-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 11:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] We Sinners
JD, I hadn't yet answered your post on cleansing, but it doesn't mean I wasn't going to. I just wanted to add some thoughts on a previous post you had made. Now on to answering your query: JD wrote: > You believe the Spirit is grieved on each occasion > that His well meaning partners mis-speak? Yes. Death and life is in the power of the tongue, and speaking is a serious matter to the Lord. Out of the abundance of the heart, JD. Haven't you ever felt the Spirit greived when you mis-spoke? Haven't you ever been convicted about something you just said?
I really need you present a scriptural argument for this. My ""conviction" is not to be
confused with the Spirits feelings. The Lord knows that my sins do not mean that i am headed in
wrong direction. You God is pretty mush an emotional mess most of the time -- grieving form
hundreds of thousands, millions, perhaps billions of people who are dispapointing to Him. I
don't see it. JD wrote: > When you write "cleansed," I > uderstand you to be saying that you are pressing the > view that we have been pardoned for past sins and > empowered to live without transgression of any > kind." Absolutely. Christ died once. We cannot crucify Him again for our sins, so that means a single, thorough washing. If we were not clean and pure and holy children, He would have to sacrifice Himself again. You see, I must beleive this. I still don't fully understand exactly how this works, but I must accept it. The fact is, we cannot crucify the Son of God afresh.
this is probably one of the most incredible statements from a Christian that I have seen in
print. Help me out, here. You cannot posilby argue that you have committed no sin since
accepting Jesus into your life. Why is that not in conflict with what you say above? JD wrote: > It [damnation] is not > a decision that God makes after comparing the good > that we would do with the bad that most surely is a > part of the lives of us all. See, this is where we disagree. When you say "bad" I say immature. It's kind of like this: It is holy to love Jesus and feel if that your co-workers don't know Him, they will perish. But it is more holy to witness Jesus to them. If you are new to the faith, you're not sinning by only wishing they knew Jesus. But isn't it more righteous to preach Him? We mature in this holiness.
Is a "babe in Chrsit" immature but saved?
When we are convicted, and we move to higher practices of righteousness, we should not call the level we just left "sin." We are maturing. However, if we return to that former level, it would be wrong, because now we KNOW better. James 4:17 says that knowledge is responsibility: Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
If I decide to spend my money of a 47 inch TV flat screen instead of helping the neightbor ]
next door with his daughters hospital bills, I have committed sin. Now what do I do? The
sacrifice of Christ has been provained? Confession nor repentacne does not remit sin --
only sacrifice for sin. (Heb. 10). If God tells us we are holy, and that we are no longer servants, but children, but then leaves us in our filth, it would all be sick charade. But I beleive God does not mock us. He equips those he calls.
You use language that is prejudicial as a part of your argument. Look to Eph 4:20 . I
believe you will note that the "old man" is alive but decreasing while the new man is on the
increase. JD wrote: > I would appreciate your response on this rather than > your father's. JD, all this about not calling ourselves sinners is a personal revelation the Lord has shown me. I don't know whether to be impressed you would think I have been consulting my father on this, or insulted that you do not mean nice things about my father by saying that. :-)
The Lord has spoken to me as well, Christine. Regading my comment -- no insult intended.
You have begun other conversations with me and left the discussion behind while, at the same time,
your father has decided to involve himself in our discussion(s). That is what you have done in the past -
and that is my frame of reference.
Jd
Blessings! --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Christine -- could you take a second look at my > post and give it a more precise answer? Have I > captured your thinking on "cleansing." ? Is > "salvation" God makes based upon an accounting of > our actions as presented in my post? > > JD > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 12:58:37 -0400 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] We Sinners > > > Hello. > > You believe the Spirit is grieved on ech occasion > that His well meaning partners mis-speak? > Not arguing -- but it seems an appropriate > question. > > Regarding my use of the word "sinner." You are > correct ot make note of the biblical use of the > word. > Those who follow Christ are not called "sinners." > But I do not use the word in that light. Where we > are at odds, Chritine, is found in the wording of > your sentence below: > > And if we are sinners, then there is no difference > between us and the unsaved. But truly, we have been > cleansed. Not just forgiven, but washed clean. > > Our theologies are very different when it comes to > the observation above..............in spite of the > fact that I could easily say "amen" to what you have > written. Our words do not have the same meaning, in > a pratical sense. When you write "cleansed," I > uderstand you to be saying that you are pressing the > view that we have been pardoned for past sins and > empowered to live without transgression of any > kind." > > I find that conclusion to be an impossible one. > "Cleansing" for me is something that God does > IMMEDICATELY and continually upon our desire to > serve Him ................................Actually, > that is not what I beleive so I will try it again. > > The "reconciliation of all things" (Col 1:17) may > have secured this consideration for all of mankind > -- apart from anyone's > "decision" to "serve." If that is the more > accurate statement, then "damnation" is the result > of an attempt on our part to live a life > autonomously --------- apart from God. It is not > a decision that God makes after comparing the good > that we would do with the bad that most surely is a > part of the lives of us all ................. 99 > good things compared to 97 bad things will get us > into heaven ........... or is it 99 good things > compared to 1 bad thing will find us lost? Maybe > yoou could clarify? > > I would appreciate your response on this rather than > your father's. > JD > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 09:31:50 -0700 (PDT) > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] We Sinners > > > JD wrote: > > We sinners > > JD, I have a conscience problem with calling myself > a > sinner. As a 'son' of God, I partake of the Father's > holiness. Now, my knowledge isn't perfect, I am > still > learning and maturing onto higher levels of > Holiness, > but it is simply untrue to call a child of God a > sinner. When the Israelites made a sacrifice year > after year, they remained sinners after they were > forgiven. But only one sacrifice has been made. So I > (and you, as a son of God) am no longer a sinner. It > is putting Christ to an open shame. > > And if we are sinners, then there is no difference > between us and the unsaved. But truly, we have been > cleansed. Not just forgiven, but washed clean. > > I don't wish to pick on your wording, but I beleive > many Christians greive the Spirit when they speak > that > way. > > > Blessings! > > > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > That is exactly what I mean by "the truth." We > > sinners have so much going for us than creative > ways > > of doing things wrong. AT THE SAME TIME, we can > > be concerned with our physical health, with doing > a > > better job at work, with helping others with their > > needs and expanding on that ministry, with > > developing > > a deeper prayer life, growing in the ways we > > express ourselves to others, increasing our > > _expression_ of love, joy, peace, kindness and the > > like ---- and more. The list above can be as > > long as one has time to write. To imagine that > God > > zooms in on one consideration, as important as it > > may be, to the exclusion of the larger picture > (much > > larger) of who we are and what we are becoming is > > somewhat preposterous, to me. > > > > Jd > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:46:22 -0400 > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha > > > > > > If what you mean by 'the truth' has to do with our > > relationship with God through Christ in the power > of > > the Spirit then, yes and, Amen. > > > > It is relational in nature and, ought to include > TT > > to some extent. John 17 ain't reflected herein. > Were > > the Mormons to be truthful (I just didn't wish for > > them to conclude:'see, I told you we weren't like > > THEM-(US)) the same diversity and discord is > > reflected therein also. > > > > It's a human thingy. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: June 09, 2005 08:39 > > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apocrypha > > > > > > > > The "duh !!" response was the only thing I could > > think of at the time. Judy had once again put me > in > > the category of teaching the doctrine of men, for > > some reason, while entering into a discussion of > > what she did the other night at church. She > defends > > this rather unusual procession of thouhgt by > giving > > me a brief lesson on becoming comformed to the > image > > of Christ ......................... as if my > > primary concern is something other than this. > Hence > > "duh !!" > > > > I personally believe that we change because of our > > relationship with The Truth more than because of > > conceptual correctness. There is the opinion > here > > on Tt, it seems, that God cannot accomplish > growth > > in an individual if there exists any sin in > his/her > > life. If the goal of God is to create a people > who > > think correctly on all matters, then He has > failed > > if a single consideration is wrong. But if the > > goal is relational in nature and substance, God's > > success in our lives will be demonstrated in spite > > of our sins or errant thinking. Correct? > > > > Jd > > > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
