entire sanctification is an obtainable goal.

[FollowHim]

This Gnostic excuse is meaningless

John said a child born of God can not live in sin, BECAUSE he has been born of God (he gives the reason, He has been born empowered by God)

People who deny the power of being born of God, then blast people who not only understand it, But have experienced it, and seen it, as gnostics well,, thats just wrong

I think you have missed the point being made. People can continue to sin in action, but claim they are pure and holy because their flesh sins but their spirit does not. This is the core of the gnostic position.

If you are saying through the power of God, you can walk in love and righteousness, Amen.
But I am not sure this is what you are saying, but it is up to you to clarify it, if you so desire.

If one actually holds a gnostic view, often the denial is a change of reference and language to try and make the accuser into an evil sinner who wants to appear good and following God but is not. It is because there is no gnostic view, only the elect with their perfect spirit and fallen flesh, and those not with a perfect spirit who mock its reality. The notion that there could be believers in the flesh who walk with Jesus is so alien, it cannot be accepted that anyone actually believes this, it is so bad, in their eyes, to even suggest such a thing is possible. God bless you

 

[Eternally Grateful]

ok

Gods justice requires a payment for sin

That payment is death

If someone else does not redeem you of what you owe god (death)

then you will pay that payment on your own. In a place called hell

Because once you physically die, The ability of you being able to recieve the atonement of Christ has passed. and you have NO HOPE of being made alive in Christ

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I think you have missed the point being made. People can continue to sin in action, but claim they are pure and holy because their flesh sins but their spirit does not. This is the core of the gnostic position.

If you are saying through the power of God, you can walk in love and righteousness, Amen.
But I am not sure this is what you are saying, but it is up to you to clarify it, if you so desire.

If one actually holds a gnostic view, often the denial is a change of reference and language to try and make the accuser into an evil sinner who wants to appear good and following God but is not. It is because there is no gnostic view, only the elect with their perfect spirit and fallen flesh, and those not with a perfect spirit who mock its reality. The notion that there could be believers in the flesh who walk with Jesus is so alien, it cannot be accepted that anyone actually believes this, it is so bad, in their eyes, to even suggest such a thing is possible. God bless you

I have not missed anything

John said a believer/child of God can not live in sin

I take John at his word.

His word is applicable to gnostics, Christians, Non Christians, Pagans, You name it, It applies to them.

 

[FollowHim]

I shared the definition of atonement, as taken from Hebrew dictionaries and lexicons.

It says these sacrifices are required for atonement. It days nothing about all the works you want to add. The reason we need to have sacrifice is we FAIL to keep the commands you say we need to keep.

As hebrews said, without the shedding of blood, THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS.

I am not adding commands, God is saying this is what staying in His favour is, doing His will, being Holy as He is Holy.
One could say atonement is for the inevitable failure, which is life long, or the atonement is for the walk of faith, and the road of transformation, to appear at the end like Jesus.

Paul followed Jesus as his example and calls us to do so.
If atonement is to make the start possible, so the road can be walked, to deny the walk is in the end to deny the value of atonement.
Our hearts testify to the price of sin and hurt, it is something we hate, and causes us great pain. It is also something we desire to be free from, to not be enslaved to wrong and damaging behaviour. Paul describes Gods people as Holy, to the degree there should not be even a hint of sexual immorality, they should be pure, acts as people of heaven and not of this world.

Now if one breaks this dependency, one is saying in ones heart this aspiration is not part of ones life. I say this, because how can one live with self condemnation and failure without victory, emptiness and fear of rejection from God.

I have heard people declare that was their heart in trying to follow Jesus, because the road was too costly and too impossible, it must be not of Jesus. But maybe another reality is actually we are very lost and very different from where we need to be, and it is just the testimony of how much needs to be done. It is my testimony, that this our true state, so close, yet so lost.

How can a follower of Jesus not know love? And I mean this sincerely. Love, one to another, care, empathy, support, compassion, reaching out, encouragement. Yet I have heard these very words, and the question do I need to love others? To ask such a question means being touched by Jesus has not yet occurred, and the centre of someones life is still unresolved. In Jesus there is no self, no independence, no rights alone, no rebellion, no I must have, it is about listening and knowing need, speaking and sharing from the heart, being and dwelling in Christ till He and His word flows, and there is no stopping it. In a strange irony, Jesus provides all our needs, so our lostness in Him is finding ourselves also. How can sacrifice end with a gift of all one desires, but that is the craziness of the lie of sin, that we have to keep hold of the little we have, for without it we will have nothing. God bless you

 

[marks]

Atonement MEANS payment

According to the law. The ONLY payment for sin was the atoning sacrifice

Argue it all you want, it does not negate that this is fact. the 2 verses I just shared proves that fact.

They are to make atonement for sin.. That is how redemption was made according to the law and was a picture of what CHrist would do as the lamb of God who would take the sin of the world and atone for their sins.

@Candidus

Revelation 5:9 "And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;"

This would be a purchase, would it not?

Much love!

 

[FollowHim]

I have not missed anything

John said a believer/child of God can not live in sin

I take John at his word.

His word is applicable to gnostics, Christians, Non Christians, Pagans, You name it, It applies to them.

If people have testified that you have missed something, and in my view, I see you have not understood how I see things, then you have missed it.
We only know another, if we can produce their words in their way and it makes sense. You do not seem able to do that with my words, so it appears you have missed what I and others are sharing.

This situation always concerns me, especially if the Lord lays someone on my heart. God bless you

 

[marks]

It's favorite verse for Gnostics and Christians that apply Gnostic assumptions.

The gist is, "Where do we not sin? In the Spirit! The Spirit inside of the believer cannot sin! We are white as snow in Jesus"

That's not Gnosticism, if you mean to bandy about the historical term.

a prominent heretical movement of the 2nd-century Christian Church, partly of pre-Christian origin. Gnostic doctrine taught that the world was created and ruled by a lesser divinity, the demiurge, and that Christ was an emissary of the remote supreme divine being, esoteric knowledge (gnosis) of whom enabled the redemption of the human spirit.

Here is what a modern group says for themself:

GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.

In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.

The Gnostic World View: A Brief Summary of Gnosticism

 

[marks]

People can continue to sin in action, but claim they are pure and holy because their flesh sins but their spirit does not. This is the core of the gnostic position.

Personally, I think this is a misleading oversimplification.

I think in recent years people have become fast and loose with this term "Gnostics" using it in an insulting way (I'm not saying you are) that it's real meaning has become lost.

Like the word Gentleman. It used to mean "a land owner", but now it means, someone of whom you approve of their style and behavior.

The Gnostics taught that it was an evil "little god" who created the material universe, as the highest God would never stoop to such a thing. But now as we recognize that the material universe is evil and incidental, then whatever happens in the material, though being evil, is incidental, since this is an evil material universe created by an evil demi-god. We eventually will leave this evil material universe, and all that it is and contains is left behind as we become spirit when we die. Something like that. It's been some years since I studied these things.

But this has nothing to do with the concept that a good universe became corrupted, and that good humanity became corrupted, and that God is restoring humanity, and is restoring creation, and doing that in a certain way, which involves restoring the spirit first, and later restoring the flesh.

These are completely different, at least, so it seems to me.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I am not adding commands, God is saying this is what staying in His favour is, doing His will, being Holy as He is Holy.
One could say atonement is for the inevitable failure, which is life long, or the atonement is for the walk of faith, and the road of transformation, to appear at the end like Jesus.

Paul followed Jesus as his example and calls us to do so.
If atonement is to make the start possible, so the road can be walked, to deny the walk is in the end to deny the value of atonement.
Our hearts testify to the price of sin and hurt, it is something we hate, and causes us great pain. It is also something we desire to be free from, to not be enslaved to wrong and damaging behaviour. Paul describes Gods people as Holy, to the degree there should not be even a hint of sexual immorality, they should be pure, acts as people of heaven and not of this world.

Now if one breaks this dependency, one is saying in ones heart this aspiration is not part of ones life. I say this, because how can one live with self condemnation and failure without victory, emptiness and fear of rejection from God.

I have heard people declare that was their heart in trying to follow Jesus, because the road was too costly and too impossible, it must be not of Jesus. But maybe another reality is actually we are very lost and very different from where we need to be, and it is just the testimony of how much needs to be done. It is my testimony, that this our true state, so close, yet so lost.

How can a follower of Jesus not know love? And I mean this sincerely. Love, one to another, care, empathy, support, compassion, reaching out, encouragement. Yet I have heard these very words, and the question do I need to love others? To ask such a question means being touched by Jesus has not yet occurred, and the centre of someones life is still unresolved. In Jesus there is no self, no independence, no rights alone, no rebellion, no I must have, it is about listening and knowing need, speaking and sharing from the heart, being and dwelling in Christ till He and His word flows, and there is no stopping it. In a strange irony, Jesus provides all our needs, so our lostness in Him is finding ourselves also. How can sacrifice end with a gift of all one desires, but that is the craziness of the lie of sin, that we have to keep hold of the little we have, for without it we will have nothing. God bless you

I gave the definition of atonement and how it is accomplished.

What you are promoting here is legalistic works based atonement based on mans deeds, not on What God will accept

 

[marks]

We only know another, if we can produce their words in their way and it makes sense.

That's an important thing to be able to do.

And I think we have to set aside judgmentalism to do it properly. We have to stop trying to convince someone of our view, and instead focus on understanding theirs. We have to be able to ask those questions that fill in the gaps in our understanding even when we totally believe they are whacked!

But I think that all has to be set aside in humility and just seek to understand what they are saying.

Reflective Listening, also called Active Listening, great tools to have in the tool box. If you know what I'm saying!



And we have to be expressing ourselfs with a mind towards others being able to understand, and invite response, I think.

Your thoughts?

 

[FollowHim]

That's not Gnosticism, if you mean to bandy about the historical term.

a prominent heretical movement of the 2nd-century Christian Church, partly of pre-Christian origin. Gnostic doctrine taught that the world was created and ruled by a lesser divinity, the demiurge, and that Christ was an emissary of the remote supreme divine being, esoteric knowledge (gnosis) of whom enabled the redemption of the human spirit.

Here is what a modern group says for themself:

GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth. Indeed, one finds that most Gnostic scriptures take the forms of myths. The term “myth” should not here be taken to mean “stories that are not true”, but rather, that the truths embodied in these myths are of a different order from the dogmas of theology or the statements of philosophy.

In the following summary, we will attempt to encapsulate in prose what the Gnostic myths express in their distinctively poetic and imaginative language.

The Gnostic World View: A Brief Summary of Gnosticism

I agree that the way today we use gnosticism and the detailed secret knowledge the gnostics had are not the same.
The connection in simplistic terms is the belief that the body is innately evil and can never be regarded as holy or pure, but the spirit of a believer can be, and responsibility for behaviour of the body can be disowned by the spirit until its death of the body happens. This duality is linked by many commentators as a gnostic world view, and certainly I have met enough who 100% believe this, or even preach it on TBN.

One prophet said by just praying give me a new spirit to God, you became an eternal being, and were eternally saved, which they did on a TV show. It was for me very odd, because this had no correspondence with scripture or repentance and faith in the cross and dedication to walk the path of righteousness and reject evil, which is the hall mark of Christian belief from its beginning.

For this reason I call such believers gnostic, but one could invent a new term to describe it, as in it seems these ideas are a new creation. Some have suggested Augustine started it with original sin, and the calvanists amplified it in the reformation. Ofcourse to suggest this is a total new formulation would be difficult for such believers as it would disown what went before, though some would be happy to do this. God bless you

 

[Eternally Grateful]

If people have testified that you have missed something, and in my view, I see you have not understood how I see things, then you have missed it.
We only know another, if we can produce their words in their way and it makes sense. You do not seem able to do that with my words, so it appears you have missed what I and others are sharing.

This situation always concerns me, especially if the Lord lays someone on my heart. God bless you

You said

I think you have missed the point being made.

my reply about you claiming I have missed the point

I have not missed anything

And now you reply It seems i have missed what you said, and am not understanding.

lol.. I agree, someone here is misunderstanding, But its not me..

 

[FollowHim]

That's an important thing to be able to do.

And I think we have to set aside judgmentalism to do it properly. We have to stop trying to convince someone of our view, and instead focus on understanding theirs. We have to be able to ask those questions that fill in the gaps in our understanding even when we totally believe they are whacked!

But I think that all has to be set aside in humility and just seek to understand what they are saying.

Reflective Listening, also called Active Listening, great tools to have in the tool box. If you know what I'm saying!



And we have to be expressing ourselfs with a mind towards others being able to understand, and invite response, I think.

Your thoughts?

I agree with you, except individuals feel full exposure of their position makes it look so weak, they continually deny anyone to properly define it, or admit they have got it right. And I understand the reality of walking in the light is tough. I have done it and shifted my positions because I did not like the conclusions it led me to, but I praise the Lord I did.

The other issue is the other party has to be committed to finding the truth, or else they are just staying in their bunker of ideas, and refusing to move or even accept another perspective, for fear their position might change. I also know this fear, because it is hard to say, if Christ is false I will walk away, so can I test His truth? If I believe Christ is truth, then He must stand, but I must believe it to find out and risk it. That is truly hard, but also very liberating. God bless you

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That's an important thing to be able to do.

And I think we have to set aside judgmentalism to do it properly. We have to stop trying to convince someone of our view, and instead focus on understanding theirs. We have to be able to ask those questions that fill in the gaps in our understanding even when we totally believe they are whacked!

But I think that all has to be set aside in humility and just seek to understand what they are saying.

Reflective Listening, also called Active Listening, great tools to have in the tool box. If you know what I'm saying!



And we have to be expressing ourselfs with a mind towards others being able to understand, and invite response, I think.

Your thoughts?

Listen closely bro.. seek to understand

 

[FollowHim]

I gave the definition of atonement and how it is accomplished.

What you are promoting here is legalistic works based atonement based on mans deeds, not on What God will accept

I wish I was promoting a legalistic works based atonement, because then my conclusions would be wrong.
My best analogy is rock climbing. Being given ropes, helmet, harness, nuts, supports etc. and then saying climbing is not necessary, you have arrived already, changes the story. Gods story is we have to climb by His rules, His way, the straight path, but He will make it possible. He will clean us up at the beginning and guide us along if we stay connected to Him to arrive where we need to go.

You appear to be saying we are transported to the top, with no equipment or need or change required, no lessons to learn, nothing to do, it is all just a gift.

Now it is fine that if this is your position, then I can continue to describe what I am saying God says, when He clearly says, obey and be blessed, disobey and be condemned. Now for as long as I live, I will read and declare His word and His revelation.

For me as I grow and minister to others, it all becomes more clear, and the more I walk the simpler it actually is.
I can almost just quote verses to make the points, without commentary. And to me that is so odd, because I am so used to getting it wrong, or thinking one thing, and finding the Lord takes a different view. But then the Lord desires we follow and learn, for which I praise His name, that He would call me His friend and His follower, and is willing to listen to my call, thank you Jesus

 

[marks]

The connection is simplistic terms is the belief that the body is innately evil and can never be regarded as holy or pure, but the spirit of a believer can be, and responsibility for behaviour of the body can be disowned by the spirit until its death of the body happens.

The view I hold, and I'm not sure that @Eternally Grateful shares every detail of this, let's see, but here's what I think.

The body is not innately evil, that is, intrinsic to flesh as the Gnostics would say. God created the heavens and the earth, and everything in them, including Man, and declared all good.

But then man transgressed, and died, and what was a living humanity in fellowship with God became a dead humanity. While we had been simply given life, we now had to contend with the knowledge of good and evil apart from God, not according to His way, but according to our own.

That has infected all humanity right on down to today.

God cursed creation with futility, for the purpose that we should find nothing meaningful in it, to turn us back towards Him.

God intends to restore creation, and is restoring humanity, by rebirthing us His own children, and, as His children, He now trains us in control over our flesh. Though the flesh be corrupted, no longer a thing of innocence, we are reborn innocent, righteous, holy, not because we've done righteousness, but because Jesus did.

And we are given Jesus, Who lives in us, as we are being conformed to His image, by increasing us in control over our flesh as we grow in faith.

The failures of the flesh are already condemned in the flesh, and we live in the Spirit. And this being true, we grow in control of the flesh.

To the degree that we walk in the Spirit, and to the degree that we walk according to the flesh, we will either be fruitful or not, and we will be judged for what we do in these bodies, whether good or bad.

But our life is in Christ, not in our ability to do good.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I agree with you, except individuals feel full exposure of their position makes it look so weak, they continually deny anyone to properly define it, or admit they have got it right. And I understand the reality of walking in the light is tough. I have done it and shifted my positions because I did not like the conclusions it led me to, but I praise the Lord I did.

The other issue is the other party has to be committed to finding the truth, or else they are just staying in their bunker of ideas, and refusing to move or even accept another perspective, for fear their position might change. I also know this fear, because it is hard to say, if Christ is false I will walk away, so can I test His truth? If I believe Christ is truth, then He must stand, but I must believe it to find out and risk it. That is truly hard, but also very liberating. God bless you

How we go about it can make a big difference.

"Something I'm not clear about, what does this mean when you say . . ." can come across much differently than, "This makes no sense! How can you say . . ." And can receive back very different responses.

My conscience is pricked as I write this!



On thing I think I see sometimes is that someone "makes a stand for truth" before they actually understand the part they are standing against. I've been guilty of that.

Much love!

 

[FollowHim]

You said


my reply about you claiming I have missed the point


And now you reply It seems i have missed what you said, and am not understanding.

lol.. I agree, someone here is misunderstanding, But its not me..

I have described a realistic proof of how we know we are going through someone elses position, by reproducing their words in their way.
If I place the filter of everyone is a legalist except free grace followers, it seems to match everything you say.
Managing to see "not living in sin" in the context of everyone is in sin, except those forgiven irrespective of behaviour, is a difficult ask, because it requires quite a lot of belief filters. But with the filter all sin is forgiven for the whole world irrespective of faith, and people are only believers or unbelievers, why even say believers cannot live in sin, because in this view no one is in sin, its all forgiven.

What I have discovered, is these complex filters often create contradictions of belief which mean they fall apart, but some hold so firmly to their theory, even when it has flaws they fail to spot them, because the faith in the underlying position is stronger than anything they produce as a result.

It makes me wonder when does one give up and admit the basis of the belief is wrong if it keeps failing to explain simple scripture and positions of the apostles. I am not bright, or right, but am encouraged if as I walk and share, Jesus encourages me in His word and in His light and love. How else can we know we walk on the straight path, other than His word and His Spirit confirms it? Amen

 

[marks]

I agree with you, except individuals feel full exposure of their position makes it look so weak, they continually deny anyone to properly define it, or admit they have got it right.

We all have to decide how much we want to put out there of our views, knowing that in this environment it's like chumming the shark pool.

Much love!

 

[FollowHim]

The view I hold, and I'm not sure that @Eternally Grateful shares every detail of this, let's see, but here's what I think.

The body is not innately evil, that is, intrinsic to flesh as the Gnostics would say. God created the heavens and the earth, and everything in them, including Man, and declared all good.

But then man transgressed, and died, and what was a living humanity in fellowship with God became a dead humanity. While we had been simply given life, we now had to contend with the knowledge of good and evil apart from God, not according to His way, but according to our own.

That has infected all humanity right on down to today.

God cursed creation with futility, for the purpose that we should find nothing meaningful in it, to turn us back towards Him.

God intends to restore creation, and is restoring humanity, by rebirthing us His own children, and, as His children, He now trains us in control over our flesh. Though the flesh be corrupted, no longer a thing of innocence, we are reborn innocent, righteous, holy, not because we've done righteousness, but because Jesus did.

And we are given Jesus, Who lives in us, as we are being conformed to His image, by increasing us in control over our flesh as we grow in faith.

The failures of the flesh are already condemned in the flesh, and we live in the Spirit. And this being true, we grow in control of the flesh.

To the degree that we walk in the Spirit, and to the degree that we walk according to the flesh, we will either be fruitful or not, and we will be judged for what we do in these bodies, whether good or bad.

But our life is in Christ, not in our ability to do good.

Much love!

I have to confess, I gave up trying to work through all the positions individuals have, because they can always point out flaws, because each one has a slightly different emphasis or take. Worse if this emphasis means the words, you do not understand anything I believe or liar, or slander or any number of things which imply ill will are used. In that case I find it better to withdraw and realise the thorns and thistles are too quick to come out, and a more distant approach stating scripture seems more appropriate.

Some literally hate being linked to any general theological group, because it is uniquely theirs or their church, and it is the truth, and who are you deceiver to suggest otherwise. But then truth seekers know both sides of this coin, as we can deceive ourselves and actually be wrong. But hey, we were born not knowing how to speak, so everything is a learning process. God bless you