an issue of lust. Your suggestion is that you would perceive that they are lusting after you just as a woman would feel that a locker room full of guys is lusting after her. To lust after someone means that you don’t care about them as a person you just want to use their body for your own purposes. This is why lust is such a serious sin that Jesus talks about it on the Sermon on the Mount. It is a sin that separates us. But this is lust. It is not homosexuality. Most men are not homosexual and yet they lust after women. Most men don’t understand what it means to be “lusted” after except in the context of homosexuality and I would submit that this is one reason people are so judgemental about it: it concretely shows them the evil effects of lust.

I would also submit that another reason why homosexuality disgusts you is that you are not homosexual. For you to associate into the thought of gay sex triggers biological injunctions in your brain that you interpret as disgust. This is how you are wired. It is no different than to try and eat feces. Your olfactory senses trigger a biological injunction that you interpret as disgust. Now imagine that you are gay and you are wired the other way. Imagine that you feel the exact same disgust at the thought of straight sex.

Now, I am not reiterating the fact that gay people were born that way in order to say that it is not sinful. What I am trying to say is that humans are fundamentally wired to judge the things that disgust us as being bad, sinful, evil. I would submit that this is a part of the ultimate sinfulness of our fallen nature – we accuse and condemn ourselves, each other and God. That this is the really tough problem for us to overcome.

Jewgrass said:

If I see a gay guy, I don't get mad and want to spit on this "demon from hell." Rather, I feel sorry for this person imprisoned to their sinful nature.

There are three options, not two:

Hating homosexuals
Accepting homosexuals

Or the third, which is a combination of the two:

Loving homosexuals as fellow sinners, but detesting their sin.

This third option is the one that I believe you tend to ignore, Semeia, but I believe it is the stance we should take.

Semeia:

Disagree. There are only two options. The third option is either the first or the second depending on what is really meant. We are either for someone or against someone. When you say “detesting their sin” and we should take a “stance” against their sin I have a really hard time hearing how it is that you are not judging them for not overcoming their sin as though you have overcome your sin. Please correct me if I am hearing it wrong but I hear you saying that their sin is fundamentally different from your sin. I hear you saying that while yes you might have a speck in your eye, they have a log in theirs.

If you hear me judging you for judging another person then I am saying this wrong. I apologise if you feel attacked – that is not my intent.

When you say that you “feel sorry for this person imprisoned to their sinful nature” do you at the same time feel sorry for yourself imprisoned to your sinful nature in the exact same way? Now, if you said that you feel sorry for this person imprisoned to their sinful nature and went on to say that you felt sorry that because they were born that way they will never feel accepted by society, that they will never get to participate fully in our society, in our churches, in our schools, in the workplace and in our family life – then I would understand what you meant.

If you said, “Loving homosexuals as fellow sinners, but detesting their sin” in the exact same way I detest my recurring lustful thoughts, my recurring angry words, my recurring prideful notions, my recurring insensitivity, my recurring oversensitivity, my recurring careless thoughts and deeds – then I would understand what you meant.

If you said that we should take a “stance” on this issue by figuring out the most life-affirming path, the most loving actions and policies to prevent this sin from causing so much evil toward gay people – then I would understand what you meant.

Jewgrass said:

I hope it doesn't sound like I'm contantly attacking you, Semeia, but your the only outspoken supporter of this view on the board that I'm aware of.

Semeia:

I don’t feel like you are attacking me. I very much appreciate your willingness to engage with me on this topic. I am frustrated by my inability to communicate this clearly.

Let me try to be succinct:

One. We should never judge another. We should never condemn another. We are all sinners. To judge another is to judge ourselves. We all continue to live in sin. We all have lust in our hearts and we all say “racca” to our brother from time to time. Our righteousness is as filthy rags. We no longer live and are judged under the law. In him there is no condemnation. Although we are slaves to sin – enduring sin - at the same time – in Him – we are slaves to righteousness. There is a new law at work within us.

Two. We should seek to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect. The focus when it comes to sin is on ourselves. We have the Log – our brother only has a Speck. To forget this is to fall back into our sinful essence – we become a Pharisee – a judger. Jesus really hammered the Pharisees.

Three. We should judge those in Christ. Judgement in Christ takes on a whole new meaning. It is now always a loving action – never condemnation – In him there is now no condemnation – Him to us – us to each other.

Never condemn another person. Always seek the most loving, helpful action in any concrete situation.

Jewgrass – you are quite right to point out on this thread that picketing, sloganing and general condemnation are not loving and helpful actions in the particular concrete situation that you experienced. I couldn’t agree more.

It is also not loving and helpful to reject homosexuals from our churches or our church leadership as if their sinfulness is somehow worse than our own.

Thanks,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 1/23/2002 6:42 AM (GMT -6)

Semeia: I am glad to see that you believe homosexuality is a sin. There is, therefore, nothing left to discuss, except this fact. You seem to feel that telling people that what they are doing is a sin is judging them and, in doing that, one cannot have compassion on another person, because anytime one says that another is sinning, one is always sitting in judgment of that other person. In such a case, one could not tell your child to not walk into a crowded street, because they would be wrong and where is the compassion in that?
I would not question your theology, I would question the churches you have been associated with. It seems you have a view that any Christian who tells a person what they are doing is wrong is sitting in judgment of them and therefore has no compassion in them whatsoever. Your views seem to come more from your experiences of the wrong churches then the gospel. It also seems that, since you cannot distinguish between the sinner and the sin in identity, you dismiss Jewgrass for doing such a thing. But just because you cannot do such a thing, does not mean another cannot.
Are you seriously trying to say a person cannot hate the drug abuse of an addict, and not love the person who is an addict? I find that view, to be honest, foolish. There are many things my children do that bother me, that I don't like, yet I love them. In fact, I would say your view keeps a person from loving anyone. No one loves anyone fully and there are always parts of a person that one cannot stand. That we hate. As such, the only way to love is to do as Jewgrass called the "Third option." God calls us to love one another. God calls us to lovingly proclaim the gospel in all its ways, both negative and positive. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees. He told them what they were doing was wrong. Compassion compels a person to do the hard act, take the hard road of telling a person when they are on a self destructive path. How will a person know about the evil in their midst unless we tell them? From my view, your view is the opposite of compassiion. It is allowing a person to live in ignorance that somehow life is okay, that God loves me regardless of what I do. Compassion and complacey do not go hand in hand. The ultimate compassion any individual can have for another is to be totally truthful with them. And that, many times, includes telling them that what they are doing is wrong. If that is sitting in judgment of them, I have no problem with that. But it is the judgment of God, not man. A person can compassion on another in that instance. That, in fact, is the ultimate in compassion. Telling the truth in love.
But I won't go on, because we have discussed these issues and redundancy is like deja vu. Harold

might-be-don
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830

Posted 1/23/2002 7:57 AM (GMT -6)

Semeia says:

quote:
Three. We should judge those in Christ. Judgement in Christ takes on a whole new meaning. It is now always a loving action – never condemnation – In him there is now no condemnation – Him to us – us to each other.

Never condemn another person. Always seek the most loving, helpful action in any concrete situation.

Writerdad says:

quote:
He told them what they were doing was wrong. Compassion compels a person to do the hard act, take the hard road of telling a person when they are on a self destructive path. How will a person know about the evil in their midst unless we tell them?

I must be missing something, Writerdad and Semeia seem to be saying the same thing here about dealing with the person, yet Writerdad concludes:

quote:
From my view, your view is the opposite of compassiion. It is allowing a person to live in ignorance that somehow life is okay, that God loves me regardless of what I do.

Again, am I missing something?

peace and love, don

A quote from Rev. Gregory A. Boyd, PhD ... " Has anyone seen my keys? "

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 1/23/2002 8:39 AM (GMT -6)

Might: I think (from my view) that Semeia feels that "judgment" at least from the church means condemnation. I would simply suggest telling a person of their sin IS the most loving action. If, as Semeia, says, we act to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect, I would suggest looking at how the Father dealt with sin. He judges it, told us he would judge it, continuely begged us to stop doing it and, ultimately showed compassion on us by sending his son. But the Father was never shy about telling us that we were sinners. And we should never be either, as the Father did, with love and compassion. Harold

fr.patmos
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 45

Posted 1/23/2002 5:52 PM (GMT -6)

Jesus judges the world wrong concerning
the prevailing views of sin and righteousness and judgement (Jn. 16:8).
And he teaches (i.e. calls for) what is the true righteousness of God: i.e. to believe that Jesus Christ solely and completely represents God; and then (in this Light) to love each other as Christ has loved us.

Sin is NOT a moral problem with spiritual consequences (Jesus teaches). Sin is a spiritual condition with moral
(and other) symptoms. Sin 'with good manners' is PUTRIFICATION - i.e. is as true and living as a white-washed tomb.

and so all our energies and machinations
and speculations, here, are over ...?

... All of this can, at last, only be over how it is that Grace would encompass and claim the chief of sinners (e.g. you, & Saul of Tarsus, & me).

As that Gospel Truth becomes a compass for your life, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; whether your starting place is as a homosexual, or behavioral addict of any sort; or as a religious-rage-a-holic, or a misogynist, or a hierarchical domination champion (even you hearty bigots who continue to thrive!) ... or whether you are simply a garden variety wretch caught in this world's web of despair.

The yet-to-be indicted sin within the
'relatively more righteous', is steadily
strangling life all around itself:
those who (are "relative-sinners, making progress!?!"; who AT LEAST! are not homosexuals!!!) are quenching the wick of the dimly burning ember, etc.

But - do not despair!: there rings, somewhere, this voice - "God, have mercy on me, a sinful man!!!"

And it gives permission and invitation for
wretches like us to meet - and find Life -
at the foot of the Cross.

p.s. the evangelical church which preaches 'against sin' - but, in fact, preaches against 'others' - is passing away.
So there is this vacancy and wait upon the church which would take up its cross and follow Jesus ...

fr.patmos
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 45

Posted 1/23/2002 5:53 PM (GMT -6)

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 1/23/2002 6:28 PM (GMT -6)

God bless you fr. Patmos...

My deepest thanks,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

Iconoclast
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1227

Posted 1/23/2002 7:23 PM (GMT -6)

fr. patmos - WOW - well said! Preach it! Now THAT is the gospel!

I especially liked:

>>>>
But - do not despair!: there rings, somewhere, this voice - "God, have mercy on me, a sinful man!!!"
<<<<

That is inspiring. Yes, I know that voice. And when I follow it I feel connected directly ... to Him.

thanks!
Iconoclast

"being weird is rarely a total waste of time" - Greg Boyd

Edited by - Iconoclast on 01/24/2002 12:30:33 AM

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 1/23/2002 7:28 PM (GMT -6)

fr. Patmos, If you don't mind, I'm going to use this post as my prayer. I'm going to memorize it. It makes me cry and it gives me hope all at the same time.

Thank you,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 1/24/2002 12:58 AM (GMT -6)

Jewgrass
Registered Member

Date Joined Sep 2001
Total Posts : 113

Posted 1/24/2002 3:17 AM (GMT -6)

Great post, Patmos. I may have disagreed with you on the PS, but I'm not quite sure. You said:

quote:
p.s. the evangelical church which preaches 'against sin' - but, in fact, preaches against 'others' - is passing away.
So there is this vacancy and wait upon the church which would take up its cross and follow Jesus ...

Now, I agree, that churches that go out and preach against sin are in the wrong. I'm from a rather small town called Texarkana and when strip joint opened up a few years ago called Baby Dolls, all of the local Bible-bashers went there with cameras filming people and asking them if their wives would approve. Is this the type of thing your speaking of, because if it is, then we completely agree. Now, if these people would go there in love to spread the gospel with boldness in evangelism, that would be a different story. Although the actions of these people aren't quite as disgusting, they are along the same lines of the "God Hates Fags" group.

But, we should fight sin within the church. We are commanded to put on spiritual armor (Ephesians 6:10-18) and fight sin. Homosexuals in the church need to repent and fight their sin. Adulterers in the church need to repent and fight their sin. Drunkards need to repent and fight their sin. Gossips need to repent and fight their sin. Every single member of the church needs to repent and fight their sin. As for the person who refuses to repent, the church should "remove this wicked person from among you so that you can stay pure" (1 Cor 5:6).

The point of all my posts is this: a homosexual is just another person enslaved to the bondage of their sinful nature. But when Christ regenerates them and saves them from this wretched world, they have no excuse for merrily continuing in their sin. Instead, they should recognize, and, with the power of the Holy Spirit, fight their sin. Their sin, be it lying or their sexual tendancies, may not have been undefeatable on their own, but with the power of Christ, all sin is conquerable.

--Jewgrass

"Anyone who claims to know all the answers doesn't really know very much." --1 Corinthians 8:2 (New Living Translation)

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 1/24/2002 10:47 AM (GMT -6)

fr. Patmos: I would praise you to, if the several ideas you were espousing were connected. Alas, but the jumble of pauses and ... and arbitary paragraphing

...left me...

confused and wondering about

point

or was that counterpoint. The stuff of
genius and spiritual maturity? Perhaps. Me? I simply found it a jumble. But perhaps that was the maturity I was miss

ing. H
a
r
o
l
d

"Oh, tartar sauce." SpongeBob Squarepants

fr.patmos
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 45

Posted 1/24/2002 12:22 PM (GMT -6)

writerdad

Not all the spacing is intended.
I don't mean to be awkward or obtuse.
I'm sorry if the last post came off
as jumble to you ... I believe I
hear you loud and clear.

jewgrass

Having thought about your comment re. the p.s. (above), I would retract 'evangelical' from it, because it is a good word, and can, in that context, be taken in unintended ways. Does that help?

Edited by - fr.patmos on 01/24/2002 5:33:31 PM

lil skeptik
Registered Member

Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 7

Posted 2/15/2002 11:08 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
The point of all my posts is this: a homosexual is just another person enslaved to the bondage of their sinful nature. But when Christ regenerates them and saves them from this wretched world, they have no excuse for merrily continuing in their sin. Instead, they should recognize, and, with the power of the Holy Spirit, fight their sin. Their sin, be it lying or their sexual tendancies, may not have been undefeatable on their own, but with the power of Christ, all sin is conquerable.

So salvation is something that takes place once in a person's life? Is that what you are saying? As if yesterday I was gay and on heroine, yet, today, I am a "born-again" Christian and now must fight to be sinless. Hmmm? That doesn't sound like what Christ accomplished on the cross.

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/15/2002 11:57 AM (GMT -6)

lil skeptik, you seemed to contradict yourself. But, at least, you confused me.

Lets see if I am thinking straight myself. You seemed to have equated -- by saying "as if" -- "salvation is something that takes place once in a person's life" with "now must fight to be sinless." I'd have thought that the former would make the later unnecessary.

But let me presume that when I vote to underline the ongoing nature of salvation that I am agreeing with you instead of dis... OK?

But we must agree that Christ accomplished on the cross. Anyting ongoing, then, is with us.

But then why do you disagree with what you quoted where it says: "no excuse for . . . continuing . . . should . . . with the power of the Holy Spirit, fight their sin. Their sin . . . may not have been undefeatable on their own, but with the power of Christ, all sin is conquerable."

That seemed to me to be Gospel, and hopeful. (Did it help you when I edited out the word "merrily" from "merrily continuing"?)

Here is a quote from an article about the use of the Gospel of John in the early church. it also treats the reality of: "Where it does begin its process is generally gradual as is evident in the tardy way..."

I hope you find it interesting.

quote:
An examination of the Biblical sources reveals the fact that underlying the New Testament is the catechetical principle that one is able to discern the will and acts of God only according to the measure and degree in which he has been liberated from demonic influences and by spiritual exercise learns to distinguish between divine and satanic energies. This liberation is accomplished in Christ by the power of the Spirit but its effect on man is not automatic. Where it does begin its process is generally gradual as is evident in the tardy way in which the Apostles came to a full understanding of the way the kingdom of God had come upon them. Failure to understand and partake of the mysteries of the kingdom is attributed to continuance in the ways of Satan (e.g., Mtth. 13, 1-23; Mk. 4, 1-20; Lk. 8, 4-15; II Cor. 4, 3-4).

Before a person was admitted to baptism, he had to be instructed in the old Testament revelations of the divine activities as well as in the ways of satan. Otherwise, he would continue being blinded by the devil and would be in danger of confounding divine and satanic activities as happened in the case of the Jews who went so far as to say that Jesus cast out demons by the power of Belzebub (Mtth. 12, 22-37; Mk. 3, 22-30; Lk. 11, 14-23). This is the blasphemy against the Spirit which cannot be forgiven. Those who are not able to recognize the energies of God are those who by hearing hear but do not understand and seeing see but do not discern (Is. 6, 9; Mtth. 13, 14; Mk. 4,12; Lk. 8, 10; John 12, 40; Acts 28, 26 ff.). The fourth gospel is a continuous play on the divinity of Christ as witnessed to by the divine activities which He shares in common with the Father and the Spirit and which are eventually understood by those who are defeating the devil but continuously misunderstood by those blinded by the prince of darkness. The fourth gospel is understood only by those who have been previously exercised in the discernment of the saving and sanctifying acts of God in both the Old Testament and Synoptic tradition, apart from whose soteriological presuppositions it is totally meaningless.

The central idea of the Synoptic tradition is the proclamation that because Christ by the Spirit is casting out demons, the kingdom of God is at hand (Mtth. 12, 28; Lk. 11, 20). A basic link between the Synoptic and Johannine traditions is the event of the Transfiguration of Christ. "Amen I say unto you, There are some of them that stand here who shall not taste of death till they see the kingdom [or rule] of God come in power."

from JUSTIN MARTYR AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL
http://www.romanity.org/htm/rom.22.en.justin_martyr_and_the_fourth_gospel.01.htm

lil skeptik
Registered Member

Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 7

Posted 2/15/2002 12:26 PM (GMT -6)

To attempt to separate the "event" of "getting saved" and the regeneration which follows is heresy. Does the Bible not instruct us to walk in the same faith by which we were saved. What faith is that? That is pointing at the cross and knowing that what happened there is the only means by which I may become like the one who died there--joining in the fellowship of his sufferings and then knowing the power of the resurrection. To say that, "now that you have said a prayer and are saved, I want you to fight the enemy." is ridiculous. Isn't this what Christ accomplished? Not to leave me to pull myself up by my own bootstraps (with the help of the Spirit of God) but By the Spirit of God. Taking that which was once dead and making it alive is not my job.

Still confused?

Edited by - lil skeptik on 02/15/2002 5:28:10 PM

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/15/2002 1:07 PM (GMT -6)

Confused? Well, maybe so...

You seem to be arguing with (or against) Jewgrass, who said "but with the power of Christ, all sin is conquerable." Yet, you yourself said: "Not to leave me to pull myself up by my own bootstraps"..."joining in the fellowship of his sufferings and then knowing the power of the resurrection"...

Aren't you really agreeing with Jewgrass? (I'm confused!)

But, when he says "Every single member of the church needs to repent and fight their sin." That is different from where you said, "...leave me to pull myself up by my own bootstraps."

Yes, the "fight to be sinless" is a vital part of being in Christ. Is hard. Victory is pleasure for the soul and pain for the body. But it is necessary. And as I've quoted you above, we have "he power of the resurrection.

True, "Taking that which was once dead and making it alive" is Christ's work.

But as one contemporary Greek theologian says:

BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO BE ARGUING WITH SOMEONE WHO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU AGREE WITH I DON'T KNOW WHICH 'SIDE" OF THE ISSUE YOU ARE ON! (That's my confusion.) SO MAYBE YOU WILL AGREE WITH THIS...

It would be cruel, false to say that one can just continue in sin.

I hope that maybe we agee.

43 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:42 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual