Sinless Perfection. Why do so many teach against what Jesus taught?

[GodsGrace]

No, I won’t.

Episkopos must be proud to have you as a follower of his.

 

[JustMe]

JustMe
The above is very involved and I probably agree with most of it...
but this would fall under philosophy and not theology...would you agree?

Your very first line has a potential error in it...
what say you?

You stated:
"emotions and judgment is a complex relationship and formula in man and God."

I'd say that man can judge with emotion since it is impossible to keep it out of any everyday situation.
This would agree with your academic lecture note.

But does God judge with emotion?
This would imply that God could get mad at me and punish me because of this emotion of His?
Would this God be a reliable God? One that we could put our trust in to be just?

How could we be sure that God is being just and not basing his judgement on His emotion?

Does He have a continuous moral character or not?

Yes, you have raised a question of how emotions are used or how they affect God himself. He does and historically convey strong emotion in judgment (justice), mercy, compassion and especially love. He is of course the master of emotional control combined with reason and logic. He has revealed these emotions throughout OT, and in the NT, with his Son when dealing with both his chosen people and his enemies, collectively.

I just want to hit the statement of Epi's, that I failed to do before, concerning Adam and Eve.....

There are divergent theological views on whether Adam and Eve possessed the Spirit Of God before the Fall, rather than confirming the premise that they lacked intrinsic spiritual capacity. They ate the forbidden fruit using their own wills independent of God's spirit influence.

From some external sources....

External Presence View: Some theological interpretations, such as those by Douglas Hamp and Myles Munroe, argue that God indwelt Adam with his Spirit at creation, but this presence was external or temporary. In this view, the Spirit departed upon their disobedience, resulting in spiritual death and the loss of their direct connection to God.

No Indwelling View: Other perspectives, including Abraham Kuyper and C. Matthew McMahon, suggest Adam was created in a state of innocence without the indwelling of the Spirit. They posit that Adam’s righteousness was inherent and that he relied on fellowship with God rather than an internalized Spirit, lacking the sanctifying presence that believers receive post-Fall.

Spiritual Death Consequence: Regardless of the pre-Fall state, there is consensus that the act of eating from the tree resulted in spiritual death, defined as the separation of the soul from God’s vivifying energy. This event reversed the order of Adam’s being, making the body the master and the spirit the servant, thereby removing the spiritual discernment necessary to understand divine truths without the Spirit.

 

[MostlyConfused]

How is our form of doctrine making us BEHAVE? Does our doctrine make us condemn the righteous, the meek, the pure-hearted and God-fearers? If so then the doctrine is false.

Wisdom is shown to be right by her results.

 

[Lizbeth]

That is not what holy means.

1 Peter 1:16
16Since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.”

Do you think we can be holy like God is holy?

We are told to be holy.
Are we supposed to be sinless?
Is this possible?

Mat 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

The bible also speaks about being partakers of His divine nature, and He chastises us as sons that we might partake of His holiness. But it is all HIS holiness and perfection, not of our own. I don't believe in being literally "sinless" per se, as long as we're still carting around our corrupt flesh and the corruption that exists in it, in this life, but when walking in the Spirit it is possible to walk perfectly without committing sin. Like where Paul said it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me. Being in the spirit is walking above the flesh and old man and sin, separated from it, as it were, and the Holy Spirit/Christ giving life to the new man which is created in the image of Christ...created perfect in other words.

I find it helpful to think in terms of consecration...that this whole issue of holiness is a matter of consecration...how complete/full/thorough/total is our consecration to the Lord.

 

[MostlyConfused]

Episkopos must be proud to have you as a follower of his.

I could hazard a guess that he would much prefer to have me seeking out his posts to listen to what he has to say in the mornings and would much prefer my questions and input than yours. But that’s just a guess.

 

[Episkopos]

Yes, you have raised a question of how emotions are used or how they affect God himself. He does and historically convey strong emotion in judgment (justice), mercy, compassion and especially love. He is of course the master of emotional control combined with reason and logic. He has revealed these emotions throughout OT, and in the NT, with his Son when dealing with both his chosen people and his enemies, collectively.

I just want to hit the statement of Epi's, that I failed to do before, concerning Adam and Eve.....

There are divergent theological views on whether Adam and Eve possessed the Spirit Of God before the Fall, rather than confirming the premise that they lacked intrinsic spiritual capacity. They ate the forbidden fruit using their own wills independent of God's spirit influence.

From some external sources....

External Presence View: Some theological interpretations, such as those by Douglas Hamp and Myles Munroe, argue that God indwelt Adam with his Spirit at creation, but this presence was external or temporary. In this view, the Spirit departed upon their disobedience, resulting in spiritual death and the loss of their direct connection to God.

No Indwelling View: Other perspectives, including Abraham Kuyper and C. Matthew McMahon, suggest Adam was created in a state of innocence without the indwelling of the Spirit. They posit that Adam’s righteousness was inherent and that he relied on fellowship with God rather than an internalized Spirit, lacking the sanctifying presence that believers receive post-Fall.

Spiritual Death Consequence: Regardless of the pre-Fall state, there is consensus that the act of eating from the tree resulted in spiritual death, defined as the separation of the soul from God’s vivifying energy. This event reversed the order of Adam’s being, making the body the master and the spirit the servant, thereby removing the spiritual discernment necessary to understand divine truths without the Spirit.

The soul that sins, it shall die. Most modern believers don't know what that is because they have nothing to fall from....they are already asleep or dead spiritually. So a sin for these doesn't cause a great chasm the way it was felt by Adam and Eve.

Concerning emotionalism : Men are called by God to lead because the thinking process of a man does not have to be routed through an emotional grid. A man can bypass his emotions to get things done. Like slay all the Amalekites.

Empathy and compassion are good in the right context and balance. Modern believers have no such balance. "Sympathy for the devil" by the rolling stones pretty much covers the idea that compassion is not always a good way. (It does have a good intro)


Eve was the weaker vessel. Not just physically...but in logic and decision making. Men can lead because logic happens before emotion in judgment. Maybe not all the feminized men in the churches, but generally. The devil has put in a lot of effort to take away the masculinity of the men....so as to see it as "toxic". But the real toxicity is to filter everything through the emotions...as we see in the societal collapse taking place at large because of women having the vote.

If a woman can learn to not filter everything through her emotional template...then she too can lead.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, you have raised a question of how emotions are used or how they affect God himself. He does and historically convey strong emotion in judgment (justice), mercy, compassion and especially love. He is of course the master of emotional control combined with reason and logic. He has revealed these emotions throughout OT, and in the NT, with his Son when dealing with both his chosen people and his enemies, collectively.

I can agree that Jesus had emotions.
He got tired.
He cried.
He became angry.
etc.

This was due to His human nature.

But did God Father show these emotions in the OT?
Or were they just used to make us understand what God might have thought of us at any given moment?
How else to make man understand that God was not happy with him except to say that God was angry?
Do you accept that God Almighty was actually mad at Israel? (in a human emotional sense)
Or were the terms used in a metaphorical way?

I just want to hit the statement of Epi's, that I failed to do before, concerning Adam and Eve.....

There are divergent theological views on whether Adam and Eve possessed the Spirit Of God before the Fall, rather than confirming the premise that they lacked intrinsic spiritual capacity. They ate the forbidden fruit using their own wills independent of God's spirit influence.

Right here I'd say Yes.
Adam had to have used his own will when disobeying God...
If not, why would God hold him responsible for something He Himself caused Adam to do?

Did they have God's spiritual influence seems to be the question.

From some external sources....

External Presence View: Some theological interpretations, such as those by Douglas Hamp and Myles Munroe, argue that God indwelt Adam with his Spirit at creation, but this presence was external or temporary. In this view, the Spirit departed upon their disobedience, resulting in spiritual death and the loss of their direct connection to God.

You use the word INDWELT and DEPARTED but then explain that this presence was external or temporary.

If it was INDWELT it was internal.
If it DEPARTED could have been either interal or external...the departure could have taken place in either case.
TEMPORARY also does not seem to finalize any interpretation...it was most certainly temporary in either case.

No Indwelling View: Other perspectives, including Abraham Kuyper and C. Matthew McMahon, suggest Adam was created in a state of innocence without the indwelling of the Spirit. They posit that Adam’s righteousness was inherent and that he relied on fellowship with God rather than an internalized Spirit, lacking the sanctifying presence that believers receive post-Fall.

Interesting.

Adam was created by God breathing into him and he became a living soul.
When Jesus breathed on the Apostles in John 20:23, He was allowing them to RECEIVE the Holy Spirit...I'd say that this was an indwelling or filling since the Holy Spirit had already fallen on them in Acts 2 when they were all in one place.

I'd have to believe that Adam had the spirit of God in him...indwelling in him.
He still could have used his free will to sin...Christians do this...they believe and are baptized but still sin (this was a problem for the early church).

Spiritual Death Consequence: Regardless of the pre-Fall state, there is consensus that the act of eating from the tree resulted in spiritual death, defined as the separation of the soul from God’s vivifying energy.

Agreed...but it was not the soul that was separated...it was the spirit, which is why I believe Adam was infused with the spirit of God.

A soul defines the person and is never separated from the person...not even at death where soul and spirit survive.

This event reversed the order of Adam’s being, making the body the master and the spirit the servant, thereby removing the spiritual discernment necessary to understand divine truths without the Spirit.

Agreed.

 

[MostlyConfused]

The soul that sins, it shall die. Most modern believers don't know what that is because they have nothing to fall from....they are already asleep or dead spiritually. So a sin for these doesn't cause a great chasm the way it was felt by Adam and Eve.

Concerning emotionalism : Men are called by God to lead because the thinking process of a man does not have to be routed through an emotional grid. A man can bypass his emotions to get things done. Like slay all the Amalekites.

Empathy and compassion are good in the right context and balance. Modern believers have no such balance. "Sympathy for the devil" by the rolling stones pretty much covers the idea that compassion is not always a good way. (It does have a good intro)


Eve was the weaker vessel. Not just physically...but in logic and decision making. Men can lead because logic happens before emotion in judgment. Maybe not all the feminized men in the churches, but generally. The devil has put in a lot of effort to take away the masculinity of the men....so as to see it as "toxic". But the real toxicity is to filter everything through the emotions...as we see in the societal collapse taking place at large because of women having the vote.

If a woman can learn to not filter everything through her emotional template...then she too can lead.

I question if it’s ALL just more recent. I’m thinking of the man who was pouting because a man wouldn’t sell a vineyard to him and his wife went out and took it for him. Also, an apostle talked of effeminate or feminized men…but I agree there has been an explosion of seeking to remove the manliness and courage of men and make them eunuchs and effeminate.

 

[Lizbeth]

I sure do wish we'd come to understand the difference between:
COMPASSION
EMPATHY

Why in the name of our God would you want empathy?
I'd be very happy to gift you mine.

I nearly forgot....the bible says Jesus was touched with the feeling of our infirmities, being tempted in all ways as we are......and this was part of His being qualified to be our High Priest. But I'm sure His empathy was sanctified empathy. He was "touched" with it, but not overcome or ruled by it.

In it's proper place and proportion I think it is a lovely quality or virtue....like the empathy of mothers for their children makes women more empathetic generally. Male and female created He THEM in HIS image - the Lord has both masculine and feminine characteristics so to speak and together male and female show forth His complete image. But I believe the male part of His nature rules/regulates the female characteristics.....as God is called Father, not Mother.

 

[Lizbeth]

Compassion is feeling sorry for another person.
We can understand, to some degree (we never understand fully what another person is experiencing) what they must be feeling in the situation they're in. I think it would be what spurs us on to be of some help,,,if we could be.

Empathy is different.
Empathy puts you in the emotional situation of the other person..you emotionally feel what they feel,,,not just understand it in some mental way.

Happily a person that feels this empathy will not experience it at every situation or life would be unbearable because it affects the person at deep levels that could even cause some depression.

Dictionaries must surely explain the difference.
It would be good to know...I certainly will not be changing our vocabulary.

Ok thanks. I think it is possible even on a human level to either be too empathetic or not empathetic enough....life can conspire to make a person that way. I wonder if empathy and compassion go hand in hand, as long as it is not to a 'dysfunctional' degree.

 

[GodsGrace]

Mat 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

The bible also speaks about being partakers of His divine nature, and He chastises us as sons that we might partake of His holiness. But it is all HIS holiness and perfection, not of our own. I don't believe in being literally "sinless" per se, as long as we're still carting around our corrupt flesh and the corruption that exists in it, in this life, but when walking in the Spirit it is possible to walk perfectly without committing sin. Like where Paul said it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me. Being in the spirit is walking above the flesh and old man and sin, separated from it, as it were, and the Holy Spirit/Christ giving life to the new man which is created in the image of Christ...created perfect in other words.

I find it helpful to think in terms of consecration...that this whole issue of holiness is a matter of consecration...how complete/full/thorough/total is our consecration to the Lord.

In your post no. 696 you ageed with my definition.
Above you're going beyond,,,so I'll just take item by item.

Yes. We are partakes of the Holy Spirit.
Hebrews 6:4
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,


Yes. God does chastise.
Hebrews 12:6
6FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES,


We are not sinless...plenty of scripture for that.
1 John 1:8
8If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.


And, yes, the NT teaches that we are to walk in the spirit.
Galatians 5:16
16But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.


What I don't understand fully is this comment of yours:
" But it is all HIS holiness and perfection, not of our own. "


What does that mean?
Are WE set aside to do God's work,,,as you agreed,,,
or is God doing our work?

 

[GodsGrace]

I nearly forgot....the bible says Jesus was touched with the feeling of our infirmities, being tempted in all ways as we are......and this was part of His being qualified to be our High Priest. But I'm sure His empathy was sanctified empathy. He was "touched" with it, but not overcome or ruled by it.

In it's proper place and proportion I think it is a lovely quality or virtue....like the empathy of mothers for their children makes women more empathetic generally. Male and female created He THEM in HIS image - the Lord has both masculine and feminine characteristics so to speak and together male and female show forth His complete image. But I believe the male part of His nature rules/regulates the female characteristics.....as God is called Father, not Mother.

I agree basically,,,I surely do not agree that all mothers have empathy toward their children.

 

[GodsGrace]

Ok thanks. I think it is possible even on a human level to either be too empathetic or not empathetic enough....life can conspire to make a person that way. I wonder if empathy and compassion go hand in hand, as long as it is not to a 'dysfunctional' degree.

You're allowed to believe as you will.
No soteriology involved here.

 

[MostlyConfused]

You know, come to think of it…Israel in the desert seem “feminized” or eunuch-like to me. He brought us out here to starve and die of thirst! We want the foods of Egypt! We’re like grasshoppers to those men and they will kill us all, Waaah! I think being in captivity for so long took their manly courage from them and they had to learn to be brave men again or die there.

There are still men who like to go out into the wilderness and rough it but I’m not sure how many…

 

[ProDeo]

Truly, if Jesus were on earth now in human form, you would be talking the same about Him when he rebuked and corrected the Pharisees, saying he had no empathy!

??????????????

 

[ProDeo]

And one more thing. This is an exact example of the useless conversation/useless way of life we were taught by our fathers and society. It IS that guile we were taught to move in, that form of attack that is covert and
”passive” that protects you from anyone being able to SAY you have attacked them. It is a veneer of politeness or manners that covers over murdering someone in your heart. And when a man speaks upfrontly and honestly, he is hated because he doesn’t play by these useless ”rules” of politeness. He is thought to use unnecessary roughness by being upfront instead of passive in his shot back.

Yesterday Epi, brutally honest, said important things about himself.

 

[Lizbeth]

In your post no. 696 you ageed with my definition.
Above you're going beyond,,,so I'll just take item by item.

Yes. We are partakes of the Holy Spirit.
Hebrews 6:4
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,


Yes. God does chastise.
Hebrews 12:6
6FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES,


We are not sinless...plenty of scripture for that.
1 John 1:8
8If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.


And, yes, the NT teaches that we are to walk in the spirit.
Galatians 5:16
16But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.


What I don't understand fully is this comment of yours:
" But it is all HIS holiness and perfection, not of our own. "


What does that mean?
Are WE set aside to do God's work,,,as you agreed,,,
or is God doing our work?

It is by His (Christ's) Spirit and nature within us.......not of our own, that is, not of our old man. Scriptures that say the following.........Christ IN us, the hope of glory.........no longer "I" who live but Christ who lives in me........we have this treasure (Christ) in earthen vessels. It is all to be by His grace and power and life. It's not about trying to establish our own righteousness like those under the Law, but rather submitting to the righteousness of God. Yielding and setting aside our vessels to the Lord as a living sacrifice in order to obey the leading, commands and unctions of His Spirit. Like where Paul said he laboured more than the other disciples, yet not he, but the grace of God which was with him (1 Cor 15).

 

[amigo de christo]

We cannot FORCE anyone to agree.
It is their right to disagree.
Otherwise we'd be living in a totalitarian state.

It is their right to disagree with Christianity.
It is NOT their right to try to change it.

True we cannot FORCE anyone to agree .
But what we can do is if one agrees not to sound doctrine
Put them out of the church and let us not eat with such a one till repentance is made .
What we cannot do is just Decide to agree to disagree and continue fellowship with such .
Now if what i just said makes me sound like a monster , not saying it does to you ,
Then we really do need to open our bibles .
This sheep totally refuses to find any kind of common ground or unity
or fellowship with he or she who cliams to beleive and yet walks contrary to the doctrine .
Thus if any even supports sins , they will be cast out . TO support sin is as guilty as being in the sin .
IF anyone thinks me to be in error then by all means lets examine this for ourselves in the holy writings
of the h oly apostels . And let us see what THEY had to say about those in sin and what to do .
But i fully agree with you , we cannot force one to believe . We cannot force them to agree
BUT WE SURE CAN FOLLOW THE PATTERN the apostles left us in their writings . Feel free to show me my error
if you so th ink i am in errror .

 

[Lizbeth]

You know, come to think of it…Israel in the desert seem “feminized” or eunuch-like to me. He brought us out here to starve and die of thirst! We want the foods of Egypt! We’re like grasshoppers to those men and they will kill us all, Waaah! I think being in captivity for so long took their manly courage from them and they had to learn to be brave men again or die there.

There are still men who like to go out into the wilderness and rough it but I’m not sure how many…

I really doubt that the Lord, who created male and female in His image, and who is also called El Shaddai (breasted one) wants us to be misogynistic. Female traits apparently have value in His sight. Jesus welcomed and included women in His circle and the things He did, in a society under the Law that treated women as second class, or having no class/value at all. It happens that some of the characteristics that make us women also at the same time make us vulnerable in certain ways, and so we need covering/protection for those things..........not disparaging and mocking.

 

[amigo de christo]

Yesterday Epi, brutally honest, said important things about himself.

yesterday . did you say yesterday .
Friend for years the man has been bringing a false gospel known as inclusivity .
Have you ever once seem him remind us about the dire necessity to even have to FIRST BELEIVE ON JESUS . WHY NO YOU AINT .
Have you seen him go after those who DO remind us that we must first BELEIVE ON JESUS . WHY YES YOU HAVE .
And before he twists things to you all yet again and refuses to answer certain questions .
Have you ever seen him say to a man who was preaching the dire need to BELEIVE ON JESUS , an atheist
being reminded of his dire need to repent and believe on JESUS , call the man who did so a RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST .
WHY YES YOU HAVE if you b other to go to the interfaith section .
A FALSE GOSPEL WILL NOT BE TOLERATED OR ALLOWED On my watch . And you and all can call me a hater for doing so .
But i am going to c ontinue to expose epi and or anyone else who brings such an inclusive false gospel .
No matter how i be hated for doing so .