|
Forums118
Topics9,223
Posts196,070
Members1,325
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12725
03/11/05 04:05 AM
03/11/05 04:05 AM
|
|
|
We are all legalistic. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
That is not true. (please note that I am referring to Tom's statement, not to Tom personally)
Calling someone else legalistic probably isn't very helpful, however.
It's useful to be tactful when speaking to others. For example, instead of saying, "You're heart is full of legalism" one can say, "What you are saying appears to me to be legalistic." That communicates the same thought, but isn't so sharp. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
Point on tactfullness is well taken.
But I would like to point out yet again that I never called anyone, including Restin, legalistic. Neither have I said anything about anyone's heart being full of legalism.
I did, however, call certain beliefs legalistic.
You know? And I hope everyone pays close attention to what I'm about to say. I am surprised and confused (shocked probably fits best) about the following 3 things:- That I am being accused by several people of things I never did.
- I never judged Restin as a person
- I never judged her heart
- I never assumed anything about her nor her heart
- I never called her herself legalistic, nor have I said anything about her heart; I only called a certain belief legalistic, a belief which she communicated several times.
- In a completely objective review of my comments, while I did not judge Restin, nor her heart, nor make any assumptions about her, I did, however, directly and blatantly call her honesty into question, and none of you said anything about that.
- With the exception of one other person here, no one has expressed any concern about Restin fabricating statements and ascribing them to Larry and myself. In other words, she made multiple claims that Larry and I said things we never ever said and then she attacked those statements.
If I am going to be publicly flogged, so to speak, let it be for things of which I am guilty, namely the harsh tone of two of my posts (as unintentional as that was) and the fact that I called her honesty into question (which I have to admit was intentional).
And if you are going to criticize and judge one person for bad behaviour, do not excuse another's bad behaviour at the same time.
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12726
03/11/05 04:48 AM
03/11/05 04:48 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
If we think we are not in any way legalistic, we are suffering under a delusion. Legalism is very pronounced and subtle in all of us. It is what makes unbelief so natural for us. Legalism has at its heart the notion that we can gain God's favor by things we do or refrain from doing (including faith). It was represented in the Pharisee's comment, "I thank you that I am not like other men, especially like that publican." Here's a gut-check question. When you look at the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican, who do you identify with? Is it not the Publican? Do you not think, "That you Lord that I am not like other men, especially not like that Pharisee?" The following is from the chapter in Christ's Object Lessons discussing the Publican and the Pharisee: quote:
No man can of himself understand his errors. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?" Jer. 17:9. The lips may express a poverty of soul that the heart does not acknowledge. While speaking to God of poverty of spirit, the heart may be swelling with the conceit of its own superior humility and exalted righteousness. In one way only can a true knowledge of self be obtained. We must behold Christ. It is ignorance of Him that makes men so uplifted in their own righteousness. When we contemplate His purity and excellence, we shall see our own weakness and poverty and defects as they really are. (COL 159)
The very first step in beginning the process of being cured of legalism is to recognize we have the problem. If we say we see, then our blindness remains.
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12727
03/10/05 05:33 PM
03/10/05 05:33 PM
|
|
|
If we think we are not in any way legalistic, we are suffering under a delusion. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
I still disagree that everyone is legalistic.
- the Pharisee's comment, "I thank you that I am not like other men, especially like that publican."
- Do you not think, "That you Lord that I am not like other men, especially not like that Pharisee?"
- ... the heart may be swelling with the conceit of its own superior humility and exalted righteousness.
|
| quote: Tom Ewall |
What is being described here is PRIDE, not legalism. While the two may often go hand-in-hand, they are not synonymous.
I would agree that we all battle with pride, to one degree or another. But I still do not believe, as you have stated, that everyone believes we can obtain salvation by our own merits and self effort, or that we can earn or win God's love or favor by the same (i.e. legalism)
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12728
03/10/05 06:07 PM
03/10/05 06:07 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
But I still do not believe, as you have stated, that everyone believes we can obtain salvation by our own merits and self effort, or that we can earn or win God's love or favor by the same (i.e. legalism)
I suppose it depends on how narrowly one focuses a definition, but I would assert that in the same way that pride is subtle and the quote I cited applies to it, the same applies to legalism.
I gave the gut-check question for pharisees. How did you do? I think it's a universal reaction pretty much that people who are asked who they identify with say the Publican. Nobody wants to be like the Pharisee. But that's what we are by nature. We say in our hearts, "Thank God I'm like the Publican, and not the Pharisee" thereby proving that we are like the Pharisee!
In terms of not doing things to earn salvation, I agree with you on that point. That is, there are few people, at least few SDA's, who consciously believe that to be the case. However, when we deal with gaining God's favor, especially taking into account unconscious fears, it is at this point that I believe we are all legalists.
That is, there is, at the very least deep within our hearts, a fear that God does not really accept and love us just as we are, sinners and sinful, but something within us thinks that we obtain favor from God by the things we do, or by things we refrain from doing. It's extremely difficult to accept the fact that God just loves, period.
It's a wonderful idea, though, and God is a wonderful God! I believe that understanding and internalizing this principle (that are favor with God is not dependent on us) is at the heart of overcoming sin (not to say there aren't other important matters -- there are, such as sympathizing with God's pain).
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12729
03/10/05 06:48 PM
03/10/05 06:48 PM
|
|
|
I suppose it depends on how narrowly one focuses a definition, but I would assert that in the same way that pride is subtle and the quote I cited applies to it, the same applies to legalism.
... ... ... ... ...
In terms of not doing things to earn salvation, I agree with you on that point. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
Well, we may have to respectfully agree to disagree on this. ![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif) At least we agree on some of the points.
You may have missed the fact I edited the very last part of my previous post to include winning the love or favor of God as part of the definition of 'legalism'. You were probably in the middle of composing your reply when I made that revision.
However, when we deal with gaining God's favor, especially taking into account unconscious fears, it is at this point that I believe we are all legalists.
That is, there is, at the very least deep within our hearts, a fear that God does not really accept and love us just as we are, sinners and sinful, but something within us thinks that we obtain favor from God by the things we do, or by things we refrain from doing. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
The problem here is UNBELIEF, which then leads to legalism if the person desires to obtain God's love/favor. Believe it or not, there are some people who do not want God's love or favor, sad to say. Some people actually hate God, and could not care less about His love and favor. Sadly, some just want to finish their life here on earth, and then just die.
It's extremely difficult to accept the fact that God just loves, period. |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
Extremely difficult to accept? Yes. But impossible to accept? No.
I don't think it safe to assume that no one in all of humanity has accepted the fact that God just loves us period. Different people grapple with that concept to differing degrees. Some people have accepted it; others haven't.
But just because God loves us period, that does not therefore mean that He is not pleased when we obey or do what is right, and that He is displeased when we do evil. Some people may be frustrated with a problem sin in their life because they know it displeases and hurts God, not because they're afraid God does not love them anymore.
It's a wonderful idea, though, and God is a wonderful God! I believe that understanding and internalizing this principle (that are favor with God is not dependent on us) is at the heart of overcoming sin (not to say there aren't other important matters -- there are, such as sympathizing with God's pain). |
| quote: Tom Ewall |
Amen! While we were still enemies with God, He came to our aid as a Friend. How's that for just loving us, period?!
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12730
03/10/05 08:05 PM
03/10/05 08:05 PM
|
|
|
DenBorg, you did not use the phrase “heart full of legalism”. I did. What you said was this: quote:
Restin, pause and reflect for a moment on your statements above. This legalism is a recurring theme in most, if not all, of your comments.
As you pointed out, face-to-face communication is different from written. Face-to-face we use non-verbal communication (sometimes intentional and sometimes not) that augments our spoken words to form the overall message. With written words, we can’t see the same non-verbal cues to “read between the lines” as we use face-to-face. However, even with written words we still communicate non-verbal cues (either intentionally or not) that combine with our written words to form the overall message.
Though you didn’t use explicit language that you “judged Restin as a person”, “called her herself legalist”, etc, the message recieved conveyed something different. Non-verbal cues such as the tenor of the above quoted statement and others, questioning her "honesty", combined with the fact that nearly every dissenting paragraph began with Restin's name, gave the post a more personal tone, seemingly aimed more at Restin than simply debating the points.
I do think that you made some important points, and it would have been much better to have just made the points and left the personal stuff out.
As for: quote:
I did, however, directly and blatantly call her honesty into question, and none of you said anything about that.
Actually, I was getting to that, but several posts have gone by since I’ve had time. Your questioning of her honesty was surprising to me, especially since my understanding of what she said seemed different from how you were responding to it. As I understood it, it wasn’t as much a matter of honesty as it was perception.
I don’t mean (and I’m sure no one else does either) to publicly flog you any more than you meant to publicly flog Restin. In this post, my intention is only to explain why I perceived your posts the way I have. You’ve apologized and Restin has accepted. I also want to apologize to you for misunderstanding your intentions.
Now that we know more of where everyone is coming from, maybe we can get on with the discussion. Perhaps the question of legalism (ie, are we all legalist in some way?) belongs to a different thread.
Jeff
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12731
03/10/05 10:01 PM
03/10/05 10:01 PM
|
|
|
To recap my point, as it seems to have been lost on the recent events above, and to set the records straight concerning the things I've said and the things I have not said:
Disclaimer: None of the following comments are about any person nor about anyone's heart. Despite the fact that there may be references to specific individuals or to things they have said, the following comments are not judgements of those individuals. Directing replies to an individual, and referring to individuals, do not automatically constitute judgement of these individuals. These following comments are only about certain beliefs, doctrines, thoughts, or ideas. Please keep that in mind as you read further.
I would like to point out, and feel free to reread my posts to verify, I have not ever once commented on the implications of the bodily absense of our Lord from the Most Holy Place immediately prior to His return; not in this thread nor in any other thread on any message board. While I may personally lean towards believing the SDA viewpoint concerning the perfection of character in God's people at that time, I have not completely made up my mind. Furthermore, I see it as a secondary issue, albeit an important one; one to be debated over vigorously and passionately with love and respect as fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, but not one to divide over.
That said, I would also like to point out that my main point in this thread concerns the implications of no longer sinning, regardless of whether anyone believes it to be possible this side of heaven. I personally believe it is possible to not sin anymore, and I have previously stated the reasons why. Not that I believe it possible by man's own efforts, though I've been accused of saying that despite my several explicit statements to the contrary. Others disagree as to the possibility of no longer sinning.
One person in this thread in particular (whom I shall not name at this point as to hopefully avoid being again accused of personal attacks) as well as many others in other threads in other message boards (whom shall also remain nameless because it's not germane to this and I also do not remember them), have outright stated that the implication of completely ceasing from sin is that we would no longer need the plan of salvation and would automatically be entitled to eternal life. It is this implication, this belief, which I am judging in the light and testimony of scripture, not any individual. To say something about a belief that someone has presented to the public is not the same thing as saying something about the individual him/herself, regardless of whether that reply is made directly or indirectly to that individual.
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Rm 3:23; 5:12) That is a given and unchangeable fact. For this very reason, we all owe a penalty, namely death; for the wages of sin is death (Rm 6:23). There is no getting around this fact. Even if all of us were to suddenly and immediately become perfect in both character and body and remained so from now throughout eternity, that would still not circumvent the fact that we are guilty and owe that penalty, regardless of how we became perfect, whether we did it ourselves or if God zapped each and every one of us with perfection. note -- this is not an endorsement of the idea that we can become perfect by self effort.
Everyone of us has a choice. We can either choose to pay the penalty ourselves with our very own life; or we can accept Christ's sacrifice as payment in full and accept God's gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, and in so doing turn away from a life of sin and as new creatures (2 Cor5:17; Gal 6:15) walk in newness of life (Rm 6:24) as His wormanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God has before ordained that we should walk in them (Eph 2:10). It is that simple; regardless of whether or not we become perfect (and as God's children we are promised perfection -- 1 Cor 15:52), nothing changes the above nor absolves our need of a Saviour and God's plan of redemption.
This is where some strongly disagree. Some say that if we became perfect in character before Christ's return, then we don't need Christ and are automatically entitled to eternal life. It is this belief that I label as legalism (not any specific individual or heart).
This is why I disagree with their belief:
Becoming perfect in character does not, nor cannot, absolve past guilt. If you are cited for breaking a traffic law, and if you never break a traffic law ever again, does that mean you don't have to pay the ticket? I think it safe to say that the answer would be a resounding and unanimous NO!
So then why do some of the same people believe that becoming perfect in character takes care of our spiritual tickets already issued to us?
One day, as sons and daughters of God, we will become perfect in both character and in body. The only difference between becoming perfect in character now and in becoming perfect at the second coming is TIMING (okay, and also the fact that the latter includes physical perfection).
But that perfection, whether now or later, has no ability whatsoever to pay the debt we owe for sinning in the first place.
And the belief that perfection absolves past sin is a legalistic belief. The belief as to the possibility of perfection is completely irrelevant; the belief itself that perfection atones for sin is legalism.
The only way for there to be remission of sin is by the shedding of blood. (Heb 9:21-23; Lev 16:15-18; 17:11) The wages of sin is death (Rm 6:23). Notice that God does not say, "The wages of sin is death, unless you can promise never sin again and keep that promise." Regardless of perfection now or later, we still either have to pay the penalty with our own lives or by accepting Christ as our Substitute.
Just as an eternity of complete perfection in God's kingdom to come in no wise means we never needed God's plan of redemption, neither would perfection of character now absolve our need of Christ or any facet of God's plan of redemption.
Now, if you are so inclined to disagree with any or with all of what I have just presented, so be it. I am not here to change your minds; that is not my responsibility. It is the duty of the Holy Spirit alone to convict souls in regard to the truth. It is your responsibility to study God's Word in search of truth and understanding.
But simply because you may disagree, please do not make up untrue things about things I've said, such as Dennis claims to be perfect or near perfect. Please don't say that I said we can grab eternal life by our own efforts apart from Christ. Please don't say that I said we can become perfect in character without God's help. Please don't say that I said we can become as God Himself. Please don't say this is only a personal attack. Please don't say I am judging the hearts and motives of others simply because I disagree with specific doctrines and beliefs that they have stated.
If you disagree, then please simply disagree and leave it at that.
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12732
03/10/05 10:02 PM
03/10/05 10:02 PM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
This is, IMHO, turning out to be a quite confusing thread. What are we really discussing here? Perfectness? Restins posts? Dens and Jeffs replies to these said posts? The linguistic characteristics of message board communication?
This is turning sillier post by post...
/Thomas
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12733
03/10/05 10:03 PM
03/10/05 10:03 PM
|
|
|
Denborg, I appreciate your apology as a very Christian, considerate quality. |
| quote: Restin |
Thank you. In addition to my abrasiveness, please include my calling your honesty into question as part of my apology.
I'm sorry too, if I've been too harsh to you or any others as well. |
| quote: Restin |
Your being harsh was not a problem with me; it didn't bother me a bit.
What did bother me, although it doesn't seem to bother anyone else except for one, was the fact that you made several claims that Larry and I said things we never ever said. As I believe everyone who has read the posts truly do know what statements I am referring to, I don't feel it necessary to list them here.
And I am not the only one who has asked that you back up your claims as to what we have said.
I guess I'll just have to keep in mind, that if I quote a comment and then make my comment about the idea or doctrine conveyed, there will always be those who will adjust the focus of my comments from the idea/doctrine to the person him/herself who expressed the idea/doctrine; especially if I reply directly to that person.
Let's just forget the whole sordid affair.
|
|
|
Re: It is impossible to completely overcome before Jesus returns!
#12734
03/10/05 10:29 PM
03/10/05 10:29 PM
|
|
|
I see no evidence of interest by Restin in backing up her remarks. I know she cannot because the parties in question never said or suggested such things as she inferred. I am not holding my breath waiting for her to do anything at this point. I think some people find it much easier to cast about claims that certain ideas--concerning which they are often utterly oblivious--are legalism. When they either cannot or have no interest in accurately addressing ideas which they are already prejudiced against before they type their first word, I find such interaction useless.
Those who are interested in undestanding will show it, those who are bent to their own views, no matter how right or wrong, will manifest that.
We are wiser to use terms that have an inspired basis. Legalism does not. EGW used the term "a legal religion" and that does. But the common conception of legalism is just antinomianism hiding under the contemporary term. Hostility toward present truth is hostility toward Jesus, its Author and finisher.
Claims were made by Restin, they were not backed up, they won't be backed up, it appears the mind may be closed, hence in my mind the matter is closed. Shalom.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
