Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I'm trying: a stairway to heaven?
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 286 of 303 (258651)
11-10-2005 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by ringo
11-10-2005 2:47 PM


Re: Righteous vs Unrighteous
Now show us Biblically that that is impossible
Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible
And then it continues:
but with God all things are possible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by ringo, posted 11-10-2005 2:47 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by robinrohan, posted 11-10-2005 5:56 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 288 by ringo, posted 11-10-2005 7:15 PM robinrohan has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 287 of 303 (258653)
11-10-2005 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by robinrohan
11-10-2005 5:36 PM


Re: Righteous vs Unrighteous
but with God all things are possible.
What does this mean? Presumably, it means that with God's help all things are possible. But without God's help?:
With men this is impossible
It is impossible for men--or any rate the rich man--to be saved on his own. It is impossible for the man to be perfect--without God's help.
"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God that works within you." Who's doing the work here, you or God?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by robinrohan, posted 11-10-2005 5:36 PM robinrohan has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 288 of 303 (258665)
11-10-2005 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by robinrohan
11-10-2005 5:36 PM


Re: Righteous vs Unrighteous
Read a little further:
quote:
Mat 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
"With God all things are possible" doesn't mean that God does it for you. It means you have to do what God wants you to do - i.e. love thy neighbour as thyself.
Iano is tangled up in the idea that "with men this is impossible" and he ignores the "with God all things are possible" part.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by robinrohan, posted 11-10-2005 5:36 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by robinrohan, posted 11-10-2005 8:34 PM ringo has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 289 of 303 (258670)
11-10-2005 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by truthlover
11-10-2005 12:40 PM


Re: Seeking, Striving, Trying
quote:
I had no idea it sounded like that. My apologies.
Sorry didn't say it correctly apparently. My assumption is that you will talk to me. iano is talking at me. Meaning I can probably have a discussion to learn from with you. Sorry for the miscommunication.
quote:
I doubt seriously that's what Paul was trying to say.
I'll have to look into it more. Paul's words have been distorted to fit tradition or dogma in many cases, so we may be overlooking a possible meaning. IMO, it could be possible given the usage in the sentence.
quote:
As John put it, the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as he is righteous. Why would God withhold his Spirit from someone just because they didn't subscribe to or know about Christian theology or the crucifixion? (Maybe the better question is why would he give his Spirit to someone who subscribed to current Christian theology? ;->)
I would agree.
quote:
To my mind, the flesh is the body with its desires (food, comfort, sex, etc.)
Now see, I would consider in the flesh to be the desires not necessary for survival.
IMO, many make it more difficult than it is. The behavioral teaching is missed for the prize at the end.

Nobody can make you feel inferior without your permission. -Eleanor Roosevelt-

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by truthlover, posted 11-10-2005 12:40 PM truthlover has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 290 of 303 (258683)
11-10-2005 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by ringo
11-10-2005 7:15 PM


God or Us?
"With God all things are possible" doesn't mean that God does it for you
According to the passage quoted above, you are not going to stick the camel through the needle without God's help.
"Be ye therefore perfect"--with God's help.
justification by faith--God does it.
justification by works--we do it.
Both views are supportable Biblically.
But if by "faith," we mean that a certain doctrine has to be believed in order to be saved, this makes no sense. There is nothing particularly virtuous about believing some doctrine. (in this way, I agree with Jar).
Well, it's a little more complicated that that. There is such a thing as intellectual integrity, which I think is a virtue. But integrity means sincerity plus open-mindedness plus the courage to withstand the opinions of others. So if your belief in a doctrine possessed integrity, this would be a possibly saving virtue, but this would be so even if the doctrine turned out to be false. One might be an atheist with integrity.
The problem with the "just try" doctrine, however, lies in the vague delineation of what it means to "try." I suppose God knows your heart and so knows if you are really trying or not, but I'm concerned with our knowledge of our own heart. Do we know if we are really trying or not? I'm not sure that we do. In that case we are walking this perpetual tightrope, just as bad as the Calvinists who are searching about for "evidence" of being a member of the Elect. (Am I sincere in my belief? Well, yes. Oh, but am I really sincere? Really truly? Maybe I'm just fooling myself, etc.)
I'm trying, but am I really, truly trying?, etc. Maybe I'm just fooling myself.
ed: changed subtitle
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 11-10-2005 07:37 PM
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 11-10-2005 08:21 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by ringo, posted 11-10-2005 7:15 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by ringo, posted 11-10-2005 10:07 PM robinrohan has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 291 of 303 (258713)
11-10-2005 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by robinrohan
11-10-2005 8:34 PM


Re: God or Us?
robinrohan writes:
I suppose God knows your heart and so knows if you are really trying or not, but I'm concerned with our knowledge of our own heart. Do we know if we are really trying or not? I'm not sure that we do.
I said it was simple. I didn't say it was easy.
You're familiar with the concept of "giving 110%"? I know it's mathematical nonsense, but it conveys the principle of doing just a little bit more. If you can try a little bit harder to get the football across the line, why can't you try a little bit harder to love thy neighbour?
In real life, the goals are more complex then in football, but the means of achieving them aren't all that different.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by robinrohan, posted 11-10-2005 8:34 PM robinrohan has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 292 of 303 (258862)
11-11-2005 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by jar
11-10-2005 2:59 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
jar writes:
Is that actually correct? Is not the first example repenting and the other examples confession?
I wouldn't have thought so. Confessing is admitting you did something whether good or bad. You can evidently confess you did wrong: to yourself or the person who you wronged. But saying you are sorry is apologising not confessing. And saying you will endeavor not to repeat it in future is repentance. Repent: 1 : to turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by jar, posted 11-10-2005 2:59 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 1:15 PM iano has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 293 of 303 (258863)
11-11-2005 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by iano
11-11-2005 1:12 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
Can you "...turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life..." externally?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 1:12 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 1:18 PM jar has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 294 of 303 (258865)
11-11-2005 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by jar
11-11-2005 1:15 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'externally'.
ps: earlier you said repentance doesn't require a profession of belief in God. I can't see how one could consider turning from sin (which is offending God) without a belief that God exists
PS do you want to edit your last message so as to stop this hitting the 300 mark before we're out?
This message has been edited by iano, 11-Nov-2005 06:19 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 1:15 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 1:30 PM iano has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 295 of 303 (258869)
11-11-2005 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by iano
11-11-2005 1:18 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
we can always continue to a new thread.
ps: earlier you said repentance doesn't require a profession of belief in God. I can't see how one could consider turning from sin (which is offending God) without a belief that God exists
Go back to Message 203 there is no mention of sin involved at all. Repentance has nothing to do with sin, but rather behavior. But we are still wandering towards the issue of belief in GOD. We'll get there.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'externally'.
Go back to your three examples. If you told GOD or your neighbor that YOU were going to try to do better, then those statements are but confession, informing others of what you are going to do.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 1:18 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 1:46 PM jar has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 296 of 303 (258878)
11-11-2005 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by jar
11-11-2005 1:30 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
One could repent internally. You would be admitting you screwed up to yourself, according to your own estimation of what entails 'screwing up'. Whether 'your own estimation' is actually your own could be left hanging for the moment.
If you told GOD or your neighbor that YOU were going to try to do better, then those statements are but confession, informing others of what you are going to do.
I disagree. A criminal makes a statement to the police, In it may be contained a confession, apology, sorrow, repentance. Or it may contain a denial. If one directed the elements of your msg 203 to God for instance, the overall would be a statement containing the elements above. A confession is simple admittance to a particular action. For example "If we confess our sins he is..." Confess associated with an act

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 1:30 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 2:06 PM iano has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 297 of 303 (258886)
11-11-2005 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by iano
11-11-2005 1:46 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
Again, and I do think this is important.
Look at your three examples.
Those parts that are internal, you saying that you are going to do something related to the conditions outlined in Message 203 are part of the repentance process. The reest, what you say to GOD or to your neighbor are but reporting, confession.
In the two examples you gave, you are reporting, confessing to others what your intended action are. You may well be lying.
Do you agree that the conditions outlined in Message 203 are the steps in repenting?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 1:46 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 2:16 PM jar has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 298 of 303 (258889)
11-11-2005 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by jar
11-11-2005 2:06 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
I read them again to see how they work internally. They all do and no external reference is necessary on any of them ...except "feeling sorry". I can't see how this can be done exclusively internally. Sorrow requires of necessity, an object, in order to work. A sorrow that is only internally focussed is simply narcisstic: "I feel sorry for me because of what I did to someone else" is not sorrow. If I consider when I feel sorrow for my actions, I find it must of necessity focus on the offended. "I wish I hadn't done that to THEM"
I agree that the steps outlined adequately reflect the process of repentance. I disagree, for the reason above that in can be a completely internal affair with no reference to the offended party.
AbE: One may not tell the offended party of course but one must include the offended party in this way at least
This message has been edited by iano, 11-Nov-2005 07:19 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 2:06 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by jar, posted 11-11-2005 2:27 PM iano has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 299 of 303 (258894)
11-11-2005 2:27 PM


Am off home Jar. Dinner, movie, pint. In that order. Have a good weekend yourself

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 300 of 303 (258895)
11-11-2005 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by iano
11-11-2005 2:16 PM


Re: have you given up on discussing post 203?
I disagree, for the reason above that in can be a completely internal affair with no reference to the offended party.
Please reread Message 203. Does something in that message related to repentance exclude the object?
You get one more post (unless someone beats you to it) and then, if you want, we can continue this discussion.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 2:16 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by iano, posted 11-11-2005 8:12 PM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024