|
|
|
|
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/9/2009 3:05:08 PM | Well, I have a bone to pick with the doctrine of original sin, seeing as how it originated with Augustine and not Jesus. In terms of putting things in the positive, could it be that the good news Jesus came to tell us was that we are all worthy of God's love even in our imperfection, that God loves us just the way we are, and that there is no need for anything more than to simply recognize and accept our innate connection to the divine. If regard ourselves as children of God, would we then not naturally want to act accordingly?
I mean, if we see ourselves as hopeless sinners in need of rescue, it certainly is a relief to know that the job is done. But if we see others that way, well, then we get to feel all kinds of superior--and it shows. But if we see ourselves as children of God who were simply misled about the truth of our nature, and others too, what else better could we think of to do than to devote ourselves to the highest and best service that we are capable of to whomever shows up and in whatever apparent condition? If we recognize that those we serve are also children of God, how could we possibly judge them? We'd have to simply accept them as God does, serve them as best we can, and let God take care of the rest.
I think that the whole point of Christ's Passion was to demonstrate once and for all that God's love for us is unconditional. If we fail to accept it, the alienation is hell enough. Is there anything I've said here that contradicts anything Jesus has been quoted as saying? | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/9/2009 4:54:20 PM | "I think that the whole point of Christ's Passion was to demonstrate once and for all that God's love for us is unconditional. "
I like your alternate perspective on God loving what God hath created - us in all our imperctions and tendencies to act of self-will vs God's will. Og Mandino in The World's Greatest Salesman Scroll IV would agree with you in saying "I am nature’s greatest miracle"
Open to an alternative perspective to Christ's Life and Passion? I have had several friends go through up to 4 years of terminal cancer death walks .... some of the most horrendous pains I have ever seen. I would not wish the disease on anyone. Christ's passion was 3 days of less pain than many of today's cancer patients. How about Christ lived for us? Christ went through 33 years of life to role-model and teach us how to live ... Christ's role-modeled life is the way, the truth and the life .... as much as we imperfectly can living as Christ lived. Christ lived for us for 33 years. That always trumped the 3 days of the ending in my book. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 10:26:52 AM | Apparently you haven't been told what pain Christ had to endure from the near death beatings to the brutality of the cross, but it's not about the pain anyway. It's the meaning behind what he did that is so important to undrstand.
He has made it clear from the beginning that the consequence of sin is death. In other words, He is dead serious about sin. Instead of killing everyone who sinned, He allowed for animals to be killed in place of the sinner for a time. Then as promised, Jesus came and drove that point home, but He also provided a better way by becoming the one time sacrifice for all who trust Him to take their place before God. In return, He asks us to learn to live life the way God intended from the beginning. After He died, He rose up into the heavens to be at the right hand of God again where He belongs. In His place, He sent the Holy Spirit to help lead us in His ways and do His work here on earth.
There is no comparison to a cancer patient. There is compassion and help for them, but no comparison. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 11:17:21 AM |
He has made it clear from the beginning that the consequence of sin is death.
I am so glad you said death and not hell! That is a big mis-translation! Sheol is grave, not hell, and those translators, well...
In His place, He sent the Holy Spirit to help lead us in His ways and do His work here on earth.
Which is part of that 'unforgivable sin' I mentioned earlier. I find it amusing that the cancer patient has no comparison to JC, but if that patient says that they don't believe in the HG they are going to the grave (IE no heaven).
I guess all those beatings JC took wasn't enough to cancel out that sin. Coincidentally, that sin is the only one that pretty much says "No thinking allowed!" Also the reason I quit believing in "sin", I mean if a murderer can go to heaven but I can't because I said "I am unsure if the Holy Spirit is real, I need proof." (Which is blasphemy in the truest sense of the word.)
So, because of the way sin is currently defined is "wrong" it was time to question. So my question is, why is a sin like murder or rape greater than questioning the holy spirit? Why can Hitler (Sorry, Godwinning is fun) get into heaven (assuming he apologizes) but I can't, even if I do apologize? What is the point to following the rest of the "rules" if I already broke the rule that says "Too bad, loser"? What is the point about defining "one" sin, when there are others that seem to "not make sense". (If you say it does, please explain how Hitler is allowed into heaven but I am not. Hitler would have gassed Jesus!) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 11:37:42 AM | Oh don't get me wrong. Eternal punishment is part of God's plan. Read the Book of Revelations. Even Jesus spoke of it. He just didn't come at that time to make the final judgment. He came to give everyone a way to not even have to face the final judgment. The final judgment is reserved for the people that don't have their names written in the book of life by living a life of faith and devotion to Jesus with the help of the Holy Spirit. What happens to those people whose names are not written in the book of life at is entirely up to God. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised over what happens on that day. I personally have no clue who deserves eternal punishment other than satan and his cohorts.
I cannot believe that the unpardonable sin is something a person can do one time. I think it is something a person does over a long enough period of time that they are turned over to satan. If you ignore the Holy Spirit long enough, God will eventually remove Him from you. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:14:02 PM | Such a great debate! I was worried my questions would be taken the "wrong way".
I am under the impression that "eternal punishment" was being separated from Yahweh. Well 100% separated anyways, that would mean right now I have at most a 99.9% separation from Yahweh. That last .1% is what is supposed to cause the gnashing of teeth etc. This is all based on what I have gleaned through reading the KJV 2x's and NIT 1x + a ton of other research/question asking.
I also have some issues with the 'validity' of the NT, I mean it was written at least 70+ years after JC (If he was real). In my 10 years of hunting I have yet to find an eye witness account of the NT events. In fact, best data I have found was that it was written as illiteration/poetry. Holding true to various aspects of "The Hero Pattern" making it, more or less, a fictional story. (This is all speculation, and as of yet no one has been able to discount my stance fully. This is a topic for another thread though.) I do not let my belief on the NT dictate my position. Just because the book may be wrong, doesn't mean that it is lying. Just means I need to be more vigilant, after all it is my supposed "soul" at stake :)
As for the unforgivable sin, JC said it twice "Do not blasphemy the holy spirit, or you go straight to hell. Do not pass GO, do not collect 200 drachmas" He didn't mention a time frame, or any other stipulation just "Don't do it" (Which is pretty hard to 'misunderstand' IMO) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:21:58 PM | Question: "What is the unpardonable sin / unforgivable sin?"
Answer: The case of the “unpardonable sin/unforgivable sin” or “blasphemy of the Holy Spirit” is mentioned in Mark 3:22-30 and Matthew 12:22-32. The term “blasphemy” may be generally defined as “defiant irreverence.” We would apply the term to such sins as cursing God or willfully degrading things relating to Him. It is also attributing some evil to God, or denying Him some good that we should attribute to Him. This case of blasphemy, however, is a specific one called “the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” in Matthew 12:31. In this passage, the Pharisees, having witnessed irrefutable proof that Jesus was working miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit, claimed instead that He was possessed by the demon Beelzebub (Matthew 12:24). In Mark 3:30, Jesus is very specific about what exactly they did to commit “the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.”
This blasphemy then has to do with accusing Jesus Christ (in person, on earth) of being demon-possessed. There are other ways to blaspheme the Holy Spirit (such as lying to Him, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-10), but the accusation against Jesus was the blasphemy that was unpardonable. This specific unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit cannot be duplicated today.
The only unpardonable sin today is that of continued unbelief. There is no pardon for a person who dies in unbelief. John 3:16 tells us, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” The only condition in which someone would have no forgiveness is if he/she is not among the “whoever” that believes in Him. Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). To reject the only means of salvation is to condemn oneself because to reject the only pardon is, obviously, unpardonable.
Many people fear they have committed some sin that God cannot or will not forgive, and they feel there is no hope for them, no matter what they do. Satan would like nothing better than to keep us laboring under this misconception. The truth is that if a person has this fear, he/she needs only to come before God, confess that sin, repent of it, and accept God’s promise of forgiveness. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). This verse assures us that God is ready to forgive any sin—no matter how heinous—if we come to Him in repentance. If you are suffering under a load of guilt today, God is waiting with His arms open in love and compassion for you to come to Him. He will never disappoint or fail to pardon those who do.
The blood of Christ is sufficient for any sin.
taken from GotQuestions.org.. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:34:35 PM |
God has further declared that He will not forgive blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31).
"This reference to an unforgivable sin has troubled many unnecessarily. Those who are concerned that they have done something for which Jesus will not forgive them show a very different attitude from the Pharisees, who refused to accept even the most compelling evidence that Jesus was the Son of God. The person who rejects the Spirit's message about Jesus will not be forgiven. Anyone who seeks Jesus' forgiveness certainly has not committed the unforgivable sin" [Larry Richards, 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Fleming H. Revell, 1993), pp. 241-242.].
" With this exception [the unforgivable sin], there is nothing in the category of human offenses that is beyond the reach of divine forgiveness. 'Although your sins be like scarlet, they shall be white as snow.' is the ancient promise given by God to men; 'though they be like crimson, they shall be as wool' [Isaiah 1:18].
Source: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/unpardonablesin.html
There are going to be a ton of conflicting sources here, it is the Bible. I will say I have not felt the "holy spirit" in over 15 years (If I had ever felt it.) I doubt it exists, I challenged it to prove its existance. I have promoted that it "doesn't exist for me" for at least 5 years now (Doesn't exist for me, that "for me" is KEY)
Regardless, it does not change the argument: "Why is that sin considered greater than murder of a baby?"
Really that is the biggest issue I have with the Bible. I prefer to look at humans as "good", but the Bible says that we are all "bad". That is starting us off on the wrong foot, if you ask me. Then the Bible gives "fast-passes" to salvation, unless you don't believe in the "fast-pass". Then you get an E-Ticket to hell :( | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:38:20 PM | | The date the 4 gospels were written isn't written in stone. They are guestimates because no one has the originals with "date written" on them. The best guestimates are Matthew, Mark and Luke were written before 70AD and John sometime in the 1st cetnury. Both Matthew and John were 2 of the 12 Apostles, so they were eyewitnesses. Mark and Luke were associated with Paul, so they were eyewitnesses to his ministry and the early church, which means close contact with the 12 Apostles. Peter was one of the 12 Apostles and in his writings he confirms what Paul was doing. Deductive reasoning needs to be used. It is a regular part of science. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:52:05 PM |
There are going to be a ton of conflicting sources here, it is the Bible. I will say I have not felt the "holy spirit" in over 15 years (If I had ever felt it.) I doubt it exists, I challenged it to prove its existance. I have promoted that it "doesn't exist for me" for at least 5 years now (Doesn't exist for me, that "for me" is KEY)
The Holy Spirit isn't an "it". He is a person, a being. I don't necessarily "feel" Him. He becomes part of us when we become Christians. He is capable of being felt, but most often isn't. Some people say they feel Him more than others. Who can argue with what another person feels? I will say this though. Feelings can be fickle and they cannot always be trusted either. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 12:56:05 PM |
Both Matthew and John were 2 of the 12 Apostles
May I please have a source to back that? I know I have read that they were not, I am hunting for my source.
They are guestimates because no one has the originals with "date written" on them.
True, but they mention the fall of the temple (70AD)
This is really moot in this topic though. Defining sin:
If a person were to tie a mother down, and murder her child while she watched. Then, asked for true forgiveness and accepted JC as their savior, they would get to go to heaven.
HOWEVER
If I were to bust in on that same scenario, stop the murder and free the mother. Then say "Boy, I can't believe in a Holy Spirit that wouldn't have let JC know this was happening! What a waste!" I would go straight to hell.
(That seems, to me, like a serious error in the definition of sin.)
EDIT (To add:)
The Gospel of Mark was written anonymously, [1] but has been traditionally ascribed to Mark the Evangelist (also known as John Mark), a cousin of Barnabas.[6] There is also evidence that the author of the Gospel of Mark was Peter's scribe. [7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark
(I have better sources, just wanted to give something for now)
Also, I am not trying to make some sort of "Can God make a rock so big he can't lift it." question.
I am asking, why my sin is greater than murder? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 1:00:54 PM | | If all you are trying to do is show some kind of inconsistencies or some type of scenario too difficult for God to figure out, you are wasting your time. The final judgment hasn't occured yet. I will tell you this, though. Paul participated in the murder of Christians before being converted. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 1:09:14 PM |
The traditional view is that the Gospel of Matthew was composed by Matthew, a disciple of Jesus.[2] However, 18th Century scholars increasingly questioned the traditional view of composition, and today most of modern critical scholarship hesitates to say that Matthew wrote this Gospel which bears his name, preferring instead to describe the author as an anonymous Jewish Christian, writing towards the end of the first century. They also believe that the Gospel was originally composed in Greek rather than being a translation from Aramaic or Hebrew.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew
Sorry, just noticed you said Matthew not Mark was one of the apostles and wrote the book. I need proof that it is Matthew's handwriting.
I thought about it, and if you can't even prove who wrote the rules how can you define them? Well I suppose you could define them still, but are they (sin) real? (These are my questions, ones that no one can answer. Even a god, since they never talk, none of them.)
I guess this boils down to persinal preference. Since it is unclear if the sins are real, then the definitions of them should be just as unclear. (Deductive reasoning.) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 1:27:37 PM | | Proof in this type of case is simply the matter of a preponderance of evidence. Scholars obviously don't know any more than you or I who Matthew was. Maybe I need to do a little more research, but for now I'm not concerned because whoever wrote it was clearly either an eyewitness or a fraud. The evidnce is heavily in favor of eyewitness. | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 1:40:41 PM |
"Why is that sin considered greater than murder of a baby?"
GREAT question! If it were possible to commit the unpardonable sin today by blaspheming the Holy Spirit (and I do not believe it is possible) the reason why it would be greater than the murder of a baby is because without the Holy Spirit, you cannot come to repentance in order to be forgiven of your sin. He is the one who convicts a person of sin through their conscience in order to change their heart so they will want to repent. If you continually harden your heart or turn away from that conviction, or you attribute the work of the Holy Spfirit to evil, then you have shut yourself off from the means of being forgiven. It is like a drowning man cutting the rope of the life preserver being thrown to him.
That actual sin is no greater than any other sin, but it severs you from the means of salvation and forgiveness. Once your heart is so hardened that you no longer have a conscience for the Holy Spirit to work with, you have cut yourself off from God's means of redemption. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 1:52:22 PM | ^ Implication being then that if one had not cut off the presence of God in one's life in the first place, then the baby would not have been murdered? ...............Murder is a symptom of anger, greed, jealousy, etc....all of those things which God forgives and gets rid of via acceptance of the Trinity.
(on track with you Boomer?) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 2:20:02 PM | Not exactly.
Many barbaric sinners who never had any exposure to the Gospel and never had a chance to blaspheme the Holy Spirit or to harden their hearts against Him, have committed terrible acts of violence. Most were raised in a totaly ungodly environment without any light, so their acts of murder and such were done from a heart without any conviction. There are also many cases of those who have committed terrible crimes (rape, murder, etc.) who then went on to repent, turn their lives around and become committed Christians. It is not the degree or terribleness of the sin that matters, but the degree of hardness of the individual's heart and their response to the drawing and convicting presence of the Holy Spirit on their life.
Prime example of this is the apostle Paul who persecuted and murdered countless Christians in his Jewish zeal to please God. He did all of this when he was still known as Saul and before he was changed by a personal encounter with the risen person of Jesus Christ, After he was changed, he became the apostle to the Gentiles and ended up preaching and sacrificing his life for the ones he was previously murdering. God could have sent Paul as an apostle and missionary to the Jews, since Paul was a learned Jewish scholar (which is what most of us in our infinite wisdom would have done.) LOL But, instead, God sent him to the Gentiles to prove His transforming power over a life surrendered to Him and to demonstrate that Paul was indeed changed from the inside out.
No sin is too great for God to forgive, but He will not override a will or a heart which is closed and set against Him and His redeeming power.
PS. A person who has committed the "unpardonable sin" will not even know it or ask the question about it, because they will be so blind as to not see their sin at all. It takes a conscience that is still alive and available to the Holy Spirit to even ask the question in the first place. So, if you wonder whether or not you have committed the unpardonable sin or have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, RELAX, because you have NOT!
(If you have never done so, read the book of Acts--fascinating history and a riveting story) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 4:38:41 PM | "Apparently you haven't been told what pain Christ had to endure from the near death beatings to the brutality of the cross, "
Clearly you have never walked a person through terminal cancer. Much worse.
"He has made it clear from the beginning that the consequence of sin is death"
The consequence of physical birth is physical death....
Eternal life is the life of the spirit | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 4:41:46 PM | "In my 10 years of hunting I have yet to find an eye witness account of the NT events."
I thought one of the 4 gospels was Mother Mary's story of Christ's life as reported by the author for her - that would be autobiographical much the same as non-writers today have someone write with them who are writers. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 4:49:28 PM | "“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
Read what it says without inferring the inverse. It doesn't say the inverse. Those who believe will have eternal life. It says nothing about those who do not believe.
"Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6)"
What if this means that those who conduct their lives the way Jesus did, whose truth is Jesus' truth, whose life is Jesus' life without being baptized Christian? According to Catholicism they will all 'comes to the Father' because they have baptism of the spirit or blood. Religion is but one way ... and religon without the acts of acting as Jesus did, speaking as Jesus spoke and living as Jesus lived are empty and all the churchiness and baptisms there are will not bring that person to the Father.
I know many a non-religious person whose life is aligned with Christ's life who I have no doubt will be in heaven ... and many a puffed up religious person whose life is nothing like Christ's whose salvation is highly questionable. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 5:08:16 PM | "http://www.carm.org/questions/about-doctrine/what-blasphemy-holy-spirit-can-christian-commit-it"
I had to go study several websites to understand the context of the 'unpardonable sin' and I do believe it is possible today .... but also one that a person can change from. The question becomes can a person today do what the Pharasee's did when they claimed that the healings of Christ were demonstrations that he was not of The Holy Spirit but of Satan. How is this different from someone today who sees miracles and claims that they are acts of satan? Is it rare? I would think so. More often people credit miracles to coincidence or luck rather than to satan.
I still think that a person could do that, see the error of their thinking, retract their prior statements and return to God. Only as they continue in the thinking ... in the denial of the miracles of The Holy Spirit by whatever name their religion gives to The Holy Spirit do they stay turned away from God.
When The Holy Spirit chooses to work through someone not of my religion do I claim the miracle is of satan? If I did, would that not be unforgiveable blasphemy? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 5:11:55 PM | "If a person were to tie a mother down, and murder her child while she watched. Then, asked for true forgiveness and accepted JC as their savior, they would get to go to heaven.
HOWEVER
If I were to bust in on that same scenario, stop the murder and free the mother. Then say "Boy, I can't believe in a Holy Spirit that wouldn't have let JC know this was happening! What a waste!" I would go straight to hell."
I can't believe is not sufficient. It would have to be crediting the rescue of the mother and child to Satan. The person who did the saving would have to be accused of acting on Satan's behalf in doing the saving. The person who made that acquisation would be the one who made the unpardonable sin.
| |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/10/2009 10:17:09 PM |
Proof in this type of case is simply the matter of a preponderance of evidence. Scholars obviously don't know any more than you or I who Matthew was. Maybe I need to do a little more research, but for now I'm not concerned because whoever wrote it was clearly either an eyewitness or a fraud. The evidnce is heavily in favor of eyewitness.
The evidence is not heavily in favor, if it was the scholars would agree that it was an eyewitness. Read the content of my quotes. But really neither here nor there, I am not disputing the authors, and for the sake of argument I will conciede that they are written by the apostles (I don't agree but it has nothing to do with the topic IMO)
As for "we can't do the sin now", the Bible doesn't come out and say that. Which is what I was pointing out. If you can't define the ultimate no-no, how can you define the rest of them? There are already two MAJOR positions on how that sin works, which is right?
Sure would be nice if Yahweh had a voice and ears, so we could ask him and he could respond. | |
|
|
| Page 2 of 47
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
|
Home
login 
