I die daily... Have we misinterpreted this?

[Twilight]

Quote:

As long as I consent my will and follow the Holy Spirit continually.

Sometimes that does not happen.

So what happens when the yo-yo is not in the right place?

As you have received obedience in Christ, maybe you could explain that to me? :-)

[Twilight]

Mark, as I was reading through this thread, it appeared you were asked 5 or 6 times what you think it means to say the Holy Spirit dwells in you, without answering. All I know is you appear to think this is literal, but I have no idea what you think this means.

Would you please explain what you think the phrase "the Holy Spirit dwells in me" means using other words? -- specifically the "dwells in me" part; you can use the words "Holy Spirit"

I am actually really surprised this is even a question?

I will start another thread on it at some point in the near future, as it is off topic to this one. :-)

Mark

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Mark, why do you continually bait Redwood?

[Twilight]

Mark, why do you continually bait Redwood?

I would like to challenge the assumption in this post:

Do you consider me disagreeing and prodding Redwood to reveal his/her beliefs, as baiting?

Also can you point to the specific point where you think I am baiting Redwood and explain why you have come to that conclusion?

Or to the general points themselves.

-----------------

And do you think you are being consistent with the question?

For example:

If I called someone a "pantheist", who I knew was extremely averse to that belief, then would I be "baiting" someone.

And would you then question that "baiting"?

Would you raise the same objection with the person who would have done this?

Mark :-)

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

Mark, why do you continually bait Redwood?

I would like to challenge the assumption in this post:

Do you consider me disagreeing and prodding Redwood to reveal his/her beliefs, as baiting?

Also can you point to the specific point where you think I am baiting Redwood and explain why you have come to that conclusion?

Or to the general points themselves.

-----------------

And do you think you are being consistent with the question?

For example:

If I called someone a "pantheist", who I knew was extremely averse to that belief, then would I be "baiting" someone.

And would you then question that "baiting"?

Would you raise the same objection with the person who would have done this?

Mark :-)

Mark wrote:

Quote:

Once again, I point out to you, that your explanations of your own positions, do not come across clearly, and you seem more intent on being offended, than clarifying.

Does that not indicate that your thoughts are focused on yourself possibly?

And therefore, you keep passing by the opportunity, to clear up inconsistencies possibly?

Taking great offense, when a simple clear explanation would equally surfice to diffuse the situation?

If it was just me that this happened with, then maybe you could say it was me.

But as this happens with countless other posters, maybe the problem is your own ability to communicate what you believe?

It is also possible you have inconsistencies in your own beliefs that you do not see yourself.

That's passive agressive as heck.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I would like to challenge the assumption in this post:

Do you consider me disagreeing and prodding Redwood to reveal his/her beliefs, as baiting?

Also can you point to the specific point where you think I am baiting Redwood and explain why you have come to that conclusion?

Or to the general points themselves.

-----------------

And do you think you are being consistent with the question?

For example:

If I called someone a "pantheist", who I knew was extremely averse to that belief, then would I be "baiting" someone.

And would you then question that "baiting"?

Would you raise the same objection with the person who would have done this?

Mark :-)

Mark wrote:

Quote:

Once again, I point out to you, that your explanations of your own positions, do not come across clearly, and you seem more intent on being offended, than clarifying.

Does that not indicate that your thoughts are focused on yourself possibly?

And therefore, you keep passing by the opportunity, to clear up inconsistencies possibly?

Taking great offense, when a simple clear explanation would equally surfice to diffuse the situation?

If it was just me that this happened with, then maybe you could say it was me.

But as this happens with countless other posters, maybe the problem is your own ability to communicate what you believe?

It is also possible you have inconsistencies in your own beliefs that you do not see yourself.[/quote']

That's passive agressive as heck.

I disagree.

It is an assesment of a problem with Redwoods posting style.

Yes it is probing.

But it is not baiting.

Notice the post contains a problem, a rationale for the problem and a solution.

When someone keeps telling you that you are misrepresenting their viewpoint.

But refuse to clarify the viewpoint when questioned.

Then the only course available is to push for clarification and question the lack of clarification.

If an individual does not clarify their position when asked, they cannot really complain when someone "misunderstands" them.

As there is a constant accusation that others are "lying" when the poster is not happy with anothers assesment of their view, someone has to try to resolve the issue.

I think clarification is reasonable and not something that should be passed over.

Hence my attempts to point out the faults in the posting style.

It would remove a lot of the emotional content of some posts, if simple confirmations or explanations were made when asked.

Or do you think that we should not clarify our position when asked?

Mark :-)

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I think Redwood HAS clarified his position more than once on various issues.

Your posting style IS passive aggressive, IMHO.

Thank you for your time.

[teresaq]

Hey Richard, about time you finally showed up. Where you been?

should i or should i not? oh dear, what a temptation!

[Twilight]

I think Redwood HAS clarified his position more than once on various issues.

Your posting style IS passive aggressive, IMHO.

Thank you for your time.

I am sure it has some aggression in their Pam, but isn't love aggressive?

Isn't the gospel aggressive?

It would probably make a good subject for discussion...

Anyway, we can agree to disagree and I hope the broken relationship between one individual and another, will not affect your reasoning so as to preclude another from a relationship. :-)

Respectfully.

Mark :-)

[Robert]

Sequeria is loose on obedience.

And you are loose on seeing you ain't obeying....Who are you kidding? You pick on Jack I'll pick right back on you because when you attack Jack I take it personal

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I think Redwood HAS clarified his position more than once on various issues.

Your posting style IS passive aggressive, IMHO.

Thank you for your time.

Then I must have missed that clarification.

Would it be too much to ask for clarification again, if one has missed the previous clarification?

Anyway, we can agree to disagree and I hope the broken relationship between one individual and another, will not affect your own ability to form a relationship with another who disagrees with one of your own friends. :-)

Respectfully.

Mark :-)

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

aside from that notice the claim that we dwell in Him. now were all pretty smart enough to figure out that we really arent physically inside of Christ, so why would we think the HS or fallen angels are literally, physically, inside of us?

Demons actually take physical and mental possession of some people.

no one denied that, so no need of the . lets stay on track here. the point was whether the HS as a Being literally inhabits believers, and since you brought it up, whether the fallen angels can inhabit us, also, which by extension, would apply to the unfallen angels. are they able to literally inhabit us.

so, how does one person fit inside of Jesus, much less all living believers at any point in time?

Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me....

if the Father was "in" Christ, how was Christ "in" Him?

Joh 10:38... that the Father is in me, and I in him.

or is this figurative language and not literal? is Jesus just trying to get a point across?

Joh 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Robert

I can tell you that Paul doesn't say such....He says that we continually fall short of God's agape love...

Is all falling short of God's glorious ideal "sin"?

what do you call it?

[pnattmbtc]

Not so. Sequeria is loose on obedience. It is NOT a fruit.

[teresaq]

Can God heal all diseases or not?

the trick is realizing when we are the ones who are mentally ill, or possessed, if you will. :)

[pnattmbtc]

I believe when He shed His blood (gave up His life) 2000 years ago, He did it for all of humanity, yet that sacrifice affects me personally only as I see Christ dying for me and continuously see myself with Him nailed to His cross.

That subjective experience is based on an objective event, but the objective event won't change anything in my life as God intends unless I make that event current and personal through a faith-based relationship with Christ.

The sacrifice affects you personally with every breath. This is what it means to say that to the death of Christ we owe even this earthly life.

The objective event gives you life, which impacts everything, as without life you'd be, well, dead.

One needs to accept Christ to be justified by faith, but Christ's sacrifice does much for each one, regardless of their personal decision to accept Christ or not.

[teresaq]

The falling short of God's glory is contrasted with sinning, or lawlessness.

ehhh, no.

Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

the second clause explains what the first clause means. first clause vague, second clause specific.

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Mark, as I was reading through this thread, it appeared you were asked 5 or 6 times what you think it means to say the Holy Spirit dwells in you, without answering. All I know is you appear to think this is literal, but I have no idea what you think this means.

Would you please explain what you think the phrase "the Holy Spirit dwells in me" means using other words? -- specifically the "dwells in me" part; you can use the words "Holy Spirit"

I am actually really surprised this is even a question?

I will start another thread on it at some point in the near future, as it is off topic to this one. :-)

Mark

As you've spoken of this over a dozen times, it seems odd to me that you would all of sudden call this "off topic."

But, ok, if you wish to start another topic, that's fine, but I do hope you answer the question. You're ability to not do so up until now has been stunning.

[teresaq]

Quote:

Originally Posted By: John317

A related question:

Do demons literally get inside people? Jesus commanded the demons "to come out" of people, and then the record is that the demons came out (Mark 1: 25, 26). That's what the Bible says happens in demon-possession. People are literally possessed, or in-dwelt, by demons. If demons do, why not the Holy Spirit?

this is a bible subject our pioneers studied extensively.

it is quite obvious their "descendents" have not.

Satan was once an honored angel in heaven, next to Christ. His countenance, like those of the other angels, was mild and expressive of happiness. His forehead was high and broad, showing great intelligence. His form was perfect; his bearing noble and majestic. {EW 145.1}

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Eze 28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, ...the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

Eze 28:17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

Eze 28:18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

To the only living and true God, occupying this locality, David directs his prayer. Ps.lxxx,1. - "Thou that dwellest between the Cherubims, shine forth." Also in his exalted contemplations of God and his wonderful works, he cries out, in view of his coming to judge the world, "The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble; he sitteth between the Cherubims; let the earth be moved." Ps.xcix,1. - Then as God says what he means, and means what he says, he has a throne, high and lifted up, and did create an intelligent being, perfect in beauty, and perfect in his ways, one that "sealed up the sum, full of wisdom," from which no secret could be hidden, and did set him to be one of the anointed Cherubs that covered with his wings the burning throne of the Eternal. {July 21, 1853 JWe, ARSH 34.15}

I was shown Satan as he once was, a happy, exalted angel. Then I was shown him as he now is. He still bears a kingly form. His features are still noble, for he is an angel fallen. But the expression of his countenance is full of anxiety, care, unhappiness, malice, hate, mischief, deceit, and every evil. That brow which was once so noble, I particularly noticed. His forehead commenced from his eyes to recede. I saw that he had so long bent himself to evil that every good quality was debased, and every evil trait was developed. His eyes were cunning, sly, and showed great penetration. His frame was large, but the flesh hung loosely about his hands and face. As I beheld him, his chin was resting upon his left hand. He appeared to be in deep thought. A smile was upon his countenance, which made me tremble, it was so full of evil and satanic slyness. This smile is the one he wears just before he makes sure of his victim, and as he fastens the victim in his snare, this smile grows horrible. {EW 152.3}

Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Joh 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

if eating His flesh and drinking His blood is figurative, did we all of a sudden switch to literal, or pantheism/panentheism, in assuming that Christ literally dwells in us through the HS?

aside from that notice the claim that we dwell in Him. now were all pretty smart enough to figure out that we really arent physically inside of Christ, so why would we think the HS or fallen angels are literally, physically, inside of us?

Originally Posted By: Twilight

cool!! then we are literally dwelling in Christ, as in physically, by your "logic".

Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me....

[/quote']

Not so fast Teresa...

You have not justified your view as to why it is metaphorical.

You have done something very similar to evolutionists when they argue their position.

You have assumed you are correct, then used that assumption to display your own argument as "proof".

If you cannot supply a basis for your belief from the bible, then you have nothing to bring to the table.

"Mere opinion", is not doctrine.

Please supply the bible texts for your view.

Until you do that, all of your posts on this subject will have to be treated as personal opinion and worthless in the context of this study.

Mark

ok, my brother, if you need to believe the "HS" is literally inside you and you are living by it....

[teresaq]

Quote:

Until you do that, all of your posts on this subject will have to be treated as personal opinion and worthless in the context of this study.

Mark

Everything I read in this thread is mere opinion. All we have is opinion. What one interprets from scripture is mere opinion. That is all that one can bring to the discussion ... that is unless you believe as Steve does ...

Quote:

"it is impossible for me to be in error"

But then ... I don't know of too many people that believe as he does on this matter.

i think i can point them out...

[teresaq]

1.Jack Sequeira is making it clear that the believer will be obedient to the law, which is a point I've been making for some time. To refer to him as if he didn't teach that obedience is the fruit of salvation is misleading, and not fair to him. He does not teach that one can "only believe" and live a life of sin.

The point that JS makes is that true obedience is the fruit of agape. One cannot hope for salvation by an obedience which has self-love as its foundation. But if one has been converted by the love of Christ, agape, then that agape is shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and the fruit of conversion is obedience.

if the devil didnt fight this with all his might he would lose his victims.

[teresaq]

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

Gal 5:23 Meekness, self-control: against such there is no law.

satan would have us believe we display that fruit.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I am actually really surprised this is even a question?

I will start another thread on it at some point in the near future, as it is off topic to this one. :-)

Mark [/quote']

As you've spoken of this over a dozen times, it seems odd to me that you would all of sudden call this "off topic."

But, ok, if you wish to start another topic, that's fine, but I do hope you answer the question. You're ability to not do so up until now has been stunning.

That seemed very aggresive and strange Pnat...

Not consistent with your usual posts.

Mark

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I think Redwood HAS clarified his position more than once on various issues.

Your posting style IS passive aggressive, IMHO.

Thank you for your time.

I am sure it has some aggression in their Pam, but isn't love aggressive?

Isn't the gospel aggressive?

It would probably make a good subject for discussion...

Anyway, we can agree to disagree and I hope the broken relationship between one individual and another, will not affect your reasoning so as to preclude another from a relationship. :-)

Respectfully.

Mark :-)

if one has "received the gift of obedience" they cant sin no matter what they do, correct?

i think that was called the holy flesh movement caused by the exact same belief of having the "HS" literally dwelling within.

my people perish for lack of knowledge.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

That seemed very aggresive and strange Pnat...

Not consistent with your usual posts.

Mark

amazing what one can do and it be ok when one has the "gift of obedience"....

you havent addressed the question, just denied and evaded.