Can a Christian be complete or mature like Christ is complete or mature?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Answers

Jim....

What verse in specific are you refering to concerning "having the mind of Christ?"

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Jim...

Where does it say in Philippians 2:5 that we "have the mind of Christ??"

The context of Philippians 2:5 is having an attitude of humility in regards to our relationship to each other.....i.e., the same attitude Christ had when He gave himself up for us.

So again I ask.....what Scripture were you referring to when you quoted Paul as saying we as Christians "have the mind of Christ?"

Thanks for the clarification.

Mike....I'm not ignoring you....but it's only right to allow Jim to answer for himself.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Jim....

If I Cor. 2:16 is in fact the verse you are refering to....I believe most non-Calvinistic scholars agree that the "we" used there is the "apostolic we".....and not a declaration of the average Christian.

Notice the beginning of chapter 2....specifically beginning at verse one......then follow it all the way through and it becomes clear that Paul is contrasting the wisdom of the Apostles (a result of their baptism in the Holy Spirit and divine inspiration)....as opposed to the wisdom of Greek thinking that the Corinthians would have been so impressed with.

In other words, I, as well as most non-Calvinistic scholars understand the "we" in chapter 2 to mean.....the apostles.

Now....if you allow for the doctrine of illumination...then it would be perfectly acceptable to cite such a passage claiming that since "the Spirit revealed it to me....therefore I have the mind of Christ."

Since I do not accept illumination....I see chapter 2 as a discussion of the abilities of the apostles.

For your consideration.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Mike...

We receive the indwelling gift of the Spirit which is a far cry different from the baptism of the Spirit promised to the Apostles in John 14-17.

Again....I stand by my premise....nothing in I Cor. 2 refers to the average Christian.

As per having the mind of Christ via the written word...I guess a case could be made for that.....but that would still not fall under the meaning of "we have the mind" of Christ as defined in chapter 2 of 1 Cor.

Jim and Mark....how did Jesus not sin?? Simple...He was God. Even the temptations of the flesh did not change that.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

DBVZ....

You're free to be wrong again.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2000

Chadrick....

You said....."It is not because He was God."

If He wasn't God.....who was He??

Also....how does claiming He was God....negate Hebrews 4:15??

It seems to me that you are acentuating his humanity to the sacrifice of His divinity.

-- Anonymous, April 24, 2000

But Chuck....you did say it.

You said..."it contradicted"...which in my mine means the same things as negate.

You didn't answer my questions...still.

If He wasn't God....who was He??

How does it "contradict" i.e., negate....Hebrews 4:15??

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Man John......you cleared the upper deck in the left field bleachers on that one!!!!

Great job!!!

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Matt....

Simple question....until the time when Jesus comes again....will any Christian reach the level of "sinlessness?"

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Matt....

What is the fundamental difference between this statement by you....."A Christian can, through the power of the Spirit working through the Word, constantly choose to do the right thing".....and saying......that a person can reach sinlessness???

Are not those two statements exactly the same thing?? And if not....how not??

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Man John.....that is a really small tight rope!!

I feel like I'm asking Bill Clinton to define the word "is."

If a person chooses to do the right thing all the time....is that not sinless???

And if it's not.....what in the world is it??

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

And by the way John....

I'm not sure your answer would be Matt's answer.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Matt....

I'm not sure I agree with the premise that we are "sinless" at baptism.

I think the correct terminology is.....we are "guiltless." Baptism does nothing to change our sinful nature (unless you are a Calvinist who believes in imputed righteousness). Our nature only is changed as we submit to the Lordship of Christ.

And that "guiltlessness" remains as long as we remain in Christ. Thus 1 John 1:9 uses continuous action in the Greek......"if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us and keep on cleansing us from unrighteousness." (Interesting....the assumption of that verse is that continous cleaning will be needed.)

Matt....that may not be what you are saying (or any of the others who are emphasizing this).....but as Richard Rutledge pointed out....many are perverting it. So maybe it's time for a "semantics" check. Someone was in my office two weeks ago from the area where Dick Chambers is the preacher and he mentioned that there are those who are teaching "sinless perfection" as not only the goal....but the possibility.....and the demand.

What concerns me the most....is that a lot of time is taken discussing personal righteousness as opposed to the grace of God.

When it comes to which is discussed most in the N.T.....I would certainly suggest the topic of grace is the most oft discussed topic. And when personal righteousness is discussed....it is never discussed in the format of that which measures one's justification.

You can personally believe anything you want as far as how sinless one should or should not be. People have dealt with the area of "holiness" for years....i.e., to play cards or not to play cards....to watch T.V. or not to watch T.V....mixed swimming or no missed swimming. So this is really not a new discussion....just different words.

But if someone crosses the line and at anytime suggests that "personal righteousness" equals or contributes to justification.....then the Gospel has been perverted.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Chadrick....

Double talk???

No....what sounds like double talk to me is...."we will always need the grace of God".....and yet "the Christian can always choose the right thing."

If the Christian can always do the right thing....then why will they always need the grace of God??

Your stance is far more confusing than a God who calls us to holiness but also UNDERSTANDS OUR HUMAN WEAKNESSES (as Hebrew puts it).....and has a Son who sits at His right Hand and makes intercession for us), also Scriptural.

All this thread does is fulfill what many have come to fear about this movement....an overemphasis on personal piety to the exclusion of grace.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

So Chadrick and Mike....

I presume you know each other....my guess is you are helping each other out to make your arguments.

In light of your last two posts....it appears, then, that you both do believe in the attainment of "sinless perfection"....since therefore, it is only the "sinless" who can practice church discipline.

What an arrogant attitude!!!

Let me ask you.....will either of you then ever be qualified to practice church discipline??

How will you know at what point you are "sinless" enough to practice church discipline??

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Chadrick.....

Don't pull a J.W. technique on me and try to change the course of the discussion.

Answer my questions first.....

1)If the Christian "can always choose the right thing".....where is the need for the grace of God?

2)Will you ever be qualified to practice church discipline??

3)At what point will you know you are "sinless" enough to practice church discipline??

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Mike....

The double talk continues.

Example....an elder will always need the grace of God....but he must be BLAMELESS.

First of all......you misunderstand the word "blameless". It is most often translated "above reproach" and comes from the Greek word which means "cannot get a handle on." Then he proceeds to tell the qualities that an elder should have so that people will not "get a handle on them"...i.e., not a lover of money, manages his household, etc. No where.....have I ever seen anyone suggest that the Elder is to be blameless in the way you suggest...i.e., sinless.

Secondly, just because you quote Scripture does not mean you have a proper understanding of Scripture. I would challenge you, show me one non-Calvinistic theologian throughout history that supports your premise. And don't say it doesn't matter because an important part of hermeneutics is understanding how a text has been historically understood.

Thirdly, Paul says in 1 Timothy 1:15...."It is a trustyworthy statement deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I AM FOREMOST OF ALL."

Now Mike and Chadrick....I assume that you believe Paul to be speaking in the past tense....since....how could Paul admonish others to not sin....while he himself admitted to be the chief among sinnners??

BTW.....I call them the way I see them. Ask Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

First......

I will answer your questions but also state that the questions I lastly presented to Mike and Chadrick....I also present to you.

First....I see no connection between being declared "guiltless" by the blood of Christ and still being "a sinner." That is not a contradiction to me. When Jesus took my sin.....he took the guilt of my sin and the penalty for my sin.

Second, you make much of "sin" in 1 John but make the grave hermeneutical error of not understanding the "sin" for which John is discussing in 1 John (i.e., the sin that leads to death)....as the false teaching of gnosticism that taught that Jesus never came in the flesh.

But if you want to pursue it....fine.....John says..."If we say we have no sin.....we make God out to be a liar."

Matt....your "new teaching" is contradictory and confusing at its best. You admonish us to live sinlessly...and now in fact, you have insisted that our level of perfection reached affects our salvation....and yet.....you say we need the grace of God.

No one would disagree with your assumption that God calls us to holiness. That's not the question. The question is....."As we strive and struggle.....will we fail?"

The Scriptural answer is unequivically yes....which is why we have a "faithful and compassionate High Priest who understands our weaknesses".....and "sits at the right hand of the Father making intercession."

At what point will Jesus not have to make that intercession anymore Matt??

I stand by my premise Matt. Level of sanctificaiton attained has NOTHING to do with my justification....othwise Romans 8:1 is a lie!!! "There is therefore now....NO CONDEMNATION to those who are in Christ Jesus."

It seems to me the very strong temptation in this new doctrine is the temptation of prideful righteousness as opposed to a total reliance on the grace of God.

Do I want to live righteously and holy?? Oh most definitely. But as Paul points out in Romans 8.....not as a slave....but as a son. The things I strive to reach in my Christian life I do BECAUSE I AM A SON.....not a slave. I do it out of thankfulness that my debt was paid.

Jesus spoke to this in the woman who annointed His feet. The self righteous Pharisees condemened his action because "He ought to know what kind of woman she was." Yet Jesus said...."Because her sins which were many have been forgiven....she loves much."

The same is true of the sinner who realizes the debt that was paid for him or her.....it's a love that causes us to desire to live holy lives.

But the reality is Matt.....you or no one else WILL EVER reach sinless pefection....because you WILL NOT ALWAYS rely on the Spirit....and you will ALWAYS be in the need of the grace of God.

I am much more confident in the attitude of the one whom Jesus said "went hom justified"....."God be merciful to me a sinner."

In seems to me in your premise.....that no one will ever know for sure whether the are saved or not until we get to heaven and the score card is pulled out.

My protestations have nothing to do with the supposed calls for righteous living.....but as the Pharisees of old....I see it as putting burdens on people which they cannot bear.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

And....I would add....I would not disagree with Scott on that.

But what happens when we don't listen to the Spirit....but in a moment of weakness....listen to the flesh??

What happens then?? And what do we come back to as far as our spiritual need?? Exactly....the need for the grace of God.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Mike...

It was not my statement....it was Paul's...and you, again, did not answer the question.

I assume for you Paul must have been speaking in the past tense, since by your logic he could not tell people not to sin, and then call himself, "the chief sinner?"

As per your comment about the theologian....since the faith was "once delivered" a hermeneutical maxim is that others who lived closer to the time of the Scripture would also have a correct understanding of the text. The only ones who generally deny this are cults who believe that they alone have had revealed to them the meaning of Scripture hidden for all these years. Everyone else has been wrong.

Blameless....does not equal sinless. Nowhere does the Scripture demand pefection from the elders. They are to be spiritually mature men who have good moral fiber who live lifes "above board" so that no one can "get a handle on them." In other words....they don't cheat on their wife, cheat on their taxes, and if they own a business, they are fair and equitable. Such a man will bring honor to the Lord's church....not opportunity for derision as someone might be able to "get a handle" on them."

No where....does it suggest....that they are sinless.

I've answer your questions....but will not do so again...until the favor is returned.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Matt....

I am offended that you said...."I did not answer you with Scripture."

FOR INSTANCE.....you or anyone else has yet to answer my question concerning 1 Timothy 1:15 and or Paul's discussion of the struggle in Romans 7. I believe you have simply choose to ignore my references to Scripture.

Matt....as I read through your latest post.....I see that our differences could be minor, however, I believe the very strong potential is there to begin to nullify the grace of God through a reliance on one's own level of holiness. If you recognize that danger....good for you. So all I say for now is....maybe our differences are minor.

BUT....that is only because I am able to "read through" some of the things you are saying. The average person in the pew would be confused to say the least.

AND.....there is still this amazingly conflicting view...."That the Christian can always choose to do right".....yet constantly stands in need of the grace of God.

Again....as I stated before.....you folks better check your semantics.....because what you are saying is being carried to the next extreme.

One remains in Christ because they choose to. I am saved as long as I cling to Christ. My justification is no where affected by sanctification. Sanctification is the result of justification...not vice versa.

I am saddened by one thing. While you have been succesful in pulling some of your friends on the forum to help you out...unfortunately....not enough people who have a conflict with the view consider it worth their time to discuss it....therefore, I stand alone.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Matt....

Just as you would condemn those who take your view to the extreme (i.e., sinless perfection)....don't make the same mistake of my view....(i.e., rape, pillage, etc. because of grace). That is indeed a straw man.

You know that is not my position and I would say the same thing Paul did in Romans 6...."May it never be."

I don't know why you feel the need for a such a long discourse on Romans 7. Paul would agree with your basic thesis.....our minds want to conform with the law of Christ....but as long as we are in the flesh we are tempted by the flesh....and often do the very things we know the Spirit would not want us to do....and vice versa.

I have read Titus 2 through twice now.....and see nothing incongruent with what I have said. Yes....the grace of God causes me to want to say no to sin. (By the way....a son obeys faster than a slave.) But again.....THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION.

The question is.....will we always say no to sin?? Answer...no!! For as Scripture says in Romans 3:23...."All sin and fall short of the glory of God."

Therefore, praise be to God for His immeasurable gift.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Matt....

You may have already answered me this before....so humor me.

Will Matt Hartford (or anyone) ever reach a point where the grace of God is no longer needed?? (And I mean grace in the sense of the gift of the atoning death of Christ.)

In other words....will Matt Hartford sin in the future and need the blood to cover Him??

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Matt....

Hyperbole or misrepresenting my position.....you did them both.

NOT ONE TIME IN YOUR THREE YEARS OF HEARING MY SERMONS did you ever hear me say....."Hey, you're forgiven.....so go out and do your own thing".....yet you have done your level best to present my position as such.

You did not answer my question......a simple yes or no is all that is needed.....

Will Matt Hartford sin in the future and need the blood of Christ to cover Him??

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

This is what I was afraid of Matt.

Does "dead to sin" mean I will never sin again???

Absolutely not!!!!

I am "dead to sin" in the sense that it is no longer the primary focus of my life. Previous to my conversion to Christ the only thing that drove me was the desire to sin. Thus as Paul points out in Romans 6...."we should no longer be slaves to sin."

Now....I have a new allegiance.....Jesus Christ. As Michael D. points out....everyday....I must deny myself, take up my cross (i.e., die again to self).....and follow Christ. Why would Jesus make such a statement if He did not as the Hebrew writer say...."Understand our weaknesses??" It seems to me as Michael pointed out the Bible assumes our struggles and failures. My desires are for Him and His kingdom.

Or, as Roger Chambers use to say....."Sin now becomes the embarrasing exception."

When sin use to be my master, I sinned and did not care, because it was king.

Now when I sin, I am heartbroken. Why?? Because..."Oops....now I'm going to hell??"

ABSOLUTELY NOT!! I'm heartbroken....because I want to be Christlike in my life in order to show thankfulness for his immeasurable gift.....NOT....so that I can obtain that gift.

Matt....your "new doctrine" (although it is really not new)....teeters on the very edge of the sin of the Judaisers who said...."Yes....we are saved INITIALLY by the grace of God....BUT....we remain saved by obeying the law of Moses." The only difference is, you replace "law of Moses"....with....."putting away the desires of the flesh."

Your doctrine denies our very humanenss.......one which Paul in Romans 7 and in 1 Timothy 1:15 understood very well.

BTW....your exegesis of Romans 3 was wrong and in fact misses the entire purpose of the book of Romans.

The book of Romans was written to settle the issue of broken fellowship at Rome between Jewish and Gentile Christians. At issue was the question..."WHO are the sons of God?"

The Gentiles claimed they were and the Jews were rejected....and the Jews claimed that they still were.

Thus Paul points out in Romans 1....that the Gentiles are under sin. In Chapter 2.....the Jews are under sin. Leading to his conclusion, then, in chapter 3 that all are under the condemnation of sin. Therefore, neither one holds the corner on righteousness.

However, his point then in chapter 4 & 5 is then......all are made righteous by faith in Christ.

To see Romans 3 as only in the past tense....is simply untrue to the whole of biblical teaching in the book of Romans.

Just so everyone who reads the forum sees the difference....I will admit right now....based on past experience.....Danny Gabbard, Sr. WILL SIN AGAIN.

Is that a declaration of my "freedom in Christ?" Absolutely not! It is a realization that I am a sinner. My acceptance of Christ did nothing to change my basic character. That is a life long process, or struggle, that requires persistence and discipline.

But.....it is nice to know....in the midst of my struggles, He understands my weaknesses, and died for my sin.....past, present, and future.

In fact Matt....as Roger also use to say...."There were great benefits to recognizing our sinfulness. 1) He makes us realize how much we need Christ and we will cling to Him with everything we have. (Remember, the non-swimmer runs for the life preserver much faster). 2) It enables us to love our brothers for when we realize how much Christ has forgiven us.....we will be forgiving."

Eph. 4:32...."Forgive each other, just as in Christ Jesus, God forgave you."

If I understand your position Matt.....I guess there is a limit to God's forgiveness.

You get so many chances to get it right, and if you don't.....you are out of there!!!!

Romans 8:38-39 points out that NOTHING will be able to separate us from the love of God.

Now immediately you will charge back with "You believe in eternal security!"

You know that ain't so Matt. I believe in "Once saved, always saved.....as long as my trust is in Christ."

"Nothing to the throne I bring....only to the cross I cling."

I believe it's a lot harder to go to hell than you are leading people to believe Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Chadrick....

First....I disagree with your view of "death" as it is used in Romans 6. You are trying to force a meaning on a text that is simply not there.

As to answering your questions....

1) Grace....that which we do not deserve.

2) Do not sound "holier than thou" by calling my references "proof texting." I've seen plenty of that from your side.

Your question assumes that at conversion.....our nature is changed. This is why I firmly believe that you deny it if you want...but your premise is Wesleyan in nature....i.e., "the Holy Spirit must work through me because I'm too weak to do it myself."

To me....that says something the Bible does not say....because it assumes "moral depravity"....i.e., I cannot choose good unless God empowers me to do this.

I maintain that conversion does nothing to change our character, simpy our standing with God...i.e., Romans 8:1..."There is, therefore, now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus."

My nature is what I choose to change as I am obedient to the Word. That's a choice I make....the Spirit cannot do that for me.

Mike....if we somehow lost our sinful nature at baptism....then please explain why all the directions in the N.T. to "conform to godliness"....to "reject the deeds of the flesh?"

If our nature was changed at our baptism.....then why bother with the instructions??

All the verses that call us to godliness (as you all have pointed out)....assume that the Christian still has a sinful nature that has to be conformed to godliness.

3)No the Christian does not have to sin. But human experience....yours as well....tells you that you will again. Which, therefore, leads to the need for a High Priest as the book of Hebrews states "who understands our weaknesses."

I say this with all the love I can muster....but your doctrine reeks of a "holier than thou" attitude. This was manifested in Mike's post on another thread where he pointed out that our movement is dead because we have not pushed personal holiness. That is a simplistic answer to a problem that is many faceted.

I will say this....it impresses me that it takes three of you to stay up with me. Ha!!!

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

For further Scriptural evidence that Christians still have a sinful nature, good grief.....just read the book of 1 Corinthians.

It reads like today's newspaper headlines.

Let's have a list of sins from Corinth....shall we?? division, pride, arrogance, immorality (so bad that the Gentiles did not even do such things), misuse of spiritual gifts, lawsuits against each other, going to pagan temple worship on Saturday and the Lord's church on Sunday, abuses at the Lord's table, offending weaker brothers. (And that's just what comes to me off the top of my head!)

All that, and yet, the apostle Paul says in the following verses.....

1:2 "To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been SANCTIFIED IN CHRIST JESUS." (Funny, they don't sound sanctified.)

1:2 "Saints by calling"....(hmmmm....they don't sound saintly)

1:3 "Grace to you an peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." (hmmmmm.....sure sounds like my definition of grace....because they sure didn't deserve it.)

16:15 "Now I urge you brethren"....(hmmm...still calls them brethren....evidently they had not sinned enough to be written off yet. I probably would have....but I'm not God.)

Now....boy....I can't wait to hear the answer to this one. Man....I didn't just give you a Scripture....I gave you whole book!

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Matt....

Instead of answering the Scripture....you flat out denied it.

He DID call them HOLY....I will quote it again.....

I Cor. 1:2...."To those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus." (Sanctification and Holy are the same word in the Greek.)

It really is unbecoming when you have complimentary posts to each other.

We can keep on going as long as you like or discontinue....but this has renewed my efforts to warn others about the danger of this doctrine.

Matt.....from your next to last post.....there is little you and I would disagree with. I just hope and pray that you continue to stand firm on that post and not move to what historically has been the logical extreme of this position....a "level" of sinless perfection.

The biggest danger I see is taking away people's security in Christ....almost back to a Calvinistic level of never really knowing whether I'm saved or not....because I never know whether or not my level of sanctification is enough to be counted "in Christ."

To count on anything else as Paul says in Galatians is to fall from grace.

BTW....if one were dead to sin in the way you define "dead"....then....one should assume....there would be no more sin.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Thank you Mike for one of the most confusing statements I have ever read in my entire life.

Let me quote...."And through diligence in the Scriptures, God will, if I am allowed to live that long, stregthen me to make the right choices not to sin, not that I can't but I will make the choice not to, through the working of God in me."

What in the world does that mean?? Can anyone on the forum explain ti to me. So...if you are allowed to live long enough...then you will reach sinless perfection, wherein you will always choose to do right???

Sounds almost like "spiritual evolution"....i.e., if I live long enough I will finally get it right.

And I think you guys are not being honest by saying your conclusion does not lead to "sinless perfection" for as Mike himself stated...."I will make the choice not to."

Unless someone has changed the meaning of the English language.....say what you mean....and mean what you say.

And Mike....are you judging my heart?? Did Jesus and the Apostles not regularly use sarcasm??

I guess you haven't reached "sinless perfection" yet.....as you are guilty of judging people's motives.

Matt....

Be very careful of accusing others of causing the rift because of their attitude of not wanting to speak at churches, clinics etc.....or debating....as being the ones who are causing the split.

Last I checked.....they also would have the same attitude towards a Wesleyan, Methodist, Baptist, and or Mormon.

Your argument either stands or falls on its own without the need for accusing others.

BTW....I'm still waiting for my Walter Scott references.....and the other non-Calvinistic authors who present the same view of Scripture that you do.

It amazes me that you seem to be claiming that you folks are the only ones who have gotten it right in 2000 years of church history.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Thanks Mike for not clearing up the confusion....but instead offering yourself as a persecuted martyr because "you have the truth." That is a classic "cultic" mentality.

George Faull's article on "Perfection" gives my understanding of Romans 3:23 as well.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

So are we to assume AW Kelley.....that you no longer sin??

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Mike...

There is absolutely no way to clear up the contractions I have pointed out numerous times.

We are arguing in circles.

As I told Matt.....I'm with you all in everything you said...UNTIL.....you insinuated that our salvation in Christ is ultimately dependant upon some unknown level of sanctification that is reached.

Here is a couple of questions.....

1) Can we ever know for sure.....that we are saved??

2) How will we know when we have reached a level of sinlessness that, therefore, we can have some grounds for certainty in our salvation??

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Mike.....

Don't bother answering the questions.

Really. Nothing personal.

I've just decided to discontinue my association with this forum.

You, Matt, and others have my e-mail address. I will be glad to continue our discussion via e-mail.

This forum is not and never has been a place to have any kind of meaninful debate because we always have referee's like Connie, AKelley, and Nelta....determining the rules of debate which they have no knowledge of at all.

I am also extremely disturbed that none of my "brethren" have offered any assistance in this debate, while I contended with no less than three people. You three are to be commended for helping each other out. I'm sure there were some things I could have said better.....and George Faull's article brought to light numerous Scriptures that just would not come to my mind. So....the odds....unlike a real debate....are simply unfair. In any situation.....3 minds are better than one (especially when it is as small as the one I have). (See....I still have my humor.)

Matt....alluded to the fact that no one will accept the challenge to debate the issue. I will accept it any time......as long as it would be on neutral ground and the rules of debate will be strictly followed. Terms, of course, would have to be agreed to by both parties.

True debate involves many facets of human language, including sarcasm. How anyone can come away from the Campbell debates on this one....is beyond me....especially his debate with Robert Owen.

The spirit of tolerance....and weaniness is alive and well in the Church of Christ.

May God continue to lead you, Matt, Chadrick, and myself....to continue to search the Scriptures daily to see if these things are so.

Yours in Christ, Danny Gabbard, Sr.

PS: Nobody needs to bother responding.....I assure you.....I won't be around to read it. If you got anything to say....you got my e-mail address.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Well, at first I thought I was. But the older I get the further away it seems to get.

It is sorta like..."The hurrier I go the behinder I get!"

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Mike,

The answer to your question lies in the definition of the word "complete". "Mature" is a very good way to define the Biblical word for complete or perfect.

Maturity in Christ is really nothing more than a combination of Bible study, life experience, perseverance, and daily determination to make ourselves more Christlike.

Can we be as complete as Christ? I would say No. Jesus is God, we are not. There are aspects about Him that we can never approach, as creation can never be equal or superior to Creator.

But.....as Christians we have the Spirit of God dwelling within us - and that provides us with a great deal. He (the Spirit) helps guide us in our daily decisions and actions (if we let Him). He can utter our desires and feelings to God even when we can't find the words in which to do it. We will never be as complete as Christ, but with the Spirit's help and a lot of diligence on our part - I think one has the ability to come reasonably close, in at least some aspects.

The good news is - we don't have to be as perfect as Christ. When we accept Christ as our Savior and follow Him & His commandments, we "put on" or clothe ourselves in Christ. Therefore, God sees not our pathetic lives and attempts, but instead sees Christ. The pure, white cloak of Christ envelops us in God's eyes - so we don't have to be perfect, just faithful.

God IS good, isn't He.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

If we can't be, then why did He say be perfect (complete-mature). Was He lying? If we cannot posses the mind of Christ why did Paul say we could? Kinda confusing, isn't it?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Dr Jim,

I really don't see it as confusing. We can be "perfect" in the sense of being mature (as I defined maturity up above). Possessing a mind Like that of Christ (one focused on Godly principles and actions) isn't necessarily a difficult proposition, just a life-long one. It is our fleshly actions that occassionally get us into trouble - a dilemma Paul fought as explained in Romans 7:14-25

My point was just that we cannot become Exactly like Christ. We are two different types of beings, therefore we can never be identical. I thank God for that too, I wouldn't want to be God - I couldn't handle the pressure!

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Philippines 2:5 is the Scripture Reference.

Oh, I know we are not God, but exactly how did Jesus go without sinning?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

I believe that Paul said in 1 Cor 2:16 that we Christians have the mind of Christ. Not that we are diety equal with God,able to call out of nothing the universe,but we have the fullness of diety dwelling in Christ's body, His Church. Col 2:9. And His Spirit that works within us.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny,

Right you are. If Paul said let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, then it is a possibility to attain this mind-set(or we should already exhibit it), right.

Again, and I need all your help here, how was Christ able to go without sin? I know that we are free moral agents and we will never out grow our need for Christ. (That is an impossibility!)

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Dan,

I did mean 1 Corinthians 2:16. Thinking of one and wrote the other. Guess I'm not PERFECT YET!!!

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny,

Again I agree with you. I wanted comformation of my thoughts on the matter. I have been presented with the idea of perfection many times and the questions that arise are:

If Paul said let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, then it is a possibility to attain this mind-set(I believe we should already exhibit the attitude of Christ if we are His), right.

Still no one has answered my question. HGow do I deal with this question. I want your thoughts to see if I'm going in the right direction.

Again, and I need all your help here, "How was Christ able to go without sin?"

Personally, I know that we are free moral agents and we will never out grow our need for Christ. (That is an impossibility!)

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny-

What you said seems to make sense, although as I follow the 1 Cor 2:16 passage back to verse 13 it seems to indicate that the apostle here is talking to Christians, Christians recieve the Spirit from God in immersion and further on through the end of the chapter unless I missed it, it never changes from Christians to apostles. Now I am far from a scholar and do not play on on T.V. but I do not put my trust in them entirely and I am not asserting that you do either, but rather Romans 3:4 and Acts 17:11. Treating man as a liar, and searching the scriptures daily 2 Tim 2:15 rightly dividing the word of truth are who I listen to. My entire trust, as I am assuming yours is too, is in the perimeter of scripture, the 100% accurate word of God. I do allow scholars to guide me in a general direction to do my own research, but I have to be careful not to rely on them. Now if this passage is talking about Baptism in the Holy Spirit, again I am unable to find the defining factors for this contention. I may have missed it, so I will wait for your reply to clear it up. Again bare with me, I am far any of your equals in the scriptures, especially Jim, I have heard him preach and have his material. So I know I am not close to his scriptural knowledge. Although there is alot to learn a well respected Christian said one time " How do you eat an elephant?...... One bite at a time!

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny- One more question, If the apostles were inspired, and the bible is inspired, and Christians have a copy of the bible, then could we not say that we have the mind of Christ? If the bible contains all Christ's words He knew we would need for all that pertains to life and godliness then would that not be considered the mind of Christ? I would have to think that lines up logically. I am always searching for the truth, so if I am wrong I will change, the kingdom has no room for pride.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Thanks Jim...

Now I know where your question is coming from......"How did Jesus go without sinning?".

Jim, I don't think we will ever know the answer to that in its fullest sense - at least not on this side of Paradise anyway. I see that question as being similar to "How did God create everything from nothing?" I don't have a clue.

These are questions that go beyond human comprehension. Kinda goes back to the idea that we are not God, as there are many things He can think and do that we cannot even fathom with our mere mortal minds.

The above would be my answer if anyone asked that particular question. We could go on and speculate about how Jesus' motivation, love, concern, former pre-incarnate deity, and various other ideas helped Him in His all-too-human struggle against sin. Those sound good and make great sermons & sermon illustrations, but they are still speculation on our parts.

When asked, I would move the conversation in the direction I did in my first answer on this thread - forget about being a perfect person or discovering how Christ became one, and instead focus on being Found perfect in Christ. That is something we can comprehend and act on.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

You're on the right track there Mike....

We do not have every word of Jesus (the Apostle John said as much), but we do have all that we NEED according to what Paul told Timothy.

That is pretty much where I was going in the first reply when I spoke of Maturity being a combination of things - beginning with Bible study.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Mark-

Yes it I think is fair to say that we do not have all of Christ's mind, but He gave us what He knew we would need.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Jim-

Let me see if I can answer your question correctly. Heb 4:15 makes it clear that Christ was tempted in ALL points, yet did not sin. And He gave up some priveleges Phil 2:7. So I believe that the answer is the Indwelling, the same thing we as Christians have. In addition to that He memorized the scriptures, obviously from all of the accounts in which He quoted the Old Testament. Scriptures do not say that He was supernaturally able to answer with scripture, or possibly He could not be our example in this regard. To follow in His foot steps would mean to memorize the scriptures as He did, leaving us this example to follow. So therefore we should be able to be complete or mature as Christ was, first because we have all that He did (But not the miraculous healing powers to prove He was from God , but we can prove the authority and accuracy of the scriptures to prove what we say is from God, and that only the bible is His word) and secondly He told us to be( Matt 5:48). Correct?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny-

First, as I understand it, Paul is writing to the church of Christ at Corinth, which it seems to me would contain Christians and the word "we" to me as my limited experience indicates, would mean that he is talking to Christians, even 1 Cor 1:30 it would seem is talking to Christians, would you agree? And from there where is the transition made to apostles? You refer to John 14:17, and I agree with you that the apostles were different in some respects, but your premise is not affected by this, because this passage in John does not define who the "we" are in 1 Cor 2:15, I would think the grammar in 1 Cor 2:15 would do that, but of course, it does define who is guided into all truth. And if the bible contains all truth, then it would be the mind of Christ. And I noticed that you did not nail down specifically what in that chapter or adjoining chapters would show that he spoke to the apostles only. To contend the opposite, I am very interested in your view of the scriptures and I will always change if wrong. Like I said I am not a scholar and I can be wrong.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny,

Jim and Mark....how did Jesus not sin?? Simple...He was God. Even the temptations of the flesh did not change that.

Do we have a problem as Mike pointed out in Hebrews. How could He (Jesus) be tempted like us if He overcame because He is God?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

This kinda reminds me of "Alice Through the Looking Glass." After Alice and the Red Queen have run until they are winded, Alice notices they are in the same place they started from, next to a tree. When she points out to the Queen that the tree is still beside them, the Queen replies, "Of course it is ... here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!"

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

To all-

I appreciate the Christ-like attitude from all in this category. This subject is hotly contested by many in the brotherhood. I pray we will all be honest with the scriptures and allow them to lead where God has predestined them to lead. May our lives be a continual groping for the truth, in every aspect. To God be the Glory! Forgive me if I have taken up quite a bit of space answering you all, I did something really bad to my knee yesterday and all I can do is sit and type for the most part, and what better use of time than to reason together through the scriptures.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Thanks Mike. Love ya brother. Have great night!!

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2000

Danny,

I doubt only Calvinists see I Cor. 2 as refering to ALL mature Christians. That passage is set in contrast with Chapter 3 and following, about the "mere infants in Christ" who were "not yet ready" for solid food. And if they are infants and not yer ready, it is clear they are expected to mature and become ready. They are taught throughtout the book as infants, and in Chapter 14 are told to "eagerly desire spiritual gifts"; presumably as they become ready for it and mature. Again in 14:30 they are told to "stop thinking like children." and "in you thinking be adults". The adult thinking they are to aspire to is described throughout the book, but especailly in Chapter 2. The Corinthians are told to imitate Paul, and how could that be if only the apostles were capable of such "adult" thinking?

I believe you missed the intent of Chapter 2 entirely.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2000

To all the saints who write and read this forum. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and The Lord Jesus Christ (some memory work Ive been wanting to quote). Ive been thinking of your question Jim and have done a study on the subject. Much more needs to be done and Lord willing I will find some time as I lead my family and work with my hands to provide for them. I will not attempt to answer the question yet but start out with an answer that will not work.

I cannot start by answering because He was/is God because that would contradict Both Hebrews 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. And James 1:13b  for God cannot be tempted by evil... That answer would force one to conclude that there are contradictions in the Bible. There are not and the answer to How was He both tempted and God? is found in Philippians 2:6,7 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

So in conclusion, it is not because He was God

Also, I would like to change the question to a more positive question. Instead of asking why didnt He sin, I want to ask How did He live a conquering, overcoming, victorious life?

Jim, if Harold Rutledge is still with you tell him and Becca my wife and I say Hi.

-- Anonymous, April 24, 2000

Danny,

Guess I needed to be more refined in my explanation:

Jesus was tempted in all points, just as we are, yet without sin (Heb) but God cannot be tempted by evil (James). So who was He? Was He tempted as you, Danny and I humans are tempted? Yes, just as we humans are because He became human as we are (Phil)

If I'm wrong please show me scriptures that I may have a better understanding. Thanks...

-- Anonymous, April 24, 2000

Danny, I did not say that claiming Jesus was God negated Heb 4:15. I said answering the question with "because He was God"...

Please be careful how you quote me. It could mean alot...

Thanks

-- Anonymous, April 24, 2000

It seems to me that Chadrick is saying that Jesus was not God while he was here on earth, but merely a man. Am I correct?

Chadrick also errs when he quotes James ("God cannot be tempted by evil"). For often in Scripture "God" means God the Father specifically, and this may be one such case. Not to mention that I believe the historical Biblical doctrine of Christ was that he was fully God and fully man, and that in his humanity he could be tempted, but in his divinity he could resist. (Which is why we need the Holy Spirit btw).

As Paul stated, "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" (Colossians 2:9). "In the Beginning ... the Word was God ... and the Word became flesh." He is Immanuel, "God with us." It does not say anywhere in the New Testament that Jesus stopped being God while he was on Earth. Philippians 2 merely says that He humbled Himself, He submitted to the will of the Father and became a man. It does not say He divested Himself of his Godhood, merely that He placed it in a submissive role, just as He did everything in His live.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Danny-

To answer an earlier discussion, 1 Cor 2:15 is talking about the apostles, I stand corrected, although we still have the mind of Christ from the bible revealing the mysteries hidden from ages past. The mystery has been revealed to us Col 1:26-27 " The mystery which has been hidden from the ages and generations; but has now been manifested to His saints, to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the gentiles, which is Christ ib you the hope of glory." Through the apostles the mind of Christ was revealed, and is no longer hidden.

But then something you said caught my eye. You said in you mine " negate" and "contradict" mean the same thing? To me that sounded as though you were being a little post modern, our president does the same thing " it depends what your definition of "is" is. Clearly the dictionary defines these two words much differently. Let us not playing "selective definitions" . Instead let us reason together, minus the sarcasm. I think Chadrick has a valid point, and you seem to wiggle and dance around clearly written scriptures. At least that is the way I see it. John And the point you made about Col 2:9, this contention would be valid if Paul would by the inspiration of God chosen other grammar specifically where the word " dwells" appears. Rather this is not looking back but (or else dwelt would have been used)talking in present tense of the fullness of deity dwelling in Christ's body, His church. Or a possible grammatical error in the bible. And I am not saying that this is what you think. I believed God used that word specifically with this intention. Even in the book of John he says" And the Word became flesh and DWELT among us." Again proper grammar to convey a specific though. So as I understand this passage, In the church the " Fullness of deity dwells in bodily form." So since the grammar is present tense and Christ's body is the Church then how does this refer to Him retaining all the Fullness of deity when Phil 2:6-7 makes it clear He laid aside some of His priveleges?Now we have a clear contradiction one is denyiny what another affirms.Did you catch what I am trying to say? I am not sure that sounds as clear as I would like but if not let me clear it up. Or maybe you can clear it up for me, which ever let me know.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

John

Please read this last comment about Col 2:9. I am sorry I put a space and when it was submitted it was smashed together, read the whole thing if you like, but your part starts at " John at the point you made........"

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Actually John's statement made a sudden slant and went foul. Col. 2:9 does not in any way state that Christ had the fulness of Deity in bodily form.(Although I believe he did). The word "lives" or "dwells" is a present tense verb. The body that Christ has is the church as Paul identifies in 1:18 of Col. This verse states that the church has the fulnees of Deity. Paul states the same thing a little differently in 2:10 when he states "and in him you have been made complete" (full- the same word for fullness in the previous verse).

I would say you would have a huge burden to prove that "God" in James 1:13 would be the Father exclusively. Besides, it would be nice for you to have some scripture to prove that Jesus resisted temptation because He was divine (which He absolutely was and is.) I can give you scripture to show you how Jesus persevered through temptation: I Peter 2:21-23, "For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept ENTRUSTING HIMSELF TO THE ONE WHO JUDGES RIGHTEOUSLY;". He conquered by trusting God not His own divinity, which is by the way why Peter says that this example if for us to "follow in His steps, who committed no sin...".

Also, if Jesus conquered because He was God then Hebrews 2:14-18 is meaningless. Hebrews 2:14-18: "Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through His death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the Devil; and might deliver those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the descendant of Abraham. Therefore, He HAD to made like His brethren in ALL things, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted." Jesus' ability to understand where I am coming from and to be my high priest is that He partook of the same flesh I have and overcame by the same Spirit God gives me Col. 2:9-10. Also, Hebrews 4:14-16 states: "Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy in the time of need." Jesus laid aside His priveledge of being immune to temptation in order to experience life in the flesh of men, all the while never ceasing being God, in order to help my weak flesh overcome.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Danny,

Chadrick (not Chuck- this may have been an oversight but if it wasn't it is not exactly the most edifying thing to do Eph. 4:29) was saying that Jesus was God. If you examine his statement "it is not because He was God" you will see that he is saying He was God but this is not the reason He did not sin.

I kinda goofed on my first sentence on my last post. I meant to say in the parentheses that I believe He was fully God in the flesh as is stated in Col 1:19.

Why would God keep on telling us things like "stop sinning" and "let us cleanse ourselves of ALL defilements of the flesh and spirit" and "and everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself just as He is pure", and "putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness..." and many other scriptures that tell us to do the like? I am looking for any SCRIPTURAL answer that would help me clarify. I have always responded with Scripture on this forum. I hope everyone would do the same because it really doesn't matter what anyone believes, only what the Word says.

With all the love I have, (which I hope is reciprocated)

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

He conquered by trusting God not His own divinity. Thank you Matt for your one sentence saying clearly what I was trying to write in a logical argument.

NO John you are incorrect. Thanks for asking. I would hate to be labeled as one who didnt believe Jesus in the flesh was divine. Please notice I never wrote Jesus was not God/divine. If my last statement was read the reader would with a little thought understand I believe 100% that Jesus was and is God, though He did not rely on that to overcome.

Again Matt said it well, Jesus laid aside His privilege of being immune to temptation in order to experience life in the flesh of men, all the while never ceasing being God, in order to help my weak flesh overcome.

Thanks

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

To add to this discussion, consider that Jesus was born of a virgin and the Son of God for a reason. He was born free of the damage done by the sin of Adam, and became the second Adam with the unfettered free will to choose good or evil. While he was human, as we are, and tempted as we are, He was in the "undamaged" human state of Adam (without being prone to sin as all others after Adam are); as well as being fully divine. It is a mistake to believe any other human can live a sin-free life; though Christ is our example, and we need to try to live as sin-free as possible.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

dbvz,

It would be a mistake to bring in the Calvinistic doctrine of total depravity into the picture as it has no support in Scripture. I noticed you used no Scripture to back up your belief. Hebrews 2:14 states: "Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the SAME". Also Romans 8:3, "For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh."

Jesus partook of the same flesh, with all its weaknesses, that we have.

Matt

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2000

Chadrick;

Whew! I am glad you clarified your position. :-)

"Jesus Christ [as to His Diety] the same yesterday, today and forever!"

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Danny,

As I said in the post on "another gospel" there is no "point" or "level" where a Christian will not able to sin. My point is that a Christian can, through the power of the Spirit working through the Word, constanly choose to do the right thing. It is a case by case, moment by moment thing. If I ever take my eyes off of Christ or cease listening to the Word, I fall. There is no level or point. I can though, constanly shoose to pick God's way if I desire. It is not easy, it is extremely hard because I must deny my flesh which has a very powerful influence. Yet I must adhere to the admition of Paul who states in Romans 6:11, "Even so consider yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God."

I hope that tells you where I am coming from. If I need to clarify please let me know.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

No, Danny, I don't think they are. "Sinlessness" implies that the person is completely free from sin, that the very capability to sin has been somehow expunged from a person's being. Matt's scenario is of one who is not free of sin, and fully recognizes it, yet through reliance on the Spirit constantly makes the right decisions, chooses the right path. Insofar as they remain on that path, they are not sinning, but they are certainly able to fall off that path, and certainly their sin nature is still with them regardless.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Danny,

Your question asked if a person could reach a "level". You need to define what you mean by level. I think you would agree that when you confess your sin you are free from sin because God forgives you. So do I. You are therefore sinless until you sin again. My statement is that an individual whose mind is set properly and, most importantly, walking by the Spirit, will stay that way until they decide to sin. That could be 1 second, 1 hour, 1 day, etc. Paul states it this way in Gal. 5:16, "But i say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the deeds of the flesh."

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Danny,

You told John you didn't think his answer would be my answer. Why? Do you think I believe what you stated the argument was in the previous thread on this issue? I don't believe anything you wrote in stating the issue in "another gospel". I would agree that would be "another gospel". And I do not know anyone who does...ESPECIALLY Jay Wilson. He doesn't mind if I name him.

No one has offered other interpretations of the Scriptures I have offered. I am open-minded on this issue but I must see Scripture. I am writing something on Romans 7 and I will probably put it on a new thread soon.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Danny-

I did not get from Matt that he was teaching that we need not the Grace of God. As for us not without sin after immersion, I ask this question. Can God come and dwell in something unholy? I do not know if I can nail down all the associated scriptures, but some do come to mind. Acts 22:16 seems to indicate that our sins are washed away in immersion,now is that all sin? Along with Romans 6 where is says the old man is buried,( gone, dead) not just part of him. 2 Cor 5:17 the old is passed away behold new things have come. What was old is gone! Does that help?

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2000

Just a quick question. Where does it say (In the Bible) that the Christian has a sinful nature?

Thanks,

-- Anonymous, April 27, 2000

I thought now we have become partakers of a divine nature - 2 Peter 1:4 "For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, in order that by them you might become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust."

-- Anonymous, April 27, 2000

Danny - do you NOT believe in "imputed righteousness"?

-- Anonymous, April 27, 2000

Sorry for so many small entries tonight but my spirit is provoked

Eph 2:1 And you were (past tense) dead in your trespasses and sins, 2:2 in which you formerly (when? Formerly.) walked according to the course of this world (now if we choose, we walk by the Spirit), according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 2:3 Among them we too all formerly lived (past) in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were (past tense) by nature (what? Past nature.) children of wrath, even as the rest. 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 2:5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved, 2:6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus, 2:7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 2:9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast. 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works (created for what? For good works that some say we cant practice even though Christ in the flesh did), which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them (but some of you say we cant  we must try but we will never be able to what a bunch of hypicritical preaching and teaching. Dont sin  but we are always going to. Sounds like a bunch of double mindedness.)

-- Anonymous, April 27, 2000

Chadrick

I was just asked the other night. How can we discipline anyone for sin in the CoC? If we are nothing but a bunch of sinners nothing more, then would it not be unreasonable to have discipline? I am just giving in to my sinful nature, and the leadership may or may not be more or less the same sinner I am, so how can they discipline me for the same that they are guilty of. Or since they are sinning less, they can stand in judgement of me because I am sinning slightly more than they. This seems to be contrary to the scriptures, but the mind- set of many in the CoC.

-- Anonymous, April 27, 2000

I heard at All for Christ Weekend someone asked What constitutes a practice of sin? Seems to me (the man said) that anyone who sins more than me is practicing sin. See how subjective we would have to be if we all have to sin. Your point is a valid one Mike.

Anyone who tries to live a victorious life by there own power will fail. I believe that is why so many people are against the "overcoming" message of God. They, like I use to be, are trying to be victorious by their own power. They fail time and again, so in their minds it must be imposible. But every Christian who relies on the power of God can overcome by the stregnth of HIS MIGHT. God can do anything. Those who say we cannot are saying our God is weak. That makes me shudder.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny - please define "grace" for us. Is its soul purpose to continualy forgive sin? It does that [I do not for one instance believe it does not] but is that all it does?

I will always need the grace of God. I attain what you call "sinless perfection" every time I confess my sins to our loving, caring, merciful Father. And those times get furthur apart as I'm learning to practice righteousness.

Can we practice righteousness Danny?

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny-

Ephesians 4:29 Let NO unwholsome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word, as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear it. (Emphasis added on " NO") I think we can reason throught the scriptures without the accusations of JW's tactics being used, of which I do not think is the case. Your first question1)"If the Christian "can always choose the right thing".....where is the need for the grace of God?" I must answer this with asking a question, And this is not evading but so that all is understood where it is you are coming from. 1. Where did any of us assert that we will get to a point that we do not need the grace of God? I think the burden of proof for this is on you. The way you worded your question seems to indicate that all Christians must continue to rely on grace in the same amount all the time, when Paul gives another view " Are we to continue in sin that Grace might increase?" And he answers this MAY IT NEVER BE!!!! Your second question2)"Will you ever be qualified to practice church discipline??" Again you never answered my original question, but I will answer this one. Titus 1:5-9 makes clear that an Elder must be ABOVE REPROACH ( or better tranlated BLAMELESS!)! So clear does God want this CLEAR that He uses this statement in verse 5 and 6. Now as I understand it one who carries out discipline in the Lord's church must be BLAMELESS. But not in the CoC, we seem to ignore this passage. This should help, and if not ask more questions. And actually your third question is answered by Titus 1:5,6 An elder must be blameless, not just a forgiven sinner. I hope this is helpful. Please answer the questions I ask so that we can help each other. I will never admit my answers are exhaustive but i hope that is in the general direction you need.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny,

I will try to answer the questions you posed to me.

You said you are not sure that you agree that we are sinless at immersion but, you believe we are guiltless instead. My questions is, how can you have one without the other? How can you be free from guilt and still have sin? Remember, God is absolutely holy, first and foremost.

Next you state that the Christian nature is a sinful one. Jesus told Nicodemus that we are born of God if we are int he Kingdom. I John 3:9 states that "No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." My question is, can God create something sinful? The Christian is born again from the seed of God, how can God create a sinful being? Also, Paul states in Ephesians 4 that we are to laid aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you put on the NEW SELF WHICH IN THE LIKENESS OF GOD, HAS BEEN CREATED IN THE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HOLINESS OF THE TRUTH.

About I John 1:9- true the Greek states that the confession is continuous. However, it must be understood in light of the rest of the book as well. I John 2:1-2 states "My little children, I am writing these things to you that you MAY NOT SIN, and IF (not when) anyone sins, we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous. Could John be stating that IF (not when) we have sin we will need to confess them?

As per the preacher that saw you from where Dick is preaching that stated that some in his area are teaching that "sinless perfection" (which is a weslyan false doctrine) is the goal, possibility and demand, I know of no one who preaches that doctrine. But if you are refering to what I am defending, there are many, including myself, and Dick's elders (although we might differ on some minor points.). As a matter of fact, I will be preaching at out 3rd sunday rally which includes the congregation I serve, Dick's and another one.

Yes I bleive that the goal, possiblilty, and demand if for us to be walking in the footsteps of Christ. Did not Peter state "You are to be holy, for He is holy"?

As per "personal rightousness" you must define your terms. If you are refering to my own rightoues that I do by myself, it is as filthy rags and always will be. But if you are refering to how holy the Christian can walk by the power of God, that is where I am coming from.

By the way, I have said it before and I will say it again, "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, TEACHING US TO DENY UNGODLINESS AND WORLDLY DESIRES AND TO LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY AND GODLY IN THE PRESENT AGE". The purpose of grace is to help us be holy. How can that be double talk?

I would ask for clearer understanding and clarification as to stating that grace is more often discussed than holiness. Understanding grace as I have listed above I would agree as it pertains to the wonderful gifts God gave us. But I would stongly disagree with your severe limitaion of grace to only forgiveness of sins. Paul stated it this way" are we to continue in sin that grace might increase? May it never be! How shall we who DIED TO SIN STILL LIVE IN IT?" The reason we are not to coninue in sin so grace may increase is because that is not the purpose of grace.

I also need clarification on Justification not being defined by how holy we are. If you mean our intial conversion, I totally agree. My intial salvation is contingent only upon my obedience to the plan of salvation.

However, if you are suggesting that our holiness has nothing to do with getting into heaven, I would say that sound like perseverance of the saints to me. Galtians 5:19-25, "But I say, walk by the Spirit and you will not carry out the deeds of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law. Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissentions, factions, envying, drunkeness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you just as I have forewarned you that those who practice such things WILL NOT INHERET THE KINGDOM OF GOD. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, SELF-CONTROL, against such things there is no law." Notice a person will go to hell for outburst of anger and evy just as quickly as he will for sorcery. We tend to see one as worse thanthe other. God lumps them in together. Also, Peter writes in II Peter 5-11 a list of attributes that are necessary for the Christian. At the end of the list he states that "For if these qualities are yours and are INCREASING, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful int he true knowledge of or Lord Jesus Christ. For he who lacks these qualities is blind or short sighted having forgotten his purification (not just removal of guilt) from his former sins. Therefore brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about his call and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will NEVER STUMBLE, for in this way, THE ENTRANCE INTO THE ETERNAL KINGDOM OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST WILL BE ABUNDANTLY SUPPLIED TO YOU."

As for the areas of hotly debated sin in the church uch as watching tv, playing cards, etc...is that really what being holy is all about? I know mormons that do not do those things...are they holy? Holiness is taking on the character of God and, most importantly, doing the things that Jesus did, not just not doing the things he did not do. All of those things can be answered in one simple word- edification. Do all things for edification. If it does not edify, do not do it.

So it seems that if you are stating that if one says that the holiness God requires and works in Christians is necesary to go to heaven is a perversion of the gospel, I guess Paul and Peter and John perverted the gospel, and I guess I am to. But if I am right, then what does it say about the teaching that Christian is nothing but a dirty sinner?

It seems to me that the Bible is very clear on this. It takes away every excuse man has for staying in his sin...which is why...I believe...that it is being fought so much, and distorted. Most people do not want to stay in the Scriptures on this debate.

Also, does the Christian have free will? If one say I must sin then I do not. And that person would be a calvinist.

Lastly, Jesus says in Matt 5:6 "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness for they shall be satisfied." The word for "satisfied" means to eat your fill. In other words, I can be as holy and righteous as I want to be. I want to walk in the very steps of Jesus and never sin again. If I can't do that, then Jesus was either misinformed, joking, or lying. If I can do that, Jesus was telling they truth. Which one?

With all the love I have,

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny, If you want a non-calvanist theologian who believes this, check out Walter Scott. He stated that the purpose of the Holy Spirit is to make the Christian perfect is character.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Also, if you use the concept that since there are no non-calvinist theologians who believe this therefore it probably has no merit to it, then Jesus would fall into that boat as well since the theologians of his day, scribes and pharisees, totally disagreed with him save Nicodemus and Joseph. Yet even they did not say anything in support (at least that is recorded).

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

I want books and page numbers from Walter Scott so I can read what he said in context.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny,

I will answer your numerous questions but I must run out for a few minutes...however I want to ask- Did you hear what Titus 2 says about grace? Why do you insist on keeping a limited defintion of grace that fits your argument?

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny-

As for your statment "Thirdly, Paul says in 1 Timothy 1:15...."It is a trustyworthy statement deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I AM FOREMOST OF ALL." Paul also Exhorts Christians to " imitate me as I Imitate Christ"1Cor 11:1.So is this a contradiction? Also is an argument valid only if a theologian says it is? And your argument "Secondly, just because you quote Scripture does not mean you have a proper understanding of Scripture" actually the same could be said of you , so why try such an argument? As for the Greek Word Thayers is what I went by, along with the KJV's translators. Thayers say " that cannot be called to account, inreprovable, unaccused, blameless." Not that these are the absolute authority. Just giving the references I used.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny,

I am back and will try to answer you according to the Scripture...something I have asked you to do but the favor has yet to be returned (it does work both ways.)

The contradiction is not found in the fact that we are guiltless at immersion and still called sinners. The contradiction is that the Christian has the same nature as before he was immersed. The Scriptures I listed have shown that God expects us to forsake the old man and embrace the new.

Actually Danny, you have made the hermeneutical error. Are you suggesting john the Apostle was guily of being a Gnostic because he stated that if we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us? By the way you quoted john wrong...he said in verse 10 If we say we have not SINNED we make God a liar..not if we HAVE no sin. Kevin Yeagar explained verse 8 very well by saying what John is describing is not being without the knowledge of sin, not actually having sin.

Since you mentioned Gnostics...the doctrine you are espousing has tremendous gnostic overtones on two levels.

1) You are stating that Jesus did not really come in the flesh, at least not like us. He did not take on the weaknesses of our flesh truly since he was impervious to temption (He was if He could not sin as you say.)

2) You are making the point that our flesh can sin and it does not affect our salvation. This sure sound docetic to me.

The teaching that i am defending is not new...it is rooted in the first century church. And, it is not confusing. It seems you will not let the Scripture define its terms. You seem determined to put me into a the box that you defined in the opening post of "another gospel". Danny, that is a straw man. I know no one who believes that and I am in the center of this group who is teaching it. I have spoken at most of the clinics and camps and I have heard all of the men who are teaching this. None of them believe what you wrote.

I agree that we can fall as we struggle down the road of godliness. But the key difference between what you are saying and what I am saying is that you beleive we have no choice about it and i do believe we have a choice. If I can choose to sin can I choose not to sin?

Jesus will never cease making intercession for me. Jesus role as a mediator and an interceder is not limited to only making atonement for sin (which He did once for all). He intercedes for me as I pray in His name...therefore...He will always intercede for me.

How does Roman 8:1 contradict my statements? How does one remain in Christ? You do not believe once you are in you are always in do you? Paul makes it clear through the scriptures I listed (which are only a fractional amount) that our conduct does bear on our salvation. To quote John again "Little children, let no one deceive you, the one who practices righteousness is rightoues just as He is righteous. The one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. THE SON OF GOD APPEARED FOR THIS PURPOSE, THAT HE MIGHT DESTROY THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL". Notice that the context is dealing with the performance of the Christian.

The only way this doctrine would create pride is if one thought they were doing it on their own...a statement which I have categorically denied. What seems arrogant to me is the individual who believes that he is responsible for his own righteousness, not God.

I agree that the rightouesness comes from being a son, not a slave. With our declaration as sons comes certain responsibilites. We can not have the priviledges without the responsibilities.

One who holds to being holy and blameless as the scriptures states will never be a self rightoues Pharisee, but they will constantly be examining their lives to see if they fall short (which I do) and to see what to do.

Danny, How can God call us saints, and tell us to live up to our calling if we are nothing but dirty rotten sinners?

I know that I am going to heaven because I am focused on Christ and and following Him every day. I never said you must be sinlessly perfect to go to heaven. God demands that we strive for holiness, yet IF I fall short, I will be forgiven if I confess. Yet I must still hold fast to my mindset of being dead to sin but alive to God. Notice Paul said dead and not sleeping or or reduced power.

People by themselves cannot bear the burden of God...that is why Jesus came. He gave us His Spirit and the Word so He does the majority of the work. It seems to me the burden the pharisees were telling the people to be absolutely rightoeus when they could not because the were only sinners.

I will get you Walter Scott's pages. I do not have them offhand. A friend showed them to me.

If in a moment of weakness you lidten to the flesh, you repent and get back on track. That is one aspect of the grace of God I am very thankful for. Yet, that is not the only purpose of Grace. TITUS 2.

respectfully

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Danny,

I have not chosen to ignore the two Scriptures you brought up. I told you before I would write something on Romans 7. I am finishing my research and getting my thoughts straight before I submit them for the whole world to read. In that writing I will include a discourse on I Tim. 1:15. I will start it in a new thread soon. I am starting a new job Wed. so I do not know when i will be able to get it out. I have not been able to work for 5 months because of two surgeries I had.

Yet, you have not answered hardly any of the Scriptures I have brought up either...ESPECIALLY Titus 2. That destroys the apparent contradiction, which seems to be your main argument.

I would like to know who is taking this position to the extreme. Are they the people who believe it or are they the people who find conflict with it. If they are the people who have a problem with it, it seems, at least in the face to face discussions I have had with people, they would rather build the straw man than seal with the facts.

I am clear on my semantics.

How does a person choose to stay in Christ? Can I murder, rape, and pillage and simply, congnitivly choose to stay in Christ and that is ok? Or is my choice to stay in Christ based upon my obedience? That is all I am saying. When we obey, we choose to do the right thing which is what the grace of God helps us do.

I am saddened that no one else is involved in this. By the way, I did not recruit Mike and Chad, they like good discussions.

I have quite a few things to do so I cannot write much now. We are having the church over tonight for a wing fry. Some things never change!

I do love you Danny, I hope you believe that. I am very sorry if I offended you, that was not my intention.

In Christ,

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Matt...

I haven't read the entirety of this thread but I did read a ways back. I want you to entertain a couple Biblical thoughts for me and lend your thoughts as well. Hebrews 12:14 commands us, "Pursue...sanctification without which noone will see the LORD." The word "pursue" is Present, Active, Indicative in Greek which you know, as I do, that means this is a continual action. In fact, one can conclude from this verse that diligence and effort are required AND that it is a LIFELONG task. The acquisition of which seems to be elusive this side of the Jordan...in the fullest sense of the word "sanctification."

All of us are sanctified through Christ's work on the Cross being applied to our lives, but all of also are continually sanctified in teh sense of daily picking up our cross to follow our leader.

It is a dangerous semantical distinction to say that we are "perfect" like Christ this side of the Jordan. That my friend, leaves nothing for the resurrection to do for you and I.

I don't think one can separate Jesus' words from the Hebrew author's words. Jesus said, "Be perfect like my Father..." and the Hebrew author said, "Continually pursue it all your life...for that is what it takes to see the LORD." [A little paraphrasing but it makes the point.]

-- Anonymous, April 28, 2000

Michael W.

I know it would be a task considering the length of this thread, but try reading the whole thing and see if your question was not answered.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

Please try to be patient with me. I am not trying to pull a JW on you by changing the subject. If it seems that way please let me try to answer all your questions one at a time. If we could for sake of simplifying this forum thread stick to a certain format for asking questions and answering maybe that would help

This is just an example that we might find useful:

All Q1  Does such and such mean this or that?

Danny Q2  Are you saying this?

Danny A1  Yes, that is correct. The last question you asked.

John A1  No, this or that is what I meant.

This format may help us come to a fuller understanding of what we are writing. As for your unanswered questions I will read back and try to answer them. If I miss any please include them in your next post, Thanks I have to go get a cake to make for my little Libertys 1st birthday party. When I get back I promise I will answer the questions best I can.

I think this forum is a great way to study and debate through the scriptures IF we answer the questions as thoroughly as we can. I hope we can do this with the spirit of Christ. Love you all.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

ABOUT NOT JUMPING IN TO DEFEND:

Danny, I have left this one, and others, to you to work through, not because I'm not interested or concerned, but because you're doing just fine. You're making the arguments I would make, and anything I would write here would mostly be a repeat of what you have said. So I'll remain on the sidelines, and if I see a serious miss on your part, I'll jump in. But I don't expect that to happen.

Besides, I'm in serious discussion with these two men on another thread, that is getting close to spilling over into this one.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Here were the questions I could find: 1)If the Christian "can always choose the right thing".....where is the need for the grace of God? 2)Will you ever be qualified to practice church discipline?? 3)At what point will you know you are "sinless" enough to practice church discipline??

A1  The need for the grace of God goes farther then just forgiveness of sins. Titus 2:11-12 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, It is instructing us I will always need the grace of God to live sensibly, righteously, and godly or as you put it "to always choose the right thing". If (not when - 1 John) I sin then as long as my deeds are in the light and Im not trying to hide them in the cover of darkness like some who John was writing to in 1 John where doing then I will need the forgiveness aspect of grace. So the answer in one word is everywhere.

A2 - Yes I would be qualified now if I was in a leadership role. You are too Danny. I do not believe that every person who practices church discipline must be perfect. BUT those persons who are doing it better go to the perfect source (1 Cor 13:10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. I.e. The Word of God) to find out what needs to be done.

A3 - Please refer to answer 2

Michael A1 - Hope you dont mind if I try to answer this one too. Your comment was as follows: Hebrews 12:14 commands us, "Pursue...sanctification without which none will see the LORD." The word "pursue" is Present, Active, Indicative in Greek which you know, as I do, that means this is a continual action. In fact, one can conclude from this verse that diligence and effort are required AND that it is a LIFELONG task. I agree with what you wrote here. No one that I know who teaches The Gospel of Glory would disagree with what you wrote. It is a lifelong task for us just as it was for Jesus. Good thoughts.

If there are more questions you would like me to answer Danny please include them in your next post with a note to me.

Thanks,

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Duane - I tried to put the closing tag in a new post but it didn't seem to work. I will try again. If it doesn't work could you please fix it on your end.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

I was using the rape, pillage, etc. as a hyperbolic device, not a straw man. There is a huge difference between hyperbole and misrepresenting a person's position.

By the way, you quoted Romans wrong..."all have SINNED". tenses are important. By the way, that passage is dealing with those outside of Christ, i.e. the whole world is guilty of sin which is Paul's point.

The reason I was making a big deal about Titus 2 is that you seemed to be taking a very restricted definition of grace and saying that not sinning is not relying on grace, which is not true. It IS relying on grace.

Will I need the forgiveness of my sins in the future? I confessed today and I will tommorrow. I do not wake up one day and discover that I am "perfect". It is a life-long process of denying the flesh and putting on the new man. However, I am training my mind to always make the right decision. Every Christian should be doing that. It is called learning obediance which is what the writer of Hebrews said Jesus had to do. I do not want to have the attiude that I will always sin because then I will. Paul says in several places that we are to view ourselves dead to sin. So, I am training, renewing, my mind to do that. I hope that answers your question.

Michael,

Implicit in your statement is an assumption that I am saying we will reach a "level of sinlessness". I have never stated that. My answer above to Danny should make that clear.

I do agree wholeheartedly that it is a constant pursuit. Every second of every minute of every hour of every day. Nothing less does God deserve. Danny, you taught me to give my absolute best to the Lord, that is what I am doing.

Matt

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

Your question is loaded. If I say yes, i have no choice but to sin. If I say no, I am a weslyan. I will not be boxed. It is the logical fallacy of a complex question. My answer remains...I confessed my sins today and I will tommorrow if I sin. I cannot let my mind think that I am bound to sin for then I will.

Maybe you can explain what Paul means when he says, even so consider yourself dead to sin but alive to God in Christ. Also, what does he mean when he states that if you walk by the Spirit you will not carry out the desires of the flesh.

Also, you never said keep on sinning because you are forgiven. But, aren't you saying we must continue to sin? Matt

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Matt...

From your answer to me...I have no disagreements wth your position then.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

"dead to sin" - death is a seperation defined in Gen when God told Adam he would die the day that he ate from the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil - i.e. he died spiritualy, and in James 2:26 "For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead."

With that definition from the scriptures of God I would have to say to be dead to sin means to be seperated from sin. As long as we are considering ourselves "dead to sin and alive to God" we are seperated from sin and bound with God. That would not mean that we couldn't stop considering the above and then be bound to sin and seperated from God.

1) Now Danny since I answered your questions from before please define "grace" for us.

2) Are you using Romans 7 and 1 Tim 1:15 as proof text for the christain having a sinful nature? Are there more sriptures that you think point this out? If so please point them out to me also.

3) Are you saying that the Christian has to sin? If so what reason and scripture do you use to prove this?

Thanks,

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

dead means dead, not a primary focus. If I am physically dead, this life is not simply not my "primary focus" any longer, it is finished, over, dead. That is how I am to view myself. That is why Paul used these particular terms.

I cannot emphasize enough that I WILL ALWAYS NEED THE GRACE OF GOD TO BE SAVED!!!! I will not say it again. Even you believe that a person's conduct has everything to do with their salvation. If I obey the gospel and continue to live a horrible life such as raping, pillaging etc...without changing, I beleive you would say that person should be afraid of dying. Why would envy and outbursts of anger be any different since Paul lists them in the same context in Gal. 5?

I understand the weakness of my flesh all too well. That is why I still have committed sin. Yet I am renewing my mind to view myself as dead to sin. My flesh is very weak, yet God's sSpirit who works through the Word can help me overcome my weaknesses.

Romans 3 is talking about the entire categories of Jews and Greeks, not just Christians. Paul states in 3:9 that both Jews and Greeks are under sin. Are the Christians he is writing to the ones guilty of not seeking after God or having the poison of asps under their lips? Actualy he says of the saints in Rome that he thanks his God for them because their faith is being proclaimed through the whole world. He states in verse 30 that God WILL justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised by faith. He then says that those who have been justified by faith are the true sons of God, not the Jews because they are Jews.

Jesus says that our obedience to the gospel created an entirely new person...so much so he tells us to lay down the old and put on the new...and when Paul says that he is refering to our conduct. Therefore he did change our potential character.

The fact that I remember my purification of my former sins makes me cling to Christ because I know without His grace I am doomed. Without His Spirit & Word, I cannot overcome.

There is not limit to my forgiveness of my brethren. As a matter of fact, I remember us having a conversation that centered around if we were required to forgive those who do not repent. Is that a limit on the forgiveness we have to give?

As far as God's forgiveness of us, John says if I sin I have an Advocate. I cling to that beautiful promise as well. You would also state that there is a limit on God's forgiveness. Matt. 18 states if I do not forgive my brother God will not forgive me. I am sure you believe this. God also states that if I have a hard heart like Esau I will not be forgiven because I will not be able to repent even if I seek it with tears.

I NEVER stated that you have so many chances to get it right then you are out of there. Remember what you said about misrepresenting someone. I never siad anything like it.

Nothing will separate us from the love of God...except us. I would change one thing about your statement, "Once saved always saved...as long as I obey Christ." I remember when I was in KS with you and the church there sang the song "only trust Him" and you said something (in a very tactful way I might add) that that is what the Calvinist believe. Donot misunderstand me, I am not saying you are a calvinist for stating that. ALL I am saying is that it goes beyond trust.

"Nothing to the throne I bring...only to the cross I cling", well John states in Rev 19:7-8 as the church approaches the throne of her Bridegroom, "Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready. And it was given (by God through the Spirit & Word) to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righeous acts of the saints). If that was only my rightoeusness they would be as filthy rags. But since they are God given to equip me to do righteous things, the are Bright and clean. by the way, check out the word "bright". It is used of the glory of divine beings, most noticiably the light that Saul saw on the road to Damascus of Jesus in glory. That is what the church is capable of and needs to be doing or else she will be as impotent as she was in the 20th century. The church of Christ/Christian churches have not grown in total memebrship in 100 years. This is not he only reason but it is one of them.

I am afraid this will probably be my last entry in this forum. It is really taking up too much time. I will make good on presenting Romans 7 when I am finished. I am preparing to write a magazine article on it. My new job starts and I still have the duties to my family and church. Somethings must go. This is one of them. If anyone has any questions, I will try to answer. However, it seems that you probably have your mind made up where I am coming from and this going back and forth does no good. I can't define grace any more clearly than I have yet you still insist that I am saying that I will abandon it in the future when I reach some "level" (which I stated I will never reach).

So long for now...

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

I say this with all the love I can muster, arrogance is not becoming a saint of God. You state we are arrogant, we have never stated anything like you just did. By the way, I do not think you are doing a good job answering the questions we have put towards you.

Corinth was not the model church.. . HE CALLED THEM CARNAL, MERE MEN, HE TOLD THEM TO REPENT. How can you possibly use that as a justification? Paul was reminding them of who they were supposed to be. Notice he said "saints by calling" but he never accused them of being holy. Once you compare corinth to the other epistles like Ephesians and thessalonians you will see the difference.

The sinful nature is not lost, we must use the power of God to conquer it.

by the way, if you think you can be holy on your own than that is an arrogant attitude. I AM TOO WEAK IN MY FLESH TO OVERCOME SIN! That is why I need God.

I know I stated i was going off but I had to respond to those last posts.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Matt - Just some quick questions I can't seem to understand. When I came to the understanding that I could be holy before God by His power I was so excited. When scriptures started to fit and I realized I was not some rotten sinner anymore, but by God's grace and mercy He was teaching me to overcome by His Spirit working in my inner man. This is amazing to me. So why do people look at it as a have to instead of a get to? If only they would search it out and see the liberty IN CHRIST. What do you think?

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Chad,

I said it in another post way up toward the top, it takes away all excuses. If this is true, then God has equiped us to perform much better than we have.

I can't speak for everyone else why so many reject it. Many think that we are twisting Scripture, a charge we must examine carefull to see if its true. They need to reciprocate as well and not explain away difficult passages by lessening their force.

I saw so many Scriptures that were pointing to so much more than I thought was possible. I did not believe I could be holy and then look in the Scripture for proof...I saw the proof in Scripture and believed. It is liberating that Jesus really meant what he said in john 8 that when the son makes you free you shall be free indeed.

I makes me sick when i sin, my joy is that God forgives and then empowers me to not do it again. If i do it again He does it all over agian. He wants me to get it right though, but He is patient. Praise Him!

I do not know if that helps, but that is how I see it.

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

I think people should be able to have the fullest understanding of what we are preaching and teaching. This is a link to a site that has all the info for anyone - pro and con - to study. www.newcreationstudies.org

Thanks,

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Sorry - My html link was off - try this instead

www.newcreationstudies.org

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Just a quick comment - Jay Wilson is not "our leader" but he has the most comprehensive material available at the present time. Jesus the Christ, the Son of the Living God is our Leader...

If you think Jay is wrong please give scriptures to back up your thoughts and I wouldn't be surprised if you saw some of his posts back at you. Though he is a very busy man, so maybe not.

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny-

Your sarcasm gives your heart away And I hope that was a joke about how impressed you are with yourself. Danny I hate sin, I want to be free. And it is very simple, I say God is more powerful than Satan ( so does the bible). And through diligence in the scriptures, God will, if I am allowed to live that long, strengthen me to make the right choices not to sin ,not that I can't but I will make the choice not to, through the working of God in me. Scripture makes it clear I have that choice,and with applying all that the bible says and allowing the Spirit to work in me I will make the right choice not to sin eventually as it is a growing process, but I will never get to a place that I will not Have a choice to sin, That I cannot sin, but till the day I die I will have that choice. Right now God is teaching me through the scriptures to make those right choices. But it seems you want that excuse so nothing I could say will convince you otherwise.FOR THE LAST TIME I WILL ALWAYS NEED HIS GRACE.

MIKE

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2000

Danny,

Paul said they HAVE BEEN SANCTIFIED. If you notice the tenses of the verbs in the first few verses, then you will notice they are past tense. I know what hagios means. What I meant is that God did not accuse them of currently being holy, He was trying to remind them of what they were called to be. So, I did not deny the scripture, you just got the tenses wrong again.

I am glad I have spurred you on. This conversation has spurred me on as well to tell people we are conquerors and do not need to be tossed back and forth at the mercy of sin since we are free.

By the way, we must CONSIDER ourselves dead to sin. My flesh is not automatically killed at immersion so yuor statement about there automatically being no more sin is not accurate.

This teaching is causing shockwaves through the brotherhood. There are some people who are distancing themselves from others, not preaching in certain churches or clinics. However, it is not people on the side of the coin where I stand. It is the people on the other side that are doing the splitting. Most of them are not willing to enter into a fair and honest and, most impirtantly, civil discussion on the facts of Scripture. I know jay is willing to talk to anyone at anytime on this issue. The only reason I mention him is because he seems to be the one getting all the attack these days although there are many other who are believing this.

I am going to discontinue doin this forum for the most part. I can see most people here are not interested in discussing this. I appreciate (Danny I really do) your effort to help me see weaknesses in the way I present the Scripture. This conversation has sharpened me. I could have handled this by myself, but Mike and Chad seem eager to jump in so I would not discourage them. You stated that it would have been nice to have others jumping in.

Well, so long for now. I truly appreciated the spirited debate. Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Danny-

Yes I thought about the fact that Jesus and the apostles did use sarcasm, but they did not use a caustic, arrogant, approach, as you do, which does give your heart away, I need not judge you your answers do that. Matt did not get me to come onto this forum to help him argue with you, I did it because you are opposed to this teaching and if anyone could offer a scriptural rebuttal, you that oppose it would do it best. And this forum will help me answer the objections posed to me, which you gave me much to go on. And as I see it (now even more after participation in this forum) this is truth, that we are speaking, maybe I have not articulated it without error, as I need to, but that does not negate truth, nor have your arguments. But I would have to agree with Matt, you have sharpened us, and that is what I need. Thank you for that, and that is sincere!You also say that we are teaching something we claim has not been taught since the infant church and you find that hard to believe, well how long,as far as we can document did it take to restore the ancient plan of salvation? I have heard that it was'nt till the 1800's so it is then possible that no one had restored the ancient purpose until now. But you find that absurd, of course. Your presuppostion is so strong that you even miss quote scripture" for all sin and fall short of the glory of God" to support your argument. Now that is interesting, of which you never offered a clarification. Or admitted error.

I do not think that any further comments by me are necessary.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Danny,

All the people you mentioned, Weslyans, mormons, ets, are not in Christ. Is that what you are insinuating? Let me ask a question, yes or no, Do you consider me in Christ?

The restoration movement claims to be the ones to have restored the first century church. You mean the RM is the only group to get the plan of salvation right? So that argument holds no bearing. In Scripture it is always the minority that is right. Not that assumes we are the ones because I agree this argument will stand or fall on its own no matter how bad people want to distort it.

By the way, I read George's article and my question is, how came poeple do not understand the difference between the old and new covenant? We have so many more gifts than they do. Besides, it seems the whole argument is against the word "perfect" which is only a tiny part. If you have noticed most of the Scriptures I have mentioned do not even mention that word.

I am waiting from an e-mail of the friend that has the refrences, you assume, it seems, that i am dishonest or sneaky. I have always been forthright and open with you. That would not change.

BYW, did you get my e-mail?

Matt.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Yes Matt.....to this point....I consider you in Christ.

Matt....my concern is that your doctrine sounds very similar to the Judaizer doctrine which taught...."Yes we are saved INITIALLY by grace....BUT.....we STAY IN CHRIST.....by obeying the law of Moses."

All one has to do is replace......"by obeying the law of Moses" with....."by achieving sanctification."

As Paul stated in Galatians five......to do such is to "fall from grace."

I was almost with you until you indicated that a person's salvation is dependant upon the level of sanctification reached. That is where you, I, and the Bible separate.

I thought that you would take that statement the wrong way after I read it. It was simply meant to point out that their lack of willingness to participate says nothing about the rightness or wrongness of your position. That is simply their decision of conscious which should be left between them and God.

As to the point of George's article and the word "perfect".....you can deny it if you want...but....your position is based on the Matthew text as a foundational principle.

No....I was simply holding your friend to task for the references.

BTW.....since I don't teach a Sunday school class....I did some reading. I read everything Scott had to say in "The Gospel Restored" on the subject of the Holy Spirt and regeneration. Two observations....

1) He says nothing even remotely possible to construe to support your position; 2) I would be careful about relying too heavily on anything Scott said regarding Pneumatology since he misapplies John 14-17 concerning the "Comforter" (a promise made to the Apostles only)....and applies them to the general believer.

This is understandable since Scott and the other Reformers had much to work through, especially in the area of Soteriology.

Now....in addition to that....I began rereading Campbell's "The Christian System." Scott did not hold a candle to Campbell's intellect. I would wholeheartidly recommend reading Campbell's thoughts on the Atonement, the nature of man, and the Holy Spirit.

As per your e-mail.....yes I received it....but that's another issue.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Danny-

I am asking what specifically was a little confusing as to what I said in the last post? It sounded OK to me but I understand that I am not always clear. For that only will I respond. I am willing to clear up what I left confusing.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

We died to sin how can we live in it any longer- we have the power to overcome sin through the work of Jesus Christ- the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

-- Anonymous, April 30, 2000

Danny ~

Awhile back I said (after being attacked by two and disagreed with by four or five more0, that even though Nelta, Barry Hanson, dbvz and I would leave that God would bring someone else to the forum to have you learn whatever lesson it is God wants you to learn and I stuck with it, by myself, for the most part, for q

Am I to presume that you are the only one who is correct in all your opinions; you are the only one who has the correct format for debate; and that your version of the Scriptures is the only correct one?

I call that pride, and I THINK perhaps it is what God wants you to work on.

-- Anonymous, May 01, 2000

Errata:

First paragraph:

'quite awhile', at end of sentence.

Now, it seems that people from your own group want you to to stop twisting their words and just answer the questions.

I hold no animosity toward you, Danny; I pray that God will be merciful to you while you mature.

Cast yourself on Him, for He cares for you. And quit turning down the work of the Holy Spirit.

In His Grace and Mercy, (and thankful for every bit I can obtain),

-- Anonymous, May 01, 2000

I Corinthians 10:12-13: [AMPLIFIED]

12: 'Therefore let any one who thinks he stands -- who feels sure that he has a steadfast mind and is standing firm -- take heed lest he fall [into sin].

13: For no temptation -- no trial regarded as enticing to sin [no matter how it comes or where it leads] -- has overtaken you and laid hold on you that is not common to man -- that is, no temptation or trial has come to you that is beyond human resistance and that is not adjusted and adapted and belonging to human experience, and such as man can bear. But God is faithful [to His word and to His compassionate nature], and He [can be trusted] not to let you be tempted and tried and assayed beyond your ability and strength of resistance and power to endure, but with the temptation He will [always] also provide the way out -- the means of escape to a landing place -- that you may be capable and strong and powerful patiently to bear up under it'.

As an old maxim states: As we mature in Christ, we are not sinless, but we sin less. (Hopefully). As we age in the Body of Christ, we find that sinning is not worth the consequences, partly. But I think even mature young people can so want to obey Christ that they sin very little. (Only they and God know).

When we DO sin we shouldn't dwell on it, (after confessing it) because satan loves to accuse the brethren and remind us of our failures. As Corrie TenBoom used to say: "Our sins are buried in the deepest sea, AND NO FISHING ALLOWED!"

Praise God that He was willing to send His Son Who shed His blood for our sins and to cover us with it as a remission for our sins.

-- Anonymous, May 02, 2000