From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Thu Jul 10 2003 - 16:00:57 EDT
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:41:38 -0400 "Sondra Brasile"
<sbrasile@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> If truly we set our eyes on Jesus and like Peter when he began to
> sink
> realized that if he kept his eyes on him he remained on top of the
> water, we
> can overcome our desires. The idolatry that all of you fail to
> realize is
> our fixation on ME, myself and I. It's whatever "I" want supersedes
> all? NO
> all of you are missing the point. God doesn't really care if you are
>
> comfortable in your sin or it's "tough to kick the habit" if this
> were the
> old testament we'd all be frying alive or something his anger still
> burns
> because we fail to repent (because we "changed the rules", but he
> didn't).
> That is how you put to death the flesh, by not giving into it's
> cravings and
> desires and if we truly keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, we can be
> "overcomers
> through Christ". What does this mean? That we are no longer in
> BONDAGE to
> the flesh and it's desires, that is the Christian walk, THAT is the
>
> Christian calling, THAT is the Christian life, it is one of our
> missions in
> life to put to death the sins of the flesh. If we can't even
> overcome the
> sin that rests in our own bodies, how do you think we can make an
> impact on
> the world? Isn't that the bondage that is talked about in the Bible?
> Being
> "yoked" by a behavior?
> You people are SO missing the point! You don't' change the definition
> of
> "BAD" because you fail to measure up, that's cheating! Or the
> definition of
> sin because it makes us uncomfortable or it's hard to do! It's not
> about YOU
> or what YOU want or what you think is right or the way things should
> be, God
> doesn't give a RIP what You think, he wrote the rules and guidelines
> which I
> think are quite clear, you can haggle over them and pick them apart,
> but
> since God is truly the boss, how much does it really matter what you
> think?
> He said it quite clearly and if you want to water it down and mix
> and match
> and change definitions etc, etc... you go right ahead, but I
> wouldn't want
> to be You on judgement day.
>
> What many of you want to do though is call what IS sin NOT sin. We
> are all
> born with sin in our genetic code, it's written in our DNA and I'd
> be
> willing to bet again my right arm that if they studied it they'd
> find that
> that is scientifically true. We're all genetically flawed, but does
> that
> give us licence? NO! Like Paul was saying because of GRACE we are no
> longer
> under the law, but do we do as we please? No way! I would think that
> all you
> brilliant people would be able to understand that concept, but maybe
> some of
> you are lacking enlightenment, "Having a form of godliness, but
> denying the
> power thereof" which the very next words are: "from such turn away"
>
> Sondra
>
I recall two events more than six decades back that I think bear on
aspects of Sondra's post. The first involved an older man who lived alone
in a shack on the edge of the Esmeraldas River, in Ecuador. He made a
meager living fishing. One day he came to Dad with a problem. When he
came in at night, wet and cold, and made his evening meal, the food just
sat in his stomach and he couldn't sleep until he got out his pipe. That
was the only time he smoked, but he didn't think smoking was right for a
Christian. They prayed together that the Lord would relieve the need and
grant him sleep without smoking. Some time later he joyously reported
that the Lord had removed the need for tobacco. He went to bed after his
meal and slept like a baby.
I went with Dad to hear an evangelist of some note. His message that
night included a justification of remarriage after divorce. Dad noted
that this was a new side of the man who had for years been most dogmatic
that _all_ divorce was wrong and remarriage close to the unpardonable
sin. What had changed? Certainly not scripture. The evangelist's favorite
child had shortly before been involved in a notoriously messy divorce and
had married the correspondent. Obviously, exegesis and hermeneutics had
given way before emotion. (I'm not backing any interpretation of
scripture, just noting motivation.)
Casuistry is always able to find good reasons for bad actions. Whatever
one "needs" can be "justified,." at least to the "needy." But there is
also the promise of I Corinthians 10:13.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jul 10 2003 - 16:03:56 EDT