My Weekly Devotional

[Waterfall]

But you don't need to learn that from Christ. Call it "Love" or "respect for inherent worth and dignity" or whatever, but it can learned and offered regardless of faith. That we can offer each other "Grace" is no evidence that that Grace has a divine origin. It's just a sign of the positive side of human nature.

Human nature being what it is, Grace doesn't seem to be innate but learned.

 

[revsdd]

But ... how does this reflect a Christian worldview?

Why does it have to reflect a Christian worldview in order to answer chansen's question? Consequences can be unpleasant or pleasant. It becomes a matter of faith whether one sees or interprets the consequences as a result of God, karma, predictable reaction or coincidence.

I think seeler answered chansen's question with a perfectly valid illustration.

Although, if one wants it to reflect a Christian worldview, it's an illustration of what I might call the Christian version of karma: "you reap what you sow."

 

[Jaebius]

Irrelevant to the issue of consequences. Does Grace remove unpleasant consequences?

No, that would be mercy - which is itself an amazing thing.

 

[Mendalla]

Human nature being what it is, Grace doesn't seem to be innate but learned.

I am not so sure of that. I think personality plays into how "grace-full" one is and a lot of personality is innate. And there are people who hear the message of Grace for years and still don't get it. Like anything related to personality and behavior, there are likely both innate characteristics and learning at play.

All that said, I never did say it was innate. I just said you don't need to learn it from Christ. You can learn it other ways, though it may not be called "grace". Christianity does not have a lock on teaching human grace, even if Divine Grace is, indeed, a Christian idea.

 

[Mendalla]

Why does it have to reflect a Christian worldview in order to answer chansen's question? Consequences can be unpleasant or pleasant. It becomes a matter of faith whether one sees or interprets the consequences as a result of God, karma, predictable reaction or coincidence.

I think seeler answered chansen's question with a perfectly valid illustration.

Although, if one wants it to reflect a Christian worldview, it's an illustration of what I might call the Christian version of karma: "you reap what you sow."

Her original statement about consequences a page back was in response to the question "Does God punish those who break his rules?" from @chansen so the whole thread about consequences is in that context and that question definitely puts it in the context of a Christian (or at least theistic) worldview. I respond to threads, not posts.

 

[revsdd]

Her original statement about consequences a page back was in response to the question "Does God punish those who break his rules?" from @chansen so the whole thread about consequences is in that context and that question definitely puts it in the context of a Christian (or at least theistic) worldview. I respond to threads, not posts.

Well, to be really nit-picky, the thread is "My Weekly Devotional." Thus, you're responding to posts within that overall thread rather than to the thread itself.

Seeler's post began with the words "God's law, one of the oldest and most important, is to love your neighbour as yourself." She is placing her response within a Christian context simply with those words, although in fairness she cites only a portion of Jesus' summary of the law. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself." That omission aside, her response is an illustration of the consequences (positive and negative) of loving (or not loving) one's neighbour as oneself. Even if the family she uses in her illustration is not depicted as Christian, it's still an illustration of Paul's idea of the law being written on our hearts. So even if we don't know God we know right from wrong - and the ability to know right from wrong, from a Christian perspective, comes from God. The issue is which we choose, and the consequences (positive or negative) which flow from that choice.

By the way, this is exactly the type of responses I was hoping to generate when I started this project years ago with just my own congregation. This (all the posts - even those I disagree with) is very helpful to me. Thank you.

 

[airclean33]

I'm sorry, too, because you are working under a false understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I will pray that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your heart to an understanding of the gospel of grace that came with Jesus.

--Airclean--post --First thank you Steven, for your prays. I can use as many as possible. Second minister I am filled with GODS Holy Spirit. It is by Grace" I am saved. But after salvation GOD has much work for some. As He sent me to the U.C.C first. Where I heard preached . That Noah was just a story. It never really happen. My Lord Jesus disagrees with you teachers. As He said , As it was in the days of Noah. Then remember I was a knew Christian . I am asking when are we going to bring our sick to the front of the church anoint them with oil , an lay hands on them so they could get well. I am told we don't do that. I believe your right your church don't follow the word of GOD.


Rev Steve--
It is legalism which is destroying the church by turning it into something that the church should not be; by making the church an arbiter of people's behaviour rather than an instrument of God's grace.

Airclean--post..Here you state that reading GODS Word makes you legalist. You say you know right from Wrong ? I don't think so". I believe I will just keep listing to GOD. I will pray for you as well though minister.

Rev--Steve----
I don't deny that legalistic churches often have many members - often more than non-legalistic churches. People love rules. Generally speaking they love rules more than they love God. Rules make faith easy. They reduce faith to a checklist. "I've done this and this and that," or "I haven't done this or this or that." It's very black and white.

--Ariclean--post --
Rev Steve I really thought you would give me more than this. I have walked with GOD now some 40 years. I find ever day almost" I cross the line .It don't send me to Hell. But I do ask GOD to forgive me an help me not to make that mistake again. GOD knows we who are saved are, like children" , in that we live in flesh and we don't always listen. But I am learning , and one day GOD willing" , I will be able to get up and not have to ask GOD to for give me.

Rev--Steve--
So people are attracted to that. Grace is much more difficult. It means relying - completely and totally - on God through Christ to forgive and redeem me when I screw up. That's hard.

-Airclean--post
This part here seem to contradict what you have been saying.What you posted is exactly how I see it . as you mite note from my post above. The Holy Spirit is GODS Spirit . That which is to teach us the way. That is His way. The Bible is to help us understand GOD way.

Rev Steve--post
Most people choose the easy road. The easy road is the way of law, the hard road is the way of grace. The easy God to follow is the God of rules, the God who's hard to follow is the God of grace. Now, your Scripture references:

--Airclean--post
.I believe I now see where you make a mistake . First Steve it is not easy to the way of GOD. The Holy Spirit is of GOD sent to help you understand . That dose not mean GODS Word The Bible is made none in void . It is a Living Word given into us to help understand," and see the way of GOD.


Rev--Steve--
Of course the law was accomplished and fulfilled by Jesus. The law having been accomplished and fulfilled it no longer has power.

Airclean--post--But only to those who have been saved through Christ.
This dose not mean we should just go out an break them though.

Rev Steve --post
There is also the fact that the law Jesus is referring to is the law of Moses, which was given to Israel and not to the Gentile world. Gentiles live according to the law written on our hearts, as Paul says in Romans 2:15 and not the written law. The law written on our hearts is our conscience. We know right from wrong. It's not a matter of following "rules" - it's a matter of living according to your God-given conscience.

Airclean--post --These also though are written on are Hearts and Mines, Are they not?

Rev-Steve--post-
Now,
You asked for some Scripture references. I don't have time to give you an exhaustive list and commentary, but here are a few:

For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. (John 1:17)

For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. (Romans 6:14)

For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. (Galatians 2:19)

Bear one another’s burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2)

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. (Ephesians 2:14-15a)

[/QUO TE]-- I have no problem with these Rev , for you have taken them from Gods Word The Bible. GOD has Always Lead HIS People that He has chosen. This Bible you say , we don't seem to need any more . Said's Our GOD don't change , He" is the same GOD" at the end , as He was in The Beginning. And All Glory Is His". airclean33-Gord.

 

[Waterfall]

I'm sorry, too, because you are working under a false understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I will pray that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your heart to an understanding of the gospel of grace that came with Jesus.

Are you saying that God's Grace didn't exist before Jesus? I thought the Jews also taught about God's grace in their scripture and that following the law was only an expression of love for receiving God's grace?

 

[revsdd]

Are you saying that God's Grace didn't exist before Jesus? I thought the Jews also taught about God's grace in their scripture and that following the law was only an expression of love for receiving God's grace?

Nope. I am saying that with the coming of Christ and through the life of Jesus the law was accomplished and fulfilled and, the law having been accomplished and fulfilled, humanity was no longer subject to the tyranny of the law. God has always been a God of grace.

 

[revsdd]

@airclean33 -

I don't have time to reformat your post # 87, so I'll just respond here.

First, I note that you haven't really responded to anything I said. Instead, you've chosen to discuss the historicity of the Noah story.

Second, for someone who thinks God is a God of rules, you have no hesitation in breaking God's rule that "you shall not bear false witness." Instead, you have weirdly chosen to accuse me of teaching people that they shouldn't read the Bible, and of not reading the Bible in "your church." I do not appreciate people putting words in my mouth. Please quote me saying that. Given that you will be unable to offer such a quote (or even such a suggestion) I suggest that you sinned by bearing false witness against me and that you should confess that to God and to the WC2 community, apologize to me for it, and repent of it.

 

[Seeler]

But ... how does this reflect a Christian worldview?

I agree with this scenario but to me it has absolutely nothing to do with God or a particular understanding of God. It's simply human relations in action and a humanist could just as easily believe it as you.
...
So how does your idea that what keeps us on the straight and narrow are the consequences of our actions (which are an impersonal force) jibe with following a religion that fairly clearly teaches, even in its scriptures, that there is a divine Judge who will mete out consequences for our actions (which is clearly a personal one)?

Mendalla, Chansen asked about the conse-uences of not following God's laws. I tried to give him an example.
Jesus was asked which was the greatest (most important) of God's laws. He answered -uoting two separate verses from ancient Hebrew scripture. Love God; and e-ually important, love your neighbour. I answered with the possible cones-uence of loving, or not loving, your neighbour.
Certainly a humanist could do the same, and the conse-uences would be the same.
To tell the truth, I don't put too much stock in the idea of God as judge handing out punishment. Actually I think God weeps over the natural conse-uences of our behaviour.

Gosh, I didn't realize how often I need that letter that usually precedes 'u'. I guess this is a natural conse-uence of not keeping my keyboard clean. Cleanliness is next to godliness?

 

[Jaebius]

Mendalla, Chansen asked about the conse-uences of not following God's laws. I tried to give him an example.
Jesus was asked which was the greatest (most important) of God's laws. He answered -uoting two separate verses from ancient Hebrew scripture. Love God; and e-ually important, love your neighbour. I answered with the possible cones-uence of loving, or not loving, your neighbour.
Certainly a humanist could do the same, and the conse-uences would be the same.
To tell the truth, I don't put too much stock in the idea of God as judge handing out punishment. Actually I think God weeps over the natural conse-uences of our behaviour.

Gosh, I didn't realize how often I need that letter that usually precedes 'u'. I guess this is a natural conse-uence of not keeping my keyboard clean. Cleanliness is next to godliness?

I am going to abstain from using that letter as a sign of solidarity with you. What other brave souls will join us?

 

[Luce NDs]

Why does it have to reflect a Christian worldview in order to answer chansen's question? Consequences can be unpleasant or pleasant. It becomes a matter of faith whether one sees or interprets the consequences as a result of God, karma, predictable reaction or coincidence.

I think seeler answered chansen's question with a perfectly valid illustration.

Although, if one wants it to reflect a Christian worldview, it's an illustration of what I might call the Christian version of karma: "you reap what you sow."

Would some deny that?

 

[Luce NDs]

Well, to be really nit-picky, the thread is "My Weekly Devotional." Thus, you're responding to posts within that overall thread rather than to the thread itself.

Seeler's post began with the words "God's law, one of the oldest and most important, is to love your neighbour as yourself." She is placing her response within a Christian context simply with those words, although in fairness she cites only a portion of Jesus' summary of the law. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself." That omission aside, her response is an illustration of the consequences (positive and negative) of loving (or not loving) one's neighbour as oneself. Even if the family she uses in her illustration is not depicted as Christian, it's still an illustration of Paul's idea of the law being written on our hearts. So even if we don't know God we know right from wrong - and the ability to know right from wrong, from a Christian perspective, comes from God. The issue is which we choose, and the consequences (positive or negative) which flow from that choice.

By the way, this is exactly the type of responses I was hoping to generate when I started this project years ago with just my own congregation. This (all the posts - even those I disagree with) is very helpful to me. Thank you.

Yet in Christianity and a lot of staid situations ... denial is a favoured position ...

 

[Luce NDs]

Nope. I am saying that with the coming of Christ and through the life of Jesus the law was accomplished and fulfilled and, the law having been accomplished and fulfilled, humanity was no longer subject to the tyranny of the law. God has always been a God of grace.

Tis a matter of cognate about what was rejected and lost ...

 

[Luce NDs]

Mendalla, Chansen asked about the conse-uences of not following God's laws. I tried to give him an example.
Jesus was asked which was the greatest (most important) of God's laws. He answered -uoting two separate verses from ancient Hebrew scripture. Love God; and e-ually important, love your neighbour. I answered with the possible cones-uence of loving, or not loving, your neighbour.
Certainly a humanist could do the same, and the conse-uences would be the same.
To tell the truth, I don't put too much stock in the idea of God as judge handing out punishment. Actually I think God weeps over the natural conse-uences of our behaviour.

Gosh, I didn't realize how often I need that letter that usually precedes 'u'. I guess this is a natural conse-uence of not keeping my keyboard clean. Cleanliness is next to godliness?

No lost X-Q-sis ...

 

[Luce NDs]

I am going to abstain from using that letter as a sign of solidarity with you. What other brave souls will join us?

There are a multitude of Q's elsewhere ... open to seeking ...

 

[airclean33]

@airclean33 -

I don't have time to reformat your post # 87, so I'll just respond here.

First, I note that you haven't really responded to anything I said. Instead, you've chosen to discuss the historicity of the Noah story.

Second, for someone who thinks God is a God of rules, you have no hesitation in breaking God's rule that "you shall not bear false witness." Instead, you have weirdly chosen to accuse me of teaching people that they shouldn't read the Bible, and of not reading the Bible in "your church." I do not appreciate people putting words in my mouth. Please quote me saying that. Given that you will be unable to offer such a quote (or even such a suggestion) I suggest that you sinned by bearing false witness against me and that you should confess that to God and to the WC2 community, apologize to me for it, and repent of it.

--Well Rev ,if there is to be any apology I be it should come from you.
Your post--
-I'm sorry, too, because you are working under a false understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I will pray that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your heart to an understanding of the gospel of grace that came with Jesus.

Another one of your posts--
Rev Steve--
It is legalism which is destroying the church by turning it into something that the church should not be; by making the church an arbiter of people's behaviour rather than an instrument of God's grace.

Airclean----Now I am destroying the church?
Now I am an arbiter one who makes a Judgement .
I guess you mite be close on this one". As that is what we were sent into the world to do. (That is part of the office you hold). That is tell people they are making a mistake.
First Rev you" may want to read 1- cor2:15--16
Then have a look at. Exodus 19:6--1 Peter 2:9

 

[Luce NDs]

Speak of the power of corruption and redaction!

 

[revsdd]

--Well Rev ,if there is to be any apology I be it should come from you.
Your post--
-I'm sorry, too, because you are working under a false understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I will pray that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your heart to an understanding of the gospel of grace that came with Jesus.

Another one of your posts--
Rev Steve--
It is legalism which is destroying the church by turning it into something that the church should not be; by making the church an arbiter of people's behaviour rather than an instrument of God's grace.

Airclean----Now I am destroying the church?
Now I am an arbiter one who makes a Judgement .
I guess you mite be close on this one". As that is what we were sent into the world to do. (That is part of the office you hold). That is tell people they are making a mistake.
First Rev you" may want to read 1- cor2:15--16
Then have a look at. Exodus 19:6--1 Peter 2:9

I reiterate that if you believe in a God of rules then you are working under a false understanding of the gospel and regardless of what you think, you are clearly either not being led by the Holy Spirit or you are misinterpreting what the Holy Spirit is telling you. No shame in that.

Should you choose to associate yourself with that which is destroying the church then you are passing judgement on yourself. Otherwise, I'll only say that this is a sad attempt at deflection. Show me where I said that people shouldn't read the Bible or apologize for bearing false witness against me. That's a simple request. If you're not going to do either one of those things, then please don't post again.