Hi Gregg,

Neither do I think that we can overcome sin by focusing on it. But, I do think we can find what the Bible teaches Jesus, through the power of the Holy Spirit, can do in our lives. I don't see this as focusing on negatives. If we really don't understand what the promises of God can mean for us how can we claim them by faith? It isn't possible. We can't claim by faith what we don't believe to be true.

To focus on what God can do in us, is not focusing on the power of sin in our lives. It brings us to the realization of our need for increased dependence and closeness to Jesus, and on His power to heal of sin.

This subject is all Good News to me. It is all Gospel to me. I don't want the power of sin to diminish the reflection of Jesus in my life that others can see, and that is surely what "sinning" does. Every time I fail to represent my Savior rightly (by sinning) someone somewhere recieves the wrong picture of God, the plan of salvation, the power of sin, and just how great heaven will be. This is not what I want them to see.

Neither is it what God would have us show to the world. Ellen White tells us that the power of our witnessing is not in the great acts of faith we perform intermittently, but in the constancy of our living like Jesus. This tells me that whenever I fail my constancy fails, and so does my witness for Him. Out of my love for my fellow man I do not wish this to be so. I want them to be drawn to Jesus, not pushed away.

In all of this message I see a challenge to draw nearer and nearer to Jesus for it exposes my innermost heart. This is a good thing. We are told to examine ourselves to see whether we are in the truth or not.

It is interesting that the Sermon on the Mount is pointed to as the greatest sermon on the love ever given, and yet that whole sermon is about behavior and attitude. It is all about do's and don'ts. Today if Jesus came and preached a sermon like that He would be accused of legalism by a large percentage of the church, of trying to condemn and control people by "shaking the bony finger" at their face and beating their backs with a rod.

The Bible seems to be about evenly split between faith and works. It talks about them both. I see the reason for this as being that real faith will be accompanied by works just as Mike as said. So, if we say we have faith we MUST have works.

Here is why. If I say that tomorrow I will go and deposit $1,000 in your bank account, and I do not do that on the day following the day the promise was made my words were false. The only way the statement could be true is for me to have deposited the money in your account the following day. So, if I say I have faith, for my faith to be real faith, and not presumption, then my life must show the works that real faith brings into the life. If my life is lacking the works of Jesus, then my faith is not real and I need to examine myself as to why. Remember, the law is our schoolmaster, as Paul called it, bringing us to our realization of our need of Jesus.

[ February 22, 2002: Message edited by: Gary K ]

Yes when Jesus is the focus we will have faith and works. Rev 14:12 When we become sin focused we will have works and faith in our efforts to overcome. I like the Jesus end of the equation.

Greg,

What would you say about a group of Christians taking oaths obligating themselves to never break the law of God? Would you say that these people were focusing on sin, and as such could never really live victoriously for God?

[ February 24, 2002: Message edited by: Gary K ]

I can't resist responding, sorry.

They would be focussing on works and their own will to achieve what was in the contract. God doesn't say, "Come unto Me and I will issue a contract". And in spite of what Mike said a while ago, a strong man CAN'T overcome sin/s. All our righteousness is filthy rags.

Tell me, if men are committed in their hearts to the Lord, what purpose does a contract serve? Particularly for those who are already perfect.

Hi Zyph,

No problem. I'm always glad to hear what you have to say. Just because we don't always agree doesn't mean that there are hard feelings.

The group of Christians that I was refering to were Christians that were martyred for Jesus. These were people who lived when it really cost something to be a Christian. To be a Christian right then was not something done without careful soul searching and consideration for everyone who became a Christian knew of many people who had lost their lives just because of what they believed, and lived.

Here is the story from Fox's Book of Martyrs, Chapter 2, part 1.

quote:

---

In the third persecution Pliny the Second, a man learned and famous, seeing the lamentable slaughter of Christians, and moved therewith to pity, wrote to Trajan, certifying him that there were many thousands of them daily put to death, of which none did any thing contrary to the Roman laws worthy of persecution. "The whole account they gave of their crime or error (whichever it is to be called) amounted only to this--viz. that they were accustomed on a stated day to meet before daylight, and to repeat together a set form of prayer to Christ as a God, and to bind themselves by an obligation--not indeed to commit wickedness; but, on the contrary--never to commit theft, robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, never to defraud any man: after which it was their custom to separate, and reassemble to partake in common of a harmless meal."

---

People don't willingly die for a set of rules and regulations. They will, however, die for something, or someone, they love with all their heart.

In the light of the context of this story does your opinion of this group of people change? Do you still see them as a group of legalists who didn't know what it means to love God?

Zyph,

Just a small addition to my last post. What I see in the story, and what I see in the behavior of these martyrs is this: These people so loved God, so loved everything that He stands for, that they were willing to obligate themselves to each other to live by the principles of what God stands for no matter if it cost them their lives. And that is just what it did.

I see motivation of the deepest sort. The sort of motivation that will cause someone to say, I don't care if I die for it, but I will stand on what I say I believe and will die for it. I will not only say that in the privacy of my bedroom on my knees before God, I will say it publicly too, even though doing so will cost me my life. Nothing could be further from legalism. These people were truly converted. Nothing would be allowed to come between them and their Lord.

I would see them making oaths. An oath is good in that it focuses you on something. But an oath will not save you. It is another thing to do but doing in and of itself is not salvation. The first paragraph in EW 270 is one of my favorite quotations about the doing, and the working, and the striving. Also there is a prayer in COL 159 that I like also. But as in all good analogies there are two sides of the picture. We are to rest, and we are to work. But unless Jesus is the focus our very efforts will become our God unless protected by Jesus.

Hi Gregg,

I don't see any significant difference between the two (oath and obligation).

quote:

---

2 entries found for oath.
To select an entry, click on it. (Click 'Go' if nothing happens.)
oathHippocratic oath

Main Entry: oath
Pronunciation: 'Oth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural oaths /'O[th]z, 'Oths/
Etymology: Middle English ooth, from Old English Ath; akin to Old High German eid oath, Middle Irish oeth
Date: before 12th century
1 a (1) : a solemn usually formal calling upon God or a god to witness to the truth of what one says or to witness that one sincerely intends to do what one says (2) : a solemn attestation of the truth or inviolability of one's words b : something (as a promise) corroborated by an oath
2 : an irreverent or careless use of a sacred name; broadly : SWEARWORD

---

quote:

---

entries found for obligation.
To select an entry, click on it. (Click 'Go' if nothing happens.)
obligationholy day of obligation

Main Entry: ob·li·ga·tion
Pronunciation: "ä-bl&-'gA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : the action of obligating oneself to a course of action (as by a promise or vow)
2 a : something (as a formal contract, a promise, or the demands of conscience or custom) that obligates one to a course of action b : a debt security (as a mortgage or corporate bond) c : a commitment (as by a government) to pay a particular sum of money; also : an amount owed under such an obligation
3 a : a condition or feeling of being obligated b : a debt of gratitude
4 : something one is bound to do : DUTY, RESPONSIBILITY

---

Gary:
Have your oaths stopped you from sinning? If you have stopped sinning what did it for you?

Gregg,

I take it from your reply then that you believe that the Christians of that short story out of Fox's Book of Martyrs were legalists, for this seems to be the general direction of your statements.

I also find it interesting that you intimate that I said that I have taken oaths related to sinning. Where did I say that? I gave specific examples of Christians who did and asked whether or not you considered them legalists. You never answered, but I can see why. To accuse a martyr of hypocrisy and self-righteousness doesn't look good at all. It looks much better to attack me personally.

Your statements to me on this thread have consistently implied I believe I can overcome sin on my own, without Jesus. I would ask you to show where I have made such statements. If you cannot produce such statements I ask you to stop with the insinuations. It doesn't look good on you.