|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: to whom will God show mercy?
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
But may I point out that you did so only by not answering my question, and then expanding on your previous point.
Of course. There are many kinds of questions that ought not to be answered as asked, questions like "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" or "When you want to get even with someone, do you do X or Y?" or "What color is up?"
Those questions contain an underlying assumption that something is true -- that you used to beat your wife, that you sometimes desire to get even with people, that directions have colors. To answer the question, you have to agree that the assumption is true.
If the assumption is not true, the question has no answer. If the question is addressed to you, the best you can do is explain what you see as the underlying assumption, and why the underlying assumption is invalid.
Which is what I did with your question. "Are we guilty?" carries a cartload of assumptions that must be addressed first, and separately, before we know whether your question even has an answer.
I can only answer it if you're willing to identify all your underlying assumptions, and prove that they're valid. I've told you already why I think they're not. Repeating the question doesn't show me that they are.
And until you can show me that they are, it seems to me that you're wanting to discuss the color of up. I don't see where that gets us.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
And to come on this forum - as is your right of course - and tell those of us in the catholic, orthodox, reformed and evangelical churches that we have ALL got our Scriptural interpretations wrong over the last 1900 years, whilst Mr Swedenborg uniquely knows the mind of God and the Biblical writers, is a little...
No, Mr. Swedenborg could be just as wrong as anyone else. The point is that all of the different groups think that the others are somehow slightly off the track. You yourself are here pointing out how most of the rest of us are mistaken.
Swedenborg was a life-long faithful Lutheran. His father was the famous Swedish bishop Jesper Swedberg. Swedenborg never started any church and never broke from any church. Swedenborgians exist in all denominations. He is a most ecumenical writer. C.S. Lewis, who is above reproach as a Christian apologist and member of the Church of England, shows a very pronounced Swedenborgian influence.
So I'm not saying that everyone is wrong. Swedenborgianism is consistent within many Christian denominations, just as the works of other Christian writers are. I think I'm in agreement with most of the people here.
The primary Swedenborgian tenet is that the Bible is divinely inspired and authoritative, and so my interest here is in an understanding that is consistent with Scripture.
So my argument with you isn't that I, as a Swedenborgian, am right. My argument is about what the Bible says and what the Bible means. I don't see why we should bring my denominational affiliation into it. I am unaware of your denomination.
I am no expert, so I could be way off the mark. But I'd like that to be judged against Scripture.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
And yes, the wrath of God is satisfied by Christ's death. And my sin, making me deserve an eternity in hell, is taken away by repentance and faith...
Contradict that and you contradict the Christian doctrine of atonement believed by all mainstream orthodoxy.
I guess the Orthodox Church is not mainstream orthodoxy, then, because we do not believe any theory of atonement that says that Christ's death was intended to placate God's wrath, to satisfy his divine justice, or anything of the sort.
This brief article might be useful in helping you understand the problem we see in any theory of satisfaction.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I appreciate the creeping out thing. There are hymns that jar with me too. It's the language styles used propbably, especially if it's victorian.
Actually, most hymns that creep me out do so not because of the language, but because of the theology.
quote:
As far as the belief that Jesus pardons at the moment we believe, well it's the experience and testimony of an awful lot of people that theirs is an instantaneous conversion experience.
And it's also the experience of a lot of people that their conversion experience isn't instantaneous.
I basically had an instantaneous conversion experience, but it was towards a belief in G-d. My relationship with Jesus is a lot more complicated, and I would never be able to describe it in terms of a binary yes/no, on/off.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
quote:
As far as the belief that Jesus pardons at the moment we believe, well it's the experience and testimony of an awful lot of people that theirs is an instantaneous conversion experience.
And it's also the experience of a lot of people that their conversion experience isn't instantaneous.
Indeed.
[ 30. August 2005, 08:40: Message edited by: Callan ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
This brief article might be useful in helping you understand the problem we see in any theory of satisfaction.
I'd never seen this distinction between theories of atonement. Delightfully enlightening!
(Though not exactly brief... ![[Biased]](wink.gif) )
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Lesser Weevil
Apprentice
# 10070
|
Posted
Though perhaps we should split the question: when a human, bound by time, experiences a feeling of pardon from Jesus is a different question than when Jesus, dying and rising 2000 years ago and active divinely outside of the bounds of time, actually pardons/pardoned/will pardon.
--------------------
In case of dissension, never dare to judge till you've heard the other side.
Euripides, Heraclidae, circa 428 B.C.
Posts: 40 | From: Chicago | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
Which is what I did with your question. "Are we guilty?" carries a cartload of assumptions that must be addressed first, and separately, before we know whether your question even has an answer.
Sure, and I understand that. But the "are we guilty?" was only a subquestion of the question I actually asked. You had originally said
quote:
originally posted by josephine:
I'll grant that the legal model has "something of the truth," as you said.
and the full version of what I asked in response was:
quote:
originally posted by me:
What is that "something of the truth", then? You've shown me two instances in Scripture about where it is found, but is there anything in the juridical/legal model that is taught, that you didn't already believe without it? Would you say, for example, that we really are guilty?
I would be happy to drop that last subquestion and still hear your answer to the main question, as I'm still unclear as to what you think.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
[T]he full version of what I asked in response was:
quote:
originally posted by me:
What is that "something of the truth", then? You've shown me two instances in Scripture about where it is found, but is there anything in the juridical/legal model that is taught, that you didn't already believe without it? Would you say, for example, that we really are guilty?
I would be happy to drop that last subquestion and still hear your answer to the main question, as I'm still unclear as to what you think.
Ah, I had the impression that the last subquestion was actually the main question. Sorry for misunderstanding.
I suppose to answer the larger question, I'll need you to be more specific. What, exactly, is taught by the juridical/legal model? If you'll tell me that, I'll let you know whether I believe it or not.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
(Though not exactly brief... )
You know those Orthodox...
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
Hi Josephine,
Well we could start, I suppose, with what you said here:
quote:
I'll grant that the legal model has "something of the truth," as you said. Our Lord himself compared the Kingdom of Heaven to an unjust judge, and there's the parable of the servant who would not forgive his fellows their debts. Both of those use a juridical/legal model to tell us something about what God is like.
Both these stories speak of God as judge, or in the case of the second story, a Lord who judges mercifully until confronted with the lack of grace of the unforgiving servant, after which point the original penalty is reinstated.
So my understanding of a legal model is that it begins (I think confirmed by these stories and others) not with the Law as some free-floating standard but with a just Lawgiver who communicates his expectations perfectly. Adam and Eve obeyed his law for a time and then failed (You may eat...but do not eat of...), the rest of us fail, except in Christ, who imparts an alien righteousness (righteous='not guilty', among other things) to us.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Just skipping back to that hymn !
Mudfrog, you wrote quote:
As far as the belief that Jesus pardons at the moment we believe, well it's the experience and testimony of an awful lot of people that theirs is an instantaneous conversion experience.
The fact that many people testify to a conversion experience (instantaneous or not) does not necessarily imply anything about the time at which they they are forgiven, only about the time that they realise they are forgiven. Consider a hypothetical fugitive, unaware that his crimes have been pardoned. Would he not still avoid policemen until such time as he receives the news of his pardon. He is pardonned, but unable to receive the benefit of that pardon until such time as he learns of the pardon, and accepts that the pardon is real.
That is not to say that I agree that the judicial approach to atonement is the primary one, far less that the central problem with the human condition is God's anger with us because of our sins. I merely post to show how such language can be interpreted in a number of ways. Not everyone would interpret it in the way that you do. Truth is seldom pure, and never simple!
[edited for spelling]
[ 30. August 2005, 09:59: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Sorry to douple post. I realise on re-reading the last sentence, that it is open to misunderstanding. If I might correct it, I would put that the truth is seldom plain and never simple. This more nearly reflects my view of claims that one particular view of scripture is "the obvious and clear reading"
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Surely not accepting forgiveness and not being aware of the provision of forgiveness amounts to the same thing.
If you are not in conscious possession of forgiveness by grace through faith, then you an offender that has not received a pardon and the penalty still stands and the sentence must be served.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
JJ - absolutely, it's ALL about the realisation and claiming of and living in the light of salvation, not about suddenly being saved once and for all.
Going way back to the beginning of the thread. IF Christianity is the Kingdom of God, which it very arguably is: i.e. if living positively in the light of the awareness of salvation is being a Christian and having eternal life, then Hitler wasn't in the Kingdom of God - although the greatest peace he experienced in life - like me ... - was in church - and the decent, hard working Moslem (or Jewish or Hindu or atheist and/or gay) doctor IS in the Kingdom of God but doesn't know it. Is a gentile who has discovered the Law without realising it. Such a doctor is already healed, whereas we Christians are sick, need healing ...
Such a person will have NO problem in the final, Great White Throne Judgment. Will Hitler have a greater problem ? ... Will I ?
We are ALL once saved. If we want to be. How much I'm endangering my salvation with neglect and carnality I don't fear enough to address ... like those who assume they are saved and don't live as if they are still smouldering from having been barely plucked from the fires of hell ...
Aren't we to worry about our OWN salvation in order to keep it, not Hitler's?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
You make it sound like we are all saved unless we choose not to be.
Which is of course the antithesis of the Gospel.
And in response to your theory, the Kingdom of God is seen in Jesus, nothing else. Without him there is no Kingdom,
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Mudfrog:
quote:
Surely not accepting forgiveness and not being aware of the provision of forgiveness amounts to the same thing.
That indeed was the point I was making, not being forgiven is in no way the same as not being aware of the provision of forgiveness. We can be (and, I believe, are) forgiven already. Wheter or not we acknowledge, or, if you like, accept, that forgiveness may have a profound effect on our lives, but has no implication for wheter or not we are actually forgiven.
quote:
If you are not in conscious possession of forgiveness by grace through faith, then you an offender that has not received a pardon and the penalty still stands and the sentence must be served.
Not at all. One can be pardonned, without having, in that sense, received the pardon. I realise that you are stating your belief, but it does not automatically follow, and I don't believe that it is what the Bible teaches. That was the point I was trying to make in my little parable.
My argument is with your presupposition that the central salvific problem is that we need our sins forgiven. I contend that they are already forgiven. What the atonement accomplishes is the undoing of the cosmic effect of that sin, if you like, the healing of the sinner (and all creation too).
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
My argument is with your presupposition that the central salvific problem is that we need our sins forgiven. I contend that they are already forgiven. What the atonement accomplishes is the undoing of the cosmic effect of that sin, if you like, the healing of the sinner (and all creation too).
That is the way I see it also.
This means that an individual's state of eternal peace is dependent on whether they choose to love God and love the neighbor or not. They are free.
Cosmic redemption is already accomplished, leaving humans free to love and do as they wish.
It's the love and trust in God that matters, not what you know, and especially not what church you belong to.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
You make it sound like we are all saved unless we choose not to be.
Which is of course the antithesis of the Gospel.
As Jolly Jape said, "Truth is never plain and rarely simple." To which I will add, "Careful with the use of 'of course' which rarely holds its ground."
If Gospel is "good news," how can a message that proclaims - YOU ARE ALL SAVED, NOW REALIZE IT be anything BUT good news?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
Sorry to douple post.
Just wanted to share something I came across in another post... something a Heaven Host said about double posting.
quote:
Originally posted by KenWritez:
I've seen this myth being promulgated for a long time but I figure since AW's a noob I'll address it now.
AW; "double posting" is not a faux pas, it's not any kind of an official issue on the Ship. I've no idea how that idea got started, but it's untrue. If you double post, you double post; no worries.
Anyone who has a problem with double posting has their knickers knotted waaaay too tightly.
Here is the actual post.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
But Jesus said this:
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
My church's doctrine says that the Lord JC has, by his suffering and death made an atonement for the whole world so that whosoever will may be saved.
Yes, our forgiveness is a done deal as far as its provision but the personal application of that forgiveness depends very much on a deliberate act of willing faith.
If one doesn't seek for that grace then it is not given to you and you will die unredeemed. To say that God forgives our sins, thereby saving us, without our knowing is going against free will.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
If one doesn't seek for that grace then it is not given to you and you will die unredeemed. To say that God forgives our sins, thereby saving us, without our knowing is going against free will.
But Jesus said that the way that you go about seeking grace is to do the will of the Father. People all over the world who love God and the neighbor are obeying that will.
The choice is between good and evil. Everyone on earth knows enough about this to freely choose.
The point of being Christian is that acceptance of and obedience to Christ's teachings is the most powerful and best way for this to happen. This is the light that came into the world that will change the world.
It is like information about health. It is vital for this information to be spread around the world. Millions are suffering without it. But everyone has some information about it, and there are healthy people everywhere in the world.
The Incarnation was for the purpose of restoring spiritual health to the world. The mechanism is similar to almost any other kind of reformation. This is how grace operates in all things.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
You apparently contradict yourself Mudfrog:
'You make it sound like we are all saved unless we choose not to be.
Which is of course the antithesis of the Gospel.'
...
'whosoever will may be saved'.
So either you don't believe the gospel or you can somehow reconcile these logical opposites.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
If one doesn't seek for that grace then it is not given to you and you will die unredeemed. To say that God forgives our sins, thereby saving us, without our knowing is going against free will.
But Jesus said that the way that you go about seeking grace is to do the will of the Father. People all over the world who love God and the neighbor are obeying that will.
The choice is between good and evil. Everyone on earth knows enough about this to freely choose.
The point of being Christian is that acceptance of and obedience to Christ's teachings is the most powerful and best way for this to happen. This is the light that came into the world that will change the world.
It is like information about health. It is vital for this information to be spread around the world. Millions are suffering without it. But everyone has some information about it, and there are healthy people everywhere in the world.
The Incarnation was for the purpose of restoring spiritual health to the world. The mechanism is similar to almost any other kind of reformation. This is how grace operates in all things.
This is the will of the father who sent me, that of all he has given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up at the last day. And this is the will of him who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6 v 39,40
God's will has a lot to do with our response to Jesus and not to some vague notion of 'God' and our practice of neighbourliness.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Mudfrog, you still seem not to have grasped the point I am making.
quote:
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
This says nothing about the forgiveness of sins.
quote:
My church's doctrine says that the Lord JC has, by his suffering and death made an atonement for the whole world so that whosoever will may be saved.
I, too, believe this, but it has nothing to do with the forgiveness of sins.
quote:
Yes, our forgiveness is a done deal as far as its provision but the personal application of that forgiveness depends very much on a deliberate act of willing faith.
Depending on your definition of "personal application" I would agree with you, but would argue that this says nothing about salvation.
quote:
If one doesn't seek for that grace then it is not given to you and you will die unredeemed. To say that God forgives our sins, thereby saving us, without our knowing is going against free will.
But the essence of grace is that it is both unlooked for and undeserved. You are conflating two different themes, our forgiveness and our "salvation" (a word which can, quite properly, be translated as "healing". I accept that forgiveness is involved in the atonement, but not that it is the aim of the atonement. Forgiveness is not synonymous with salvation.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
You apparently contradict yourself Mudfrog:
'You make it sound like we are all saved unless we choose not to be.
Which is of course the antithesis of the Gospel.'
...
'whosoever will may be saved'.
So either you don't believe the gospel or you can somehow reconcile these logical opposites.
Of course I can reconcile these 'opposites'.
We are not 'all saved unless we choose not to be'.
But we can, by the provision of atonement and by prevenient grace, choose to accept salvation.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
For "involved with", please read, "is implicit in"
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
How can John 3 v 16 not be about forgiveness.
aul says the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
In other words, the opposite of sin, the result of having sin taken away/ forgiven, is receiving the gift of eternal life - which is what God sent his son to give in response to our belief.
You cannot have salvation without forgiveness.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
God's will has a lot to do with our response to Jesus and not to some vague notion of 'God' and our practice of neighbourliness.
Yes, it has to do with our response to Jesus. We can't reject Him and what He stands for and be saved.
But "belief" implies acceptance and obedience, and anyone who loves God and the neighbor is accepting what Jesus stands for. This is who is forgiven.
The long and the short of it is that the Incarnation is about restoring heavenly love to the human race. This is the goal, and this is therefore what "forgiveness" is all about.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Belief certainly involves acceptance and obedience but it also involves trust and faith.
We don't merely accept Jesus' moral ethics, neither do we merely obey his requirements to serve others.
We are also required to repent of our sins, trust in Jesus as the propitiation for those sins and accept that only he is able to cleanse us from those sins and our sinful nature.
If there is no trust in Jesus as the atoning sacrifice, then we can obey the letter of the law as much as the next Pharisee but we will die in our sins.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
If there is no trust in Jesus as the atoning sacrifice, then we can obey the letter of the law as much as the next Pharisee but we will die in our sins.
I understand what Scriptures you base that idea on.
But don't you think that Jesus own teaching leans more heavily towards obedience to His teachings as the basis of forgiveness and salvation?
If you lined up the biblical statements about salvation and forgiveness, what would you say receives the greater emphasis?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
If there is no trust in Jesus as the atoning sacrifice, then we can obey the letter of the law as much as the next Pharisee but we will die in our sins.
I understand what Scriptures you base that idea on.
But don't you think that Jesus own teaching leans more heavily towards obedience to His teachings as the basis of forgiveness and salvation?
If you lined up the biblical statements about salvation and forgiveness, what would you say receives the greater emphasis?
I would say that Jesus gave a different message to everyone who asked him how to gain eternal life. The reason was not that he contradicted himself or was inconsistent, but that he only used religious words to religious people and the only person he spoke 'spiritually' to was Nicodemus - and even he didn't understand about being born again and believing in the only begotten Son.
The bottom line is that we all have to be born again. The bottom line is that we have to follow him.
What does that mean? It means to be a disciple of Jesus, obeying his teachings, yes, but also it's about repenting, and receiving his forgiveness - Mary M, paralysed man, etc. In order to receive forgiveness you have to first believe that the one doing the forgiving is qualified to do it - which means trusting him for your forgiveness.
Second point. Are you suggesting that we take Jesus' teaching against the Apostles's?
Or should we treat the Gospel as contained in the 66 books as a unified whole?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I would say that Jesus gave a different message to everyone who asked him how to gain eternal life. The reason was not that he contradicted himself or was inconsistent, but that he only used religious words to religious people and the only person he spoke 'spiritually' to was Nicodemus - and even he didn't understand about being born again and believing in the only begotten Son.
Different things to different people? I would say that His message was pretty consistent.
How do you understand Jesus' words to Nicodemus? I take them to mean that a person needs to be spiritually reborn. I believe that this happens as they receive a new will from the Lord which is given insofar as a person believes in and obeys Him. This seems consistent with everything else Jesus says.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Second point. Are you suggesting that we take Jesus' teaching against the Apostles's?
Or should we treat the Gospel as contained in the 66 books as a unified whole?
I realize that some see a tension between the message of Paul and Jesus. I don't think that they really disagree. My own preference, however, is to emphasize Jesus' own statements.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Belief certainly involves acceptance and obedience but it also involves trust and faith.
Oh you went and did it--you made me bust out the Zondervan Exhaustive Concordance. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Ephesians 2
1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
[a]Ephesians 2:3 Or "our flesh"
It seems to me that every explanation we typically give for how we obtain salvation always leaves room for us to boast. We accept it. We are obedient. We make a choice. Etc.
But as this passage points out, God, in his great mercy, made us alive while we were still dead. This, to me, implies that through no action or choice of our own we were saved by grace ("through faith" may be added because of our tendency to disbelieve the idea that we could be saved just by grace), so that no one can boast about it for any reason.
For some reason, we are very hesitant to even consider this idea.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Lesser Weevil
Apprentice
# 10070
|
Posted
Digory,
quote:
But as this passage points out, God, in his great mercy, made us alive while we were still dead. This, to me, implies that through no action or choice of our own we were saved by grace
Amen! God has mercy on us first. Then we believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy.
--------------------
In case of dissension, never dare to judge till you've heard the other side.
Euripides, Heraclidae, circa 428 B.C.
Posts: 40 | From: Chicago | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Lesser Weevil:
Digory,
quote:
But as this passage points out, God, in his great mercy, made us alive while we were still dead. This, to me, implies that through no action or choice of our own we were saved by grace
Amen! God has mercy on us first. Then we believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy.
I got an Amen! What a proud day in the Kirke house...
Question: If God has mercy on us first... will we not receive this mercy if we do not "believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy"?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
Question: If God has mercy on us first... will we not receive this mercy if we do not "believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy"?
There's the rub. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
If we do ANYTHING then we have room to boast. The only way to not do anything is if all is predestined.
And if God can give us the power to believe without our claiming merit, then why can't He give us power to obey without our claiming merit? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by The Lesser Weevil:
Digory,
quote:
But as this passage points out, God, in his great mercy, made us alive while we were still dead. This, to me, implies that through no action or choice of our own we were saved by grace
Amen! God has mercy on us first. Then we believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy.
I got an Amen! What a proud day in the Kirke house...
Question: If God has mercy on us first... will we not receive this mercy if we do not "believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy"?
-Digory
No, because the gospel "is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes."
Ropmans 1 v 16
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
If we do ANYTHING then we have room to boast. The only way to not do anything is if all is predestined.
I'm not sure there's anything wrong with considering that everything is predestined when you eliminate the moral quandry of having anyone being predestined to hell. Annnnnnnnnd if I say anything more on that RuthW will scoop this post up and sweep it into Dead Horses faster than you can spell "Presbyterian".
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
And if God can give us the power to believe without our claiming merit, then why can't He give us power to obey without our claiming merit?
I think I may have lost you here. What are you referring to when you say that God can give us the power to believe without claiming merit?
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
And if God can give us the power to believe without our claiming merit, then why can't He give us power to obey without our claiming merit?
I think I may have lost you here. What are you referring to when you say that God can give us the power to believe without claiming merit?
Just that we are trying to avoid merit and boasting. Someone could easily be proud and claim merit for having accepted Jesus.
So faith-alone is no solution to the problem of merit.
The truth is that it is God who gives us faith, so there is really no room for merit and pride.
But if that is true, then it is also true that God gives us the power to obey Him, so there is no room for merit there either.
So why not just accept Jesus' words that salvation depends on obedience?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
Question: If God has mercy on us first... will we not receive this mercy if we do not "believe, repent, obey, become increasingly loving/holy"?
-Digory
No, because the gospel "is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes."
Ropmans 1 v 16
Honestly, I don't know how this passage relates to my question?
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
And if God can give us the power to believe without our claiming merit, then why can't He give us power to obey without our claiming merit?
I think I may have lost you here. What are you referring to when you say that God can give us the power to believe without claiming merit?
Just that we are trying to avoid merit and boasting. Someone could easily be proud and claim merit for having accepted Jesus.
So faith-alone is no solution to the problem of merit.
The truth is that it is God who gives us faith, so there is really no room for merit and pride.
But if that is true, then it is also true that God gives us the power to obey Him, so there is no room for merit there either.
So why not just accept Jesus' words that salvation depends on obedience?
If obtaining salvation depends upon obediently keeping the law, why bother with a gift of faith then?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
And if God can give us the power to believe without our claiming merit, then why can't He give us power to obey without our claiming merit?
I think I may have lost you here. What are you referring to when you say that God can give us the power to believe without claiming merit?
Just that we are trying to avoid merit and boasting. Someone could easily be proud and claim merit for having accepted Jesus.
So faith-alone is no solution to the problem of merit.
The truth is that it is God who gives us faith, so there is really no room for merit and pride.
But if that is true, then it is also true that God gives us the power to obey Him, so there is no room for merit there either.
So why not just accept Jesus' words that salvation depends on obedience?
Ah, I see now. But what I've been suggesting is that salvation doesn't depend on anything we do at all, belief OR obedience. As stated in the passage I quoted above, I suggest that Christ saved us while we were yet sinners, granting us grace before we even realize we need it. Our lives involve our journey toward the full realization of the potential life we can now live once we understand our salvation, but we need not do ANYTHING to gain it.
-Digory
[ETA the last nine words of the last sentence.]
[ 30. August 2005, 20:43: Message edited by: professorkirke ]
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Lesser Weevil
Apprentice
# 10070
|
Posted
P-R-E-S-B... ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
But to shift the thread, what about our Moslem doctor of earlier? I didn't mean to imply that our grace-enabled response was necessarily of any particular form. Might some become holy and loving long before they recognise the source of the grace that set them on that path?
--------------------
In case of dissension, never dare to judge till you've heard the other side.
Euripides, Heraclidae, circa 428 B.C.
Posts: 40 | From: Chicago | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
As stated in the passage I quoted above, I suggest that Christ saved us while we were yet sinners, granting us grace before we even realize we need it. Our lives involve our journey toward the full realization of the potential life we can now live once we understand our salvation, but we need not do ANYTHING to gain it.
echoing the Lesser Weevil, sure, go ahead down that path. It is a perfectly logical conclusion.
No point in being a Christian or anything else, then. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
If obtaining salvation depends upon obediently keeping the law, why bother with a gift of faith then?
Because the truth is that we have no power to do anything by or from ourselves, because God has all power.
We cannot keep the law without having faith in Him, and we have no power even to have faith - so it is a free gift.
But because He loves us, He lets us feel that this faith, and these works, are ours. So it feels as though we ourselves are keeping the Law through our own efforts. But the efforts are God's. Still, this is what He asks us to do.
The real secret, though, is that belief in God, and appealing to Him for help, is necessary to being able to live a good life. A person really can't keep the Law without faith.
Alcoholics Anonymous is a very interesting illustration of this, since its key ingredient is that only God can keep a person back from the Demon Rum. ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
So my understanding of a legal model is that it begins (I think confirmed by these stories and others) not with the Law as some free-floating standard but with a just Lawgiver who communicates his expectations perfectly. Adam and Eve obeyed his law for a time and then failed (You may eat...but do not eat of...), the rest of us fail, except in Christ, who imparts an alien righteousness (righteous='not guilty', among other things) to us.
Sorry for being so long in getting back to you, Gordon. It's been a busy few days, and it was a bit before I could give your post the thought it deserves.
I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I also don't know exactly what to respond to in your paragraph above. I'll try to spell out what I think are the underlying assumptions -- let me know if I've got them right.
First, you're saying that the Law doesn't exist apart from God. There isn't some Platonic Good or Justice or anything of the sort apart from him that he's bound by or beholden to. Is that correct? If so, I'd agree.
Second, you believe that God gave the Law so we'd know how he expects us to behave. Without it, we wouldn't know, so he wouldn't be able to judge us fairly. Now, since we know, we're without excuse. Is that right?
If so, I disagree. I think God gave us the law because love is too difficult for us. He made us in his own image, so that we could love him and love each other. But we do a lousy job at it, so he gave us the law as a minimum standard, a sort of divine harm reduction program, if you will, to prevent us from damaging ourselves and each other too severely.
I don't believe that people are incapable of keeping the law. Certainly, there was one young man who told Jesus he had kept it entirely from his childhood, and our Lord didn't tell him he was wrong. But keeping the law isn't what God wants from us, anyway. We're supposed to live in perfect love.
In keeping with this, I don't see a Lawgiver at all in the story of our First Parents. When he told them, "don't eat from this tree," it was because eating from that tree would harm them. He wanted to protect them, like a parent warning beloved children not to touch the hot stove.
Finally, I don't understand what you mean by an alien righteousness, or what it has to do with the juridical model.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
To say that God forgives our sins, thereby saving us, without our knowing is going against free will.
Except that some of us would say that forgiveness of sins is not the same thing as salvation. Forgiveness of sins is part of salvation for those of us (most of us) who have sins that need to be forgiven. But forgiveness of sins is only a very small part of salvation.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
Hi Josephine,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, your paraphrase of what I said is fair enough.
Sorry to be so basic, then, but why (in your opinion) does the New Testament (including Jesus) refer to the Old Testament as the "Law and the Prophets", and sometimes just as the "Law", if God is not lawgiver.
And, in your opinion (depending on your answer), is it possible to break this "Law"?
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
professorkirke, you wrote:
quote:
But what I've been suggesting is that salvation doesn't depend on anything we do at all, belief OR obedience. As stated in the passage I quoted above, I suggest that Christ saved us while we were yet sinners, granting us grace before we even realize we need it. Our lives involve our journey toward the full realization of the potential life we can now live once we understand our salvation, but we need not do ANYTHING to gain it.
I think I would agree with this. Certainly I believe that our forgiveness does not depend on these things.
Mudfrog: quote:
How can John 3 v 16 not be about forgiveness.
aul says the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
In other words, the opposite of sin, the result of having sin taken away/ forgiven, is receiving the gift of eternal life - which is what God sent his son to give in response to our belief.
John 3:16 is not about forgiveness, because it is not about forgiveness. There is no mention of forgiveness at all in Jesus discourse with Nicodemus.
The second verse you quote, Romans 6:26, is also not about forgiveness, though it does mention sin, or at least, the effects of sin.
quote:
In other words, the opposite of sin, the result of having sin taken away/ forgiven, is receiving the gift of eternal life - which is what God sent his son to give in response to our belief.
You'll forgive me if I think you are reading quite a lot into this verse. First of all, the taking away of sin is not necessarily synonymous with forgiveness (that is, the taking away of sin could be interpreted as things other than forgiveness; sanctification, for example), nor is the opposite of sin eternal life. Come to think of it, it doesn't say anything about a response of faith either. My suggestion is that the reason that these concepts are so linked in your mind is that you have a belief system that links them. My contention is that this belief system is not warranted from a Biblical perspective. I just don't accept that the Bible says the things that you are so confident that it does.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
