| Poster | Thread | IRONMAN
Member
Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
| | Re: | | Krispy
you know lately God has been laying that heavily on me, seeking the spirit in all things. We are all guilty of not doing so and this is whathas Him so angry. We are so far gone from Him, in an unprecedented way I might add, in spirit because we have placed other things in it's stead that it will take an unprecedented effort by Him in terms of judgment to get us back on track. in that process, many will just not be able to hack it.
love yah!!!
_________________
Farai Bamu
|
|  2005/3/23 20:28 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Alrighty then my dear Brother,
Now 2nd question.
Does Complete Repentance happen over a period of time or is it all at once?
Karl |
| | 2005/3/23 20:37 | |
| | Re: | | My people perish for a lack of knowledge.
The chastening of the LORD is not to reveal His anger with us, it is to wield His character into us. And I can assure you that He is NOT angry with us. He loves us more then we can ever know. The reason why He is not angry with us is simply because we have believed the report that Jesus Christ came to die for our sins and we have obeyed His voice when He wooed us to Himself, that my friend is pure agape love.
I am a product of His longsuffering, His tender mercies, from the depth of the pit I cried out to Him. I was much further down then most, but His hand reached further down that I might reach up.
Today I've made my bed in hell, yet He is with me. His rod and His staff they confort me knowing that He corrects me gives me the comfort that He loves me.\
He is so longsuffering so that not one of us will perish in our lack of understanding.
His mercy endureth forever, and He gives grace unto the humble.
If we become haughty, His anger might be kindled for a moment, but then we are brought down to nothing only to look up and declare that He is God.
God does not have a short fuse, He has a breaker that never breaks, because His mercy endureth forever.
Karl ;-) |
| | 2005/3/23 20:58 | |
| | Re: | | I added a few more. It is 61 now. |
| | 2005/3/24 0:00 | | IRONMAN
Member
Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
| | Re: | | Quote:
The chastening of the LORD is not to reveal His anger with us, it is to wield His character into us. And I can assure you that He is NOT angry with us. He loves us more then we can ever know. The reason why He is not angry with us is simply because we have believed the report that Jesus Christ came to die for our sins and we have obeyed His voice when He wooed us to Himself, that my friend is pure agape love.
The Lord does chasten those whom He loves. When we veer off track He comes and brings us back by whatever means necessary. The further we have strayed the more drastic the measure. Take for example 911, in the week or two after that many people sought God in earnest then that desire evaporated. Why is it we only seek GOd in times of adersity as if He his some sort of genie who does our bidding whenever, wherever whatever. He is not a teddybear either as some have come to belive. He is a HOLY and RIGHTEOUS GOd who can't have unholiness period. Yes we have believed on the death of Christ to sanctify us but that is just the beginning, we are to become perfect just as the father is perfect said Christ. He didn't say that after believing then everything is all good. If that were true there would be no need for the coming judgment or any judgement at all. God love us yes but let us not delude ourselves on this, He is angry with us because we have not worshipped Him in spirit and in truth, we have the Holy spirit there to sho us these things but we substiture other things in Hid stead and God will simply not have that.
There is a terriible judgement coming which will catch many saints off guard because we think God isn't angry. Remember what happened to the Israelites? If they as God's chosen people were not spared for there transgressions, howcan we expect that? If even Christ, God's number 1 was not spared death how can we expect not to suffer?
_________________
Farai Bamu
|
| | 2005/3/24 0:32 | Profile | Jimm
Member
Joined: 2004/4/27
Posts: 498
Harare, ZIMBABWE
| | Re: | | Quote:
Anyone can be "moral", anyone can follow a set of rules with or without Christ.
One thing to be noted about Christ was not so much His teachings but His person. He really did not leave us with too much doctrinal teaching. If you study other religions (which, take it from me, is a waste of precious time) you will see that this is in sharp contrast to them.
Followers of Confucius never formally assert that theirs is a religion. Confucianism merely exercises great influence on Chinese culture, education, ethics, and philosophy. One thing, however, is certain: the teachings and doctrines of Confucius are of foremost importance, while the person Confucius is not as crucial. I do not mean that Confucianism has no concern for Confucius. The man indeed was an extraordinary person. However, in order to be a part of Confucianism, one only needs to understand the doctrines of Confucius, abide by his teachings, and be thoroughly acquainted with his books. It does not matter whether one understands the man Confucius or not. The principles, doctrines, and teachings of Confucius are the essence of the religion.
Next let us consider Buddhism. The founder of Buddhism was Sakya Muni. Once he preached to his disciples about evil persons being reincarnated through the Wheel of Rebirth after death. This is something that attracts man's attention. But in all of Buddhism, the point of emphasis is doctrines and theories. Concerning the man Sakya Muni, although he has a history and biography, they are something parenthetical. They do not form the crux of Buddhism. The center of the religion is not the man Sakya Muni. Whether there was such a person is unimportant to today's Buddhism. All that is needed are the doctrines and teachings.
When Nicodemus questioned our Lord concerning the kingdom, he was told fact, you must be born again
that which is born of Spirit is spirit . without being born of spirit and maturing in spirit, the kingdom of God is but a philosophy, a fairy tale. It is wishful to believe that this flesh can be tamed. We need a new person altogether and this inward man is made in true holiness after God. This wine skin (mans spirit) is a suitable dwelling place for Christs Spirit. The person Himself and not his teachings become our righteousness. We have no need to rely on memory or assertions and discipline but we rely on a person. What is largely lacking is first of all, the Spirit and second of all (after that the Spirit is received), a revelation of the Spirit within. The Corinthians were Spirit filled without a doubt but there were still many problems within them. The solution Paul prayed through for the was revelation from God of the person dwelling in them.
James
_________________
James Gabriel Gondai Dziya
|
| | 2005/3/24 9:29 | Profile |
| | A religion that permits sin is ridiculous. | | A religion that permits sin is ridiculous; because it represents God as pleased with sin. The system of religion revealed in the Bible has God as its Author. God is pleased with His religion and if He has given a religion that permits sin, then God is pleased with a system that permits sin. If He is pleased with such a system, then He is pleased with sin. There can be no escape from this conclusion. If God is pleased with sin, then He is not holy. Consequently those who deny that we can be saved from sin, really attack the holiness of God. There is no escape from this conclusion. A sinning religion is therefore a contradiction of a holy God. For whatever God does is good and His plan of salvation is therefore good. But to call it good when it permits evil is a contradiction.
A religion that permits sin encourages sin. It encourages men to remain sinful. For why should man seek for purity if he can get along without it? Why should he seek to be free from sin when the highest standard of his religion allows it? Why should he seek to be free from sin when his religion permits it? Why should he cut off the right hand and pluck out the right eye of his darling lusts if there is no need of it? Why should he try to be free from sin if his religion does not promise divine help in achieving freedom from sin? Men do not earnestly seek what they think is an impossibility. When George Fox was preaching the glorious gospel in England in one place, a man remonstrated saying, "You put it too strong." George Fox replied, "The Scripture says, " "The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth from all sin. , "The man replied, "To be sure, but all we can do is to keep striving." Fox replied, "What is the use to keep striving if we cannot do it?" It cuts the nerve of all effort if a man believes he can not accomplish the thing he is seeking to do. They, who deny that we can be saved from all sin, really make the Author of Christianity an encourager of sin.
A religion that permits sin makes the author of that religion a partner in the sins of his followers. This is severe logic but there is no escape from this conclusion. He who encourages others in any enterprise becomes a partner in it, as far as his influence, at least, is concerned. Whatever we encourage others to do is our own enterprise as far as our influence is concerned. A father, who does not discourage the disposition to dishonesty in his children, becomes responsible for their dishonesty. He is responsible because he did not encourage them to be honest. The professed Christians, who declare that they cannot be saved from all sin are really publishing to the world that God has made no provision to save from sin. And if He has made no provision, in His plan of salvation, to save from sin, then He does not discourage sin. And if He does not discourage it, His silence on the subject is an encouragement of it.
A religion that does not save from sin breaks down at the point where it is most needed. If man does not need to be saved from sin, what does he need to be saved from? Sin is the worst thing in the world. It is the great source of all our trouble. It is the cause of all the woes of mankind. It is our great hindrance in serving God. It is the only thing that can shut us out of heaven. If we need religion at all, we need it at this point, for if we are saved from sin we are saved from hell, for hell is but the result of sin. Therefore a religion that will not save us from sin is not needed for it breaks down at the vital point. A doctor that cannot cure disease fails at the very point where a doctor is needed. And so does a sinning religion.
Taken from Reasons Why We Should Be Holy
By George Asbury McLaughlin
To view entire article go
http://www.victoryoversin.com/mclaughlin/reasons.htm |
| | 2005/3/24 9:36 | | Compton
Member
Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 2732
| | Re: A religion that permits sin is ridiculous. | | Quote:
A religion that permits sin is ridiculous; because it represents God as pleased with sin....And so does a sinning religion
Brothers, you dull your own point by characterizing the vast majority of evangelical Christians as having a "sinning religion" that "opposes holiness." If we try to win our case by using such shrewdly sculpted language we look like religous pettifoggers, not faithful advocates. While the rhetoric succeeds at generating heat it fails at bringing any real light to the subject of holiness because it lacks basic integrity towards its audience.
Quote:
The professed Christians, who declare that they cannot be saved from all sin (sic) are really publishing to the world that God has made no provision to save from sin. And if He has made no provision, in His plan of salvation, to save from sin, then He does not discourage sin. And if He does not discourage it, His silence on the subject is an encouragement of it.
Not so. This kind of argument is nothing more then a slight of hand designed to fluster. It presents a court case without due dilligence. If we try to convict men with such straw men, can we fault them for being slow to listen? The above statement does not address the vast majority of Christians who readily agree that God has called man to repent from sin and to sin no more. It is a contrivance to say they "oppose holiness" and "encourage sin."
Quote:
If we need religion at all, we need it at this point, for if we are saved from sin we are saved from hell, for hell is but the result of sin
I'm sure the author isn't fairly represented by this myopic statement. For instance, he would probably agree with Oswald Chambers who said
"Salvation is not merely deliverance from sin, nor the experience of personal holiness; the salvation of God is deliverance out of self entirely into union with Himself. My experimental knowledge of salvation will be along the line of deliverance from sin and of personal holiness; but salvation means that the Spirit of God has brought me into touch with God's personality, and I am thrilled with something infinitely greater than myself, I am caught up into the abandonment of God.
To say that we are called to preach holiness or sanctification, is to get into a side eddy. We are called to proclaim Jesus Christ. The fact that He saves from sin and makes us holy is part of the effect of the wonderful abandonment of God."
Your message is needed; don't harden people hearts by replacing respect with rhubarb. Just some thoughts...
MC
_________________
Mike Compton
|
| | 2005/3/24 11:01 | Profile |
| | Re: | | I wanted to say that I really love you guys and enjoy the fellowship that I find here on this site. From other things you guys have posted about shows me the sincere heart you have after God and I feel blessed to be able to partake in these forums with you all.
I have a genuine question. What exactly is the Christian standard, or the moral goal? If perfection is not the goal what is? If repenting from every sin is not the standard then what is? What sin is it "ok" for a Christian to allow into his life? Correct me if I am wrong, but the more I study the bible the more I feel forced to believe that perfection is the goal, that repenting from all sin is the standard, and that there is absolutely no sin that should be tolerated in the life of the Christian. |
| | 2005/3/24 12:05 | | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
the more I study the bible the more I feel forced to believe that perfection is the goal, that repenting from all sin is the standard, and that there is absolutely no sin that should be tolerated in the life of the Christian.
I too am a preacher of holiness and repentance. Perfection is not a goal but a gift in which the saint goes from 'glory to glory'. It is important to distinguish what kind of perfection we are talking about. Wesley believed in Christian Perfection; so do I. I do not believe we can acquire God's perfection of that of the angels, but we can be just what God wants us to be NOW. and that is perfection. Of course today's perfection may be tomorrow's imperfection as we continue to listen to what God is saying to us. Things that He permitted yesterday He may not permit tomorrow. It is not a 'standard' but a state of relationship with God.
If we make it into a describable standard we create another law, and another burden. The word to Abraham stands true; "walk before Me, and be thou perfect." and that from Paul "walk in the Spirit and you will not fulfil the desires of the flesh".
The standard is perfection, but whose?
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2005/3/24 13:57 | Profile |
|
