Philippians 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.
i have often debated with myself the issues that are presented in this thread and have found that when it comes down to it i must compare my thoughts with the verse posted above. if my thoughts/desires do not match up with any of the above criterion then i must put them aside and think on something else. let me tell you, it works and if ever i must question if i think something is wrong then likely it is (at least as far as my own conscience is concerned). if i look around in various places to answer a question and can't find a satisfactor answer, then i go with my conscience; and sometimes, my search for an answer to whether something is a sin or not is really just a search for an excuse to continue in that sin with my conscience on silent mode. consider these things next time you think you are lusting. note also that lust can disguise itself as a love for beauty as i know from experience.
Be careful about that though. Sometimes our conscience can become disordered by telling us that things are sinful when they aren't. Sometimes people are conditioned to look upon something as a sin due to the way they were raised to think and interpret things. That can become as bad as a person not having much of a conscience at all.
indeed i know for certain that it is indeed a sin for me. as for others i cannot say either way. you deem that it isn't a sin, therefore i will not hold that against you.
That's why I used the word 'sustenance'.
no, if you look 2 of your posts back you will see that you used 'need', not 'sustenance'.
Be careful about that though. Sometimes our conscience can become disordered by telling us that things are sinful when they aren't. Sometimes people are conditioned to look upon something as a sin due to the way they were raised to think and interpret things. That can become as bad as a person not having much of a conscience at all.
i disagree. yes it is certainly possible for someone to be "taught" a sin rather than to know and understand it as one; however what i am suggesting is a means to measure up an action with the Bible to see for one's self if it is a sin or not. i nowhere speak of going with what you are taught, rather i am asking people to compare their thoughts with the verse mentioned. if they fail the test, then likely they aren't thoughts worth dwelling on. i know for my part that this has worked and i encourage others to do the same.
I'll give you some examples. I bring these up when I read posts where somebody is claiming that this or that is a sin while the Bible doesn't say anything about it one way or the other. I was taught that dancing of any kind was a sin and that drinking alcohol in any amount was also a sin. Sins so serious that if you did them you would lose your salvation. And, speaking of lust, sex for any other purpose than to make a baby was terribly sinful. It was considered to be as bad as and just a glorified form of masterbation. Now if you think that they couldn't justify those beliefs with scripture think again. They will open their Bibles and give you one stern lecture. They would find verses that in their understanding of things would back up what they believe. You telling them that they are wrong would be futile and they would just point their finger at you and tell you that you are the one who's wrong and you need to get serious about righteous living. What people that believe these things and other radical things like this do is they change the way that you think, how you interpret the Bible, and they make your conscience hyperactive. You feel that everything is a sin and you become very self condemning and judgemental of others. You can try and measure up your conscience with scripture, but what you have to understand is that person's entire way of perception has been altered. They would even go so far as to think that chewing gum was a sin because that might be "taking on the appearance of evil" or it being "worldly." Their minds and their conscience becomes so twisted that it by default sees everything as evil. What happens is that they end up living a life of sin because there's almost nothing that they can do that isn't a sin. Believe me, I come from experience on this.
I'll give you some examples. I bring these up when I read posts where somebody is claiming that this or that is a sin while the Bible doesn't say anything about it one way or the other. I was taught that dancing of any kind was a sin and that drinking alcohol in any amount was also a sin. Sins so serious that if you did them you would lose your salvation. And, speaking of lust, sex for any other purpose than to make a baby was terribly sinful. It was considered to be as bad as and just a glorified form of masterbation. Now if you think that they couldn't justify those beliefs with scripture think again. They will open their Bibles and give you one stern lecture. They would find verses that in their understanding of things would back up what they believe. You telling them that they are wrong would be futile and they would just point their finger at you and tell you that you are the one who's wrong and you need to get serious about righteous living. What people that believe these things and other radical things like this do is they change the way that you think, how you interpret the Bible, and they make your conscience hyperactive. You feel that everything is a sin and you become very self condemning and judgemental of others. You can try and measure up your conscience with scripture, but what you have to understand is that person's entire way of perception has been altered. They would even go so far as to think that chewing gum was a sin because that might be "taking on the appearance of evil" or it being "worldly." Their minds and their conscience becomes so twisted that it by default sees everything as evil. What happens is that they end up living a life of sin because there's almost nothing that they can do that isn't a sin. Believe me, I come from experience on this.
even still, doesn't my advise still stand? whether or not a person's conscience has been (i hesitate to say) "brainwashed" by someone else's interpretation, it would still seem fit to compare your thoughts to this verse. this may even be a means of freedom from that bondage. if you compare your thoughts to the verse i posted and find no fault in those same thoughts (despite whatever teaching you may have received), then there is a change of being free from that teaching. obviously, this can go in the complete oposite direction and end up causing more harm than good and thus some restraint should probably be used. still, i fail to see where my suggestion would fail because even if it changes nothing, then it changes nothing and no harm is done. this is to say, even if you still cannot break free of former faulty teaching, at least the outcome is neutral as oposed to negative.
even still, doesn't my advise still stand? whether or not a person's conscience has been (i hesitate to say) "brainwashed" by someone else's interpretation, it would still seem fit to compare your thoughts to this verse. this may even be a means of freedom from that bondage. if you compare your thoughts to the verse i posted and find no fault in those same thoughts (despite whatever teaching you may have received), then there is a change of being free from that teaching. obviously, this can go in the complete oposite direction and end up causing more harm than good and thus some restraint should probably be used. still, i fail to see where my suggestion would fail because even if it changes nothing, then it changes nothing and no harm is done. this is to say, even if you still cannot break free of former faulty teaching, at least the outcome is neutral as oposed to negative.
I am currently in a discussion with another member about whether or not I view the Bible as authoritative. He thinks that I can't possibly view it as authoritative because I don't think the Bible is God's word, but that it is inspired. Thus, his 'conscience' doesn't permit him to view me as a brother in Christ. What does your theory do in a situation like that?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Don't mess with Yoda!
"There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done.""
-C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce (emphasis mine)
"You must be imaginative, strong-hearted. You must try things that may not work, and you must not let anyone define your limits because of where you come from. Your only limit is your soul."
-Chef at the beginning of Ratatouille
I am currently in a discussion with another member about whether or not I view the Bible as authoritative. He thinks that I can't possibly view it as authoritative because I don't think the Bible is God's word, but that it is inspired. Thus, his 'conscience' doesn't permit him to view me as a brother in Christ. What does your theory do in a situation like that?
his conscience doesn't permit him to view you as a brother in Christ? that's unique. for one thing, you could only know this if he told you that himself which i doubt since this really doesn't appear to be an issue where the conscience is or even should be involved. your conscience is something that gives warning when you are on the verge of doing something wrong. i don't see how the conscience is connected. further still, how does this refer to his thoughts? if he thinks ill-will of you, then obviously my theory stands, if not then there is no connection and my theory still stands.
his conscience doesn't permit him to view you as a brother in Christ? that's unique. for one thing, you could only know this if he told you that himself which i doubt since this really doesn't appear to be an issue where the conscience is or even should be involved. your conscience is something that gives warning when you are on the verge of doing something wrong. i don't see how the conscience is connected. further still, how does this refer to his thoughts? if he thinks ill-will of you, then obviously my theory stands, if not then there is no connection and my theory still stands.
I don't think you understand what I'm telling you. This kid thinks that the Bible is God's word, and if you don't, then you're wrong. It is morally reprehensible to say the Bible isn't God's word, and if you do so you're a sinner who doesn't really believe in the authority of the Bible. That is an issue of conscience, and of morality. Again, what does your theory do in a situation like this?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Don't mess with Yoda!
"There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done.""
-C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce (emphasis mine)
"You must be imaginative, strong-hearted. You must try things that may not work, and you must not let anyone define your limits because of where you come from. Your only limit is your soul."
-Chef at the beginning of Ratatouille
even still, doesn't my advise still stand? whether or not a person's conscience has been (i hesitate to say) "brainwashed" by someone else's interpretation, it would still seem fit to compare your thoughts to this verse. this may even be a means of freedom from that bondage. if you compare your thoughts to the verse i posted and find no fault in those same thoughts (despite whatever teaching you may have received), then there is a change of being free from that teaching. obviously, this can go in the complete oposite direction and end up causing more harm than good and thus some restraint should probably be used. still, i fail to see where my suggestion would fail because even if it changes nothing, then it changes nothing and no harm is done. this is to say, even if you still cannot break free of former faulty teaching, at least the outcome is neutral as oposed to negative.
I don't think you understand where I'm coming from on this. A person that has been taught to think differently will see things that are true, noble, right, pure, lovely, excellent, or praiseworthy as being very different things than somebody else. What one person calls pure they might call dirty, or at least not pure enough. They will be very narrow in what they consider to be all of those things. Much more so than most other Christians. What they have been taught all along has been spun or taken to such an extreme that it becomes another doctrine. Since they have had that seed planted so deeply in their conscience it's roots are almost impossible to pull up. It's like crab grass, you can put weed killer on it again and again but it still grows back because its root system is far below the surface. For a person that has been taught a very strict belief system the way they look at things is just different. They automatically see things as sinful because their default switch has been set that way. Their conscience has become distorted.
I don't think you understand where I'm coming from on this. A person that has been taught to think differently will see things that are true, noble, right, pure, lovely, excellent, or praiseworthy as being very different things than somebody else. What one person calls pure they might call dirty, or at least not pure enough. They will be very narrow in what they consider to be all of those things. Much more so than most other Christians. What they have been taught all along has been spun or taken to such an extreme that it becomes another doctrine. Since they have had that seed planted so deeply in their conscience it's roots are almost impossible to pull up. It's like crab grass, you can put weed killer on it again and again but it still grows back because its root system is far below the surface. For a person that has been taught a very strict belief system the way they look at things is just different. They automatically see things as sinful because their default switch has been set that way. Their conscience has become distorted.
I was in every way a perfect description of this picture upon first being born again. I used to walk around agast for fear of sinning. People I met were astounded at my fearful outlook.
It took a lot of work on behalf of the Lord to lead me to freedom in Grace.
He brought me into fellowship with a Grace-filled discipleship group which were instrumental for my progression into the freedom Christ died to give me
Speaking from this experience I can honestly say that freedom from sin is not just an analogy used to imply an absence from sin, but a freedom not to . When I was agast for fear of sinning it was because I was hell-bent toward working out my salvation by works [fear and trembling], rather than by faiththat works.
But it is much deeper than this, for as long as a believer continues to trust that he is walking in Grace [Jesus, Living in and through such a one [abiding in God's Grace, Jesus]] he does not sin. There is no occasion of stumbling in him and he CANNOT sin, for the seed of God remains in him.
These last three statements are Biblical;
1 John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
Jesus alone is born of God, He is the ONLY begotten of the Father, Whom, we who have believed, have received. This is the seed spoken of, and HE cannot sin, because HE is born of God.
I do realise that the above may be misconstrude as a form of annihilation of my personality and/or soul, but it's not, for I both died and was ressurected with my Lord, and am now seated in the Heavenlies in Christ Jesus whilst He Lives in and through me, I'm safe in Christ, just not usually here on earth, but rather witnessing Christ here on earth in my stead, in my heart, through my being, I am His witness
Philippians 1:20-21
According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
What do you receive of God on inquiry as pertains to 1 John 3:9 god's_pawn?
__________________
.
Can the will at the same time make opposite choices? Can it choose the highest good of being as an ultimate end, and at the same time choose any other ultimate end, or make any choices whatever inconsistent with this ultimate choice?
. When I was agast for fear of sinning it was because I was hell-bent toward working out my salvation by works [fear and trembling], rather than by faith that works.
Linear Mode
