What about the Death to Self message ?

[Nancy]

Well you may not agree that God is our True Home and the Place that we who love Him swing back to when our mind is free from other things.
But, maybe some don't ...God is where my needle swings back to...whether you like the phrase or not, I do!!!

Well, North IS up, yes? And, where is The Father? Not South! lol.
I like that phrase, think I might start using it! ❤

 

[marks]

Good post..

Do you see this "reckoning' that we are told to do and BELIEVE , as the Overcoming spoken about in Rev 3 ?

Jesus said John 6 :30 "This is the work of God that you believe on Him whom He sent.."

Obviously because of the OP you can tell I am at the place of seeing that I so easily fall into the trap of NOT believing on Him 24/7 and always checking to see if I am overcoming the flesh enough.
It wearies me...and now I say ENOUGH...it is time I really believed what God wants us to believe...that our overcoming is in the mind...back to the beginning...'Who's Voice will we believe and listen to'

I doubt that on this pilgrim path that have a full decade ahead on me..
I am choosing to give 'me' up, and believe what He has said... "YE ARE DEAD and your life is hid with Christ in God."

I want to be found in Rev 3 among the overcomers. Winning the battle of the mind and having the mind of Christ.
"to be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.."

I'm with you on all of this.

Either we are saved by grace or we are not. And being saved by grace means there is no consideration to the flesh, not for good or for ill. The actions of the flesh are never good, only and always sin, our flesh being hostile to God.

Only by completely removing our flesh from the equation can we be saved.

Otherwise, it would invariably sink us. Otherwise, we have to reform our flesh, something no one can ever do. Either what is required to be saved comes from God, or it comes from me.

The righteousness of God that is by faith necessarily means not of works.

Joy comes in knowing that nothing can ever separate us from God's love. And that knowledge, to me, is found in understanding that the flesh has been cut away. It doesn't grow back.

Much love!

 

[Helen]

Well, North IS up, yes? And, where is The Father? Not South! lol.
I like that phrase, think I might start using it! ❤

In my heart I link it with - " He that dwelleth in The Secret Place of the Most High , shall abide under the Shadow of the Almighty .."

Tat is my "magnetic north". ♥︎

 

[Hidden In Him]

Jesus Himself is the only fit judge. So what does that mean to us in how we think about each other?

Do we believe all things? Hope all things? Does this truly inform our thoughts, or do we continue to think what we think of others?

Well certainly. You seem to think I am in the habit of judging every Christian I see, LoL. If you wanna know the truth, I try at all costs NOT to, even when I see and hear things about them that are decidedly not good.

The Modern Church. Love to know what you mean when you say that.

Does it include you? Are we talking one out of 7? What does this mean?

I don't see where prophecy has ceased yet, so no, I don't rule it out. But I've not heard this prophecy to which you refer, so what can I say? Let the prophecy speak, and the others discern.

The church of today : )

I believe the revelation was first given to Harold Pittman, a former Baptist preacher. Maybe I can find a copy online and post a link.

The church in modern times . . . the true church . . . is the group of people who have trusted in Jesus, who are born again God's spirit children, who are created brand new, sharing God's very nature of righteousness and holiness. So I do not think the Modern Church is wretched and poor and blind and naked. We are glorified and are rich and are given sight, and are clothed.

Many who call themselves the church aren't. And they are wretched and poor and blind and naked. And they need to go to Jesus.

It's difficult to discuss this because the terminology gets mixed, but let's just call it Christendom then. Modern "Christianity."

Let's do!

Oh, God no, LoL. I'm not going there right now. Too much going on. Maybe later. This conversation is long-winded enough as it is. Besides, I just read Helen's post about keeping things simple. "Stick to your Magnetic North" and all that sort of thing, LoL.

epiginosko - "upon-knowledge", a strengthened knowledge. Not mere recognition, as if a "lighter" form of knowledge, a "deeper" knowing. Thayer calls this "precise and correct knowledge".

Nobody said anything about "lighter" anything... except Thayer. I'd consider him a little lighter, but I digress, LoL.

It seems to me that you see God's children, or many of them, as miserable little wretches who, if they can't get their act together, are going to be spat out. And this puts the onus on us.

A Ha Ha Ha!!! Yes, even you, you miserable little wretch! A Ha Ha Ha!!!

I dunno. I just see the call of God as being great. Paul urged his readers, saying, "Having these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."

I think I need Episkopos in this discussion. I seem to be getting outnumbered here, LoL.

I see God's children as celestial children of our Faithful Creator, nevermore to be separated from our Father. He has done it!

Here is where we do part company, yes. I'm afraid I can't agree with the notion of OSAS. But that's another conversation I don't have time or patience for right now, you miserable little wretch, you.

 

[Hidden In Him]

In my heart I link it with - " He that dwelleth in The Secret Place of the Most High , shall abide under the Shadow of the Almighty .."

Tat is my "magnetic north". ♥︎

Now THAT is a good verse!

 

[marks]

I'd like that too...I want the thread to stay on topic , but I can see that what we in the 60's called " Constantly Abiding" is never mention much these days...
...but back there in the Holiness Churches , even the Pentecostal Church ...everyone knew what 'constantly abiding' was...
= Our soul returning to our magnetic north...in all we do , we do well but when the needed job is done our heart always swings back to 'home' ...our Magnetic North...Fathers heart.

I too would like to know what @Hidden In Him would say.
I am now weary of all the -'we must do this , and we must do that..'
It does not work because it bring our eyes back to me, me, me....

'I must decrease and He must increase'....

.....H

Galatians teaches that the one who has is looking to their physical obedience to commandments has "fallen from grace", that is, is no longer functioning by faith in Jesus, and reliance on His power to keep us. They are no longer entered by faith in Jesus into the grace in which we stand, instead are trying to "stand" through performance in the body.

I think that the way He increases and I decrease is that I stop looking to myself for me to be acceptable to God, instead looking to Jesus for my acceptability to God.

Consciousness of my sin puts my eyes on me. Consciousness of Jesus' righteousness given to me opens my spiritual understanding to the fact of God's loving presence with me. And He most assuredly loves me, and is here with me.

But when I look at me, I lose sight of Him.

God knows our sins are of the flesh, and we are not of the flesh. We need to know the same thing.

Much love!

 

[marks]

The "love of God" here was just another expression for the Presence of God,

I don't think we should reword the Bible. Most seriously.

It does not say, Keep yourself in the presence of God. It says keep yourself in the love of God. And that is very different.

How important is it to stay with the actual wording?

 

[marks]

Well certainly. You seem to think I am in the habit of judging every Christian I see, LoL.

No, I don't think of you that way, and I expect you are not in that habit. But there is a certain way of thinking which lends itself that way.

As we think of our acceptablity to God in terms of our performance in this life, we naturally extend that sort of thinking to others, that their acceptability to God is based on their performance, and, well, quite frankly, just LOOK at what they are doing!

So we think of ourselves this way, and we think of others this way. But we know that we're not to judge, so we try not to. Which is trying to control the behavior without the renewing of the mind.

When our mind is renewed to think the new way, then we don't think in those terms anymore. There is no judging of others, because there is nothing for us to judge, not because we want to judge and don't allow ourselves.

The church of today : )

It's difficult to discuss this because the terminology gets mixed, but let's just call it Christendom then. Modern "Christianity."

So then a mixed group of true and false believers? Should we ascribe to the true what pertains to the false?

Nobody said anything about "lighter" anything... except Thayer. I'd consider him a little lighter, but I digress, LoL.

Actually, it was me that said "lighter", not Thayer. Thayer said "precise and correct knowledge".

You had said that epiginosko was not really knowledge, if fact it's a stronger word for knowing, not weaker.

I dunno. I just see the call of God as being great. Paul urged his readers, saying, "Having these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."

Of course God's call is great! And certainly we are to be holy as He is holy.

If we cleanse ourselves from the dishonorable, we become fit for honorable use.

But we don't cleanse ourselves towards our salvation.

I think I need Episkopos in this discussion. I seem to be getting outnumbered here, LoL.

Good luck! He hasn't wanted to deal with my questions towards his doctrine for quite some time. Can't say I blame him though!

Here is where we do part company, yes. I'm afraid I can't agree with the notion of OSAS. But that's another conversation I don't have time or patience for right now

Again, we have very very different ideas of what it means to be a child of God.

Much love!

 

[Hidden In Him]

I don't think we should reword the Bible. Most seriously.

It does not say, Keep yourself in the presence of God. It says keep yourself in the love of God. And that is very different.

How important is it to stay with the actual wording?

I'm not rewording the Bible. I'm interpreting it properly, marks.

Look here to 2 Thessalonians 2:13. "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you unto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." How did Paul know they were beloved of God? Because the Lord had sent him specifically to them with the presentation of the gospel, and because the Spirit of God had been poured out upon them. This is what the "sanctification of the Spirit" is in reference to.

 

[marks]

I'm not rewording the Bible. I'm interpreting it properly, marks.

No, you are rewording it.

The passage reads, keep yourself in the love of God, and you've changed it to keep yourself in God's presence, which is, again, different. Different word, different meaning, giving a different understanding.

I submit that if we do not hold to the words of Scripture, we end up in error.

Keeping ourself in God's presence. Keeping ourselves in God's love.

 

[Hidden In Him]

No, I don't think of you that way, and I expect you are not in that habit. But there is a certain way of thinking which lends itself that way.

As we think of our acceptability to God in terms of our performance in this life, we naturally extend that sort of thinking to others, that their acceptability to God is based on their performance.

Ick! No, no. I'm sure some may interpret it that way, and some may actually teach it that way, but the wise understand that there is no righteousness expect in Christ, and the only way a person becomes righteous is when it is no longer they who live but Christ who lives in them.

But you see this is precisely my point. Many cite theological constructs in discussing being "dead to sin and alive in Christ." But when Paul was discussing it, he was talking in terms of things that had actually happened in his life. How many Christians today do you think could truthfully say, "It is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me"? And by that, Paul meant that he didn't speaks his own words, he spoke only what Christ wished to speak through him. He didn't go where he wanted to go or do what he wanted to do, he went only where the Spirit bade him go and do. He miraculously survived threats to his life over and over and over again to continue preaching the gospel, because the power of Christ was being made manifest through him continually. I could give you passages and verses of scripture on every bit of that.

How many believers today can say it truthfully, "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me"? and it be an accurate statement regarding the life they are actually living and not just some theological mumbo jumbo coming out of their mouth that does not accurately reflect who they really are in real life?

When our mind is renewed to think the new way, then we don't think in those terms anymore. There is no judging of others, because there is nothing for us to judge, not because we want to judge and don't allow ourselves.

Absolutely. And when you view things from the perspective that there is only one righteous and that is Christ, then how unrighteous a man or woman is becomes utterly irrelevant. The only question is, is a person abiding in Him or is he not. We never have a righteousness of our own and never will.

Of course God's call is great! And certainly we are to be holy as He is holy.

If we cleanse ourselves from the dishonorable, we become fit for honorable use.

But we don't cleanse ourselves towards our salvation.

Salvation is not what this thread has been about, to me anyway. The subject matter has been about dying to self and living in Him. Granted, it relates to salvation in that to enter fully into Him and abide there is to make one's calling and election secure, as we discussed. But we receive Him through grace. The question is, do we continue to receive Him to the extent that He becomes our entire life, or do we draw back, wanting His grace but not actually wanting Him. At least in anything except name only. His Spirit was poured out upon them by grace, and by His grace we were meant to abide in it.

To reject doing so is to reject His grace, yes?

Good luck! He hasn't wanted to deal with my questions towards his doctrine for quite some time. Can't say I blame him though!

Well, he tends to bounce in and out a lot. No telling. He stops answering me after awhile as well.

Again, we have very very different ideas of what it means to be a child of God.

Yeah. I know. But for me the expressions "sons of obedience" and "sons of disobedience" carry strong meaning. If there is no way to tell any difference between the sons of disobedience in the world and God's children, then they're not really His children after all, are they?

 

[marks]

Look here to 2 Thessalonians 2:13. "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you unto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." How did Paul know they were beloved of God? Because the Lord had sent him specifically to them with the presentation of the gospel, and because the Spirit of God had been poured out upon them. This is what the "sanctification of the Spirit" is in reference to.

How did Paul know they were beloved of the Lord?

Your answer . . . because the Lord sent Paul to preach the gospel, and because the Spirit of God had been poured out on them.

But is that what this passage says?

'Brethren beloved of the Lord' is the personal address Paul identifies them with. Paul is giving thanks to God because God had chosen them for salvation and sanctification.

But where exactly is the statement that this is how Paul knows God loves them? I don't see it there. Paul called them beloved brothers. But does not say what make them so. What he does say is he is thankful that God chose them.

I'm seeing an alarming pattern.

 

[Hidden In Him]

No, you are rewording it.

The passage reads, keep yourself in the love of God, and you've changed it to keep yourself in God's presence, which is, again, different. Different word, different meaning, giving a different understanding.

I submit that if we do not hold to the words of Scripture, we end up in error.

Keeping ourself in God's presence. Keeping ourselves in God's love.

Marks, let me ask you something. Have you ever experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit? The reason I ask is because Jude was here talking about praying in the Spirit in this context, and praying in the Spirit is to pray in other tongues. This is the context in which the phrase, "keeping yourselves in the love of God" is found. The natural reading here is that he was talking about the love of God as being His Presence.

It's ok if you chose not to interpret it that way, but you won't convince me it is not the proper interpretation. I know what he is talking about there, and he is not just talking about a theoretical construct again. They were again talking about spiritual realities here, not theological concepts that believers should mull over in their heads.

 

[marks]

He didn't go where he wanted to go or do what he wanted to do, he went only where the Spirit bade him go and do.

You are remembering, right, that the Spirit forbad Paul preach in Asia that time? Consider the significance of this statement.

Paul was forbidden. What does that mean?

Paul insisted on returning to Jerusalem when the Spirit was warning him the whole way to not go. What does that tell us?

 

[marks]

How many believers today can say it truthfully, "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me"? and it be an accurate statement regarding the life they are actually living and not just some theological mumbo jumbo coming out of their mouth that does not accurately reflect who they really are in real life?

Let me ask you . . . Is this true for you?

I don't ask to disparage you, rather, there is a serious discussion to be had on this point.

 

[marks]

We never have a righteousness of our own and never will.

This sets you miles apart from what episkopos teaches.

 

[marks]

Well, he tends to bounce in and out a lot. No telling. He stops answering me after awhile as well.

In my case, there are, I believe, two reasons, one being I won't rise to his baiting, the other being I won't stop asking the questions which he cannot answer, due to the internal contradictions in his doctine. Since he can't seem to discredit me by whatever means, he ignores me. That's my impression.

 

[Hidden In Him]

How did Paul know they were beloved of the Lord?

Your answer . . . because the Lord sent Paul to preach the gospel, and because the Spirit of God had been poured out on them.

Correct.

'Brethren beloved of the Lord' is the personal address Paul identifies them with. Paul is giving thanks to God because God had chosen them for salvation and sanctification.

Yes. And he meant the exact same thing when he used it in greetings. "Beloved of the Lord" was a reference to those upon whom God had bestowed His love in the form of the Spirit.

But where exactly is the statement that this is how Paul knows God loves them? I don't see it there. Paul called them beloved brothers.

Not beloved brothers. Beloved of the Lord is the expression we are discussing, yes?

But does not say what make them so.

What do think gave Paul the notion that they were beloved of God then? What do you think gave the Jews the notion that Cornelius and his household were beloved by God, and accepted of Him?

I'm seeing an alarming pattern.

Ok, buddy. I don't mean to alarm you. I need to go have a piece of apple pie anyway.

Blessings in Christ, and good talk. Maybe we can pick it up later.

 

[marks]

Yeah. I know. But for me the expressions "sons of obedience" and "sons of disobedience" carry strong meaning. If there is no way to tell any difference between the sons of disobedience in the world and God's children, then they're not really His children after all, are they?

And, this betrays a focus on the works, not the faith.

You can see works, you cannot see faith. If you don't see works, that does not mean that there is no faith. For example, the brand new believer who hasn't matured at all. You can't yet see their sanctification, but that does not mean they are not saved.

OK, back to Death to Self. How many places does the Bible say you are already dead in Christ?

Can children of God be "sons of disobedience"?

1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

The children of disobedience have the prince of the power of the air working IN them. Do you think these could be God's children?

 

[marks]

Marks, let me ask you something. Have you ever experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit? The reason I ask is because Jude was here talking about praying in the Spirit in this context, and praying in the Spirit is to pray in other tongues. This is the context in which the phrase, "keeping yourselves in the love of God" is found. The natural reading here is that he was talking about the love of God as being His Presence.

You know that not all speak in tongues, right? As to whether or not I've been baptised in the Spirit is irrelevant towards what the Bible says.

The Bible says there is "One baptism". It also teaches that we are baptised into Jesus. What is the baptism of which you speak?

If praying in the Spirit is exclusively praying in tongues, and not all speak in tongues, then there's a problem, wouldn't you agree?

But even so . . . it still doesn't change the meaning of "love" into "presence". I truly believe we need to hold to the very words used, and conform Our conclusions to the Words of Scripture.

I would say the natural wording is exactly what he wrote, keep youself in the love of God, looking for mercy from Jesus.

Thinking that we are condemned by God prevents us from enjoying the awareness of God's love.

Looking for His mercy, that is what He gives us. We look for mercy, and enjoy His love.

It's ok if you chose not to interpret it that way, but you won't convince me it is not the proper interpretation. I know what he is talking about there, and he is not just talking about a theoretical construct again. They were again talking about spiritual realities here, not theological concepts that believers should mull over in their heads.

So you approve if I choose my interpretation. OK.

Did you choose your interpretation? Or is it more a matter of holding to what you think is real?

Realities - yes.

Exactly.

You know, one thing I've noticed about episkopos' writing. He will frequently claim that those who disagree with him are just working with theories while he knows the life experience.

Theological concepts to mull over. Hm. You can examine the fairness and usefulness of these sorts of statements if you imagine them written to you.

After all, should I expect someone, perhaps you, who only knows teachings and theories to understand things the same as me, who lives this?

Do you see this?

I think "theological construct" is a way to deny the plain meaning of a simply stated passage. And the reality is that we keep ourselves in God's love by what we believe, not by what we do. Faith and not works. Works give reward. But faith gives relationship, works do not.