Jump to content
ClubAdventist is back!

The mystery of selfish love


Sonny

Recommended Posts

You state that the assurance of heaven seems self-centered, but that phrase is the opposite of what you take it to mean. It means I do not have to look to my performance for eternal life. I can't present my good deeds (which are polluted with self) and demand heaven in return. That's sin....It's the sin of unbelief.

In other words - God I'll be good and in return you owe me heaven. That's not agape. A free gift - the assurance of salvation by a loving God - is agape. I have received His gift to me. It is complete - all I can do is rest in what He has done. As I do I'll experience agape.

Also, you state that Christians still die. Yes - it's a sleep death, meaning it is temporary. The believer has a resurrection where he/she is raised 1) immortal & 2) sinless.

The unbeliever, who has rejected his/her need of Christ, will be raised in the 2nd resurrection. They will not be raised in glory; they will be raised in their fallen, mortal state. They will have to take the 2nd death upon themselves because they refused to be delivered from under the law.

Why have they refused deliverance from under law? Because in their eyes they are good moral, decent people. Essentially they are self-righteous-they refuse to see their iniquity - their bent to self - their self-love. They need no Savior - they remain under law.

What does the law require of sin? Death! - The 2nd death. What is the 2nd death? The 2nd death means no hope of a resurrection. It is the curse of the law death where God legally has to abandon you to your choice.

It's up to you, remain under law or accept Christ your righteousness. To be under law means death, to be under Christ means life. Choose life!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Sonny

    78

  • cardw

    57

  • fccool

    20

  • Bravus

    9

Top Posters In This Topic

Marcus,

I don't believe that I was saying that Christianity was the only system that resisted equality for women. That is irrelevant to whether or not Christianity does anyway.

Christianity may have had moral reforms within the areas that it was interested in, but it certainly does not have the exclusive on that.

Democracy is not a Christian philosophy. You show me where in the Bible it presents rule by the people for the people. All I read is rule by god and submit by the people.

All people are equal is hardly a Bible teaching. You show me where in the Bible that it says women are equal with men. You show me where women are allowed to be in leadership over men or in teaching positions or allowed to be priests.

This is simply another example of Christianity coming in after the fact and claiming responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a minute. I thought all I had to do was accept the gift.

I didn't know there was a maintenance contract.

I didn't know that I had to exercise faith in Christ. I thought all I had to do was accept the gift.

Exercise sounds like something I have to do to me. Exactly what does it mean to exercise faith in Christ?

This is kind of a bait and switch deal isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say a doctor writes you a prescription. It's something you need for your heart. Without it you'll die. But you can't afford it so the doctor gives it to you as a free gift. You accept it, but then you discard it. What happens next? You die!

Accepting a gift and then discarding it isn't accepting the gift. Even a child knows this....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was in Christian countries and by Christian reformers that slavery was abolished, that child-labor was moderated, the animal welfare is started, and that whole reform movement was started. When I read the biography of William Wilberforce, it became clear that there is a Christian revival that leads to this becoming part of the national culture.

And there is the whole protestant reformation, which leads to the concept of freedom of speech, the dignity of the individual, etc.

Democracy is a form of rule where all people are considered equal. Most societies are aristocratic, i.e. all power is in the hands of an elite that considers themselves the rightful wielders of the power by virtue of moral superiority and land holdings. This view was not challenged by the Athenian democracy, but first by western states, afaik.

In the Israelite system the Levites who had the role of judging were explicitly not to own land, and thus in a sense were closer to the poor people, quite different from the default system of power handed down by a royal hierarchy.

In Exodus 30, the poor and rich were to pay the same atonement shekel, representing that they had equal value.

In Ex 23:6 and Lev 19:15, [the rich and poor are to be treated fairly in court.]

[see also Mark 10:42ff and Matt 23:8ff]

And I was reading James 2 this morning. The whole chapter addresses the equality of all people.

Of course Paul says in Gal 3:28 [that everyone is equal.]

In those passages is the principle that rulers are to rule for the people. The American constitution is based on the idea that all men are created equal, created by God of course. This thinking fits right in with the Bible.

"Rule by god" is exactly the basis for human equality. If there is a Creator who can tell us what is right and wrong, an absolute authority, then the underprivileged have a standard to appeal to. If there is no creator, then whoever is in power can set the rules.

You have a point there about women, but it's not as strong as it may appear. Women have always lived with men and enjoyed generally the level of prosperity of whatever social class they belonged to. Slavery and child labour were much more serious problems in 1800. And until the 20th century most women spent most of their prime with babies at home, so equal rights for women would not have had the same level of salutary effect on society. Equal pay for example was not really relevant for most women. But in Gal 3:28 the equality of men and women is spelled out. And long before the women's rights movement there was a woman teaching in SDA churches.

ἡ ἀλήθεια ἐλευθερώσει ὑμᾶς

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

[Regarding a deleted inappropriate ad hominem post...]

I think he's here for a discussion: it's a discussion forum after all.

It needn't, and IMO shouldn't, be about 'winning' or about converting others to our perspectives.

And, again IMO, it's just more interesting to have conversations with those whose views differ from ours than with those we agree with.

(lest it turn into a dull round of high-fives and muttering 'mm-hmm')

Truth is important

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Personally and as Moderator - thumbsup

As you said it well, I won't risk redundancy by echoing the thought for emphasis...

"Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good."

"Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal."

"I love God only as much as the person I love the least."

*Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth.

(And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...