|
Post by Paws on Apr 23, 2006 4:54:27 GMT 12.75
;D Thanks Freddie. I'm still trying to get a handle on the differences among man, angels, and the spiritual versus flesh bodies. I have several problems (1) If sin passed through the generations and every man is born in sin without having personally sinned then Mary (Jesus Mother) was born in sin and was not perfect for she was born of man. (2) I really have a hard time accepting Jesus mortal death as being more than an inconvenience to Him. I see the important part of His sacrifice as being His departure from Heaven and separation from His Father and the Heavenly host for some thirty years. The thought of His willingness to do that for me is what breaks my heart. His treatment during his stay here at the hands of man was dispeakable, but His returning home to Heaven I find to be a cause for celebration.
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on Apr 23, 2006 11:47:01 GMT 12.75
Phil,
That's easy to keep straight. Ask yourself a couple of questions. How is sin passed down? What did Jesus not have that everyone else does? Sin is passed down from father to offspring, even women. But Jesus did not have an earthy father. His father is God. So, even though Jesus was born of woman, who was a sinner, he had no earthy father so therefore he was born without the stigma of sin.
Jesus death was more than just an inconvenience. It was a separation from God, the giver of life. even though His separation from the Father was physical, it was not spiritual until His death. Let me try and explain. All the time on Earth, Jesus talked to the Father through prayer. Remember at His baptism? The Father said, "This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased. Hear ye him" So Jesus was never separated from the Father, except physically. Isn't that how it is with us today? After we are saved, we are never alone, for He will never leave us. He may not be with us physically, but He is always with us spiritually. But what did Jesus say during his Crucifixion? He said" My God, My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?" When Jesus took the sins of all mankind upon Himself, God, who can not look upon sin, turned His back on His son. So, during His Crucifixion, Jesus was separated from God spiritually too. Jesus, who had never been alone during His life, was suddenly alone in all aspects. But, no one else could do what Jesus did! He gave His life for my sins!It was more than just an inconvenience. It was the perfect sacrifice. He gave His life, so that I might have life. He endured the most painful death mankind has ever devised. All for you, and for me. If that doesn't make you humble when you think about it honestly and truthfully, then nothing ever will.
|
|
|
Post by Paws on Apr 24, 2006 2:29:34 GMT 12.75
Hey, I knew that! ;D I had just forgotten that I knew that! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on Apr 24, 2006 2:35:49 GMT 12.75
Hey, I knew that! ;D I had just forgotten that I knew that! ;D Sometimes that is what being a preacher is all about. Reminding people of things they knew but had either forgotten or were unaware they were doing them ;D
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on Apr 24, 2006 10:08:04 GMT 12.75
Todays sermon was from Romans 7:13-16. Paul begins by asking us a question. Is that which is good made death unto me? We have to look back at verse 12 and see what he is talking about. In verse 12, Paul says the law is holy, and the commandment holy, just and good. So what Paul is asking is, is the commandments of God death to me? And of course the answer is NO. Remember, the Law was never designed to send men to hell. The Law was designed so that men could see that they were sinners and fell short of the glory of God. So, the Law doesn't send us to hell. Our sinful nature and unrepentant spirit is what condemns us. Paul continues by saying that he is carnal, sold under sin. Paul is saying that he is human, and is a slave to the human nature. Look at the rest of our reading. He says that which I would do, I do not, but that which I would not do, that do I. Isn't that the way it is today? We all war within ourselves daily trying to do the things of God, but failing terribly. And the things we don't want to do, we do them anyways. This is all due to our Adamic nature. But is this a license to sin? NO! We are to live holy and godly lives and not allow our sin nature to rule over us.
Roams 7:17- ain't sure yet will be the text for next weeks sermon if anyone wants to study ahead. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Toby Benoit on Apr 24, 2006 13:32:50 GMT 12.75
Hey guys, I've been away and pretty busy for a while, but now that I'm back, I'm following along where I left off before and I ain't a bit ashamed to say you're talking abit over my head.
I do have a couple of questions, but I'm not sure how to ask them yet. I'll get back to you tomorrow after I have a little time to think on it awhile.
Thanks for not giving up on me guys!
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on Apr 25, 2006 10:41:54 GMT 12.75
We won't ever give up on ya Toby. Sorry about being over your head, but I bet if you think about it, you will understand it. Think about what you want to ask and I'll try to answer it, and I'll keep in mind that you are from Florida. In other words, I'll try to answer in real simple terms ;D ;D P.S. Gotcha ;D
|
|
|
Post by Toby Benoit on Apr 26, 2006 3:13:48 GMT 12.75
"Remember, the Law was never designed to send men to hell. The Law was designed so that men could see that they were sinners and fell short of the glory of God. So, the Law doesn't send us to hell. Our sinful nature and unrepentant spirit is what condemns us."
I think I figured out the other I was confused on, you're right Freddy, I just needed to read along a little slower. Now for the above quote; could there be sin without the law? Our sinful nature and unrepentant spirit condemns us according to the law, right?
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on Apr 26, 2006 5:40:29 GMT 12.75
Toby,
Yes, there is sin without the law. But you need to keep in mind that there is more than one law. Read on before you get to thinking I'm crazy ;D. Anything that God says is a law right? So when God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit, that was the first law. When Adam ate of the fruit and broke the law, he sinned. And through Adam, we all inherit the sin nature. So, we sin without ever knowing it when we are young and don't know any better. But as we grow older, we realize that we are sinners. That is called reaching the age of accountablity. In other words, now that you realize that you are a sinner, you are held responsible for your sins. This age is different for everyone. I reached it about the age of 7. My oldest reached it when he was 6. I have a neice who has not reached it yet and she is 10. So, we are all sinners whether God ever gave the Mosaic Law to Moses or not. But God did give us the Mosaic Law, and through it, we can come to the realization that we are sinners and fall short of the glory of God.
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on May 1, 2006 6:21:40 GMT 12.75
Today's sermon was from Romans 7:17-21. Paul states that in his flesh dwelleth no good thing. In other words, in this human body that I have now, there is no good thing without the shed blood of Christ. but in these verses Paul is mainly talking about his battle between his sin nature and his desire to do the things of God. I know that I have this same battle daily, and I figure some of ya'll do too. Let me try and explain further. Anytime I do something that is not of God, it is sin. And no, the devil didn't make you do it. It is the inherent sin nature that is in each one of us. Satan may place temptation in our path, but he can not make us sin. He can tempt us, but it is our own fault if we sin. Paul had the same problem that I do. At times, I wanna do good, but I don't. That's because of my sin nature. And I will have this nature until the day that I die. I can not get rid of it, but I can try to control it. I just have to accept the fact that I am a sinner (saved by grace but still a sinner) and that there is a daily battle between good and evil in my body. It is up to you to chose how this battle will end. Will you allow your sin nature to rule over you? Or will you follow the Lord and do His commands? It's your choice.
Next week... Romans 7: 22-25
|
|
|
Post by gsoflittledove on May 1, 2006 11:45:48 GMT 12.75
"AMEN"
|
|
|
Post by Toby Benoit on May 1, 2006 15:17:34 GMT 12.75
I read it that way too.
I reckon a feller knows right from wrong and ought to be strong enough to resist. It's awfully easy to fall into the Devil's traps though. It's truly a weakness of the flesh.
|
|
|
Post by Brikatw on May 1, 2006 16:21:25 GMT 12.75
Like Daddy said, "If it ain't the right thing to do, Don't do it". But actions are not all we aree dealing with here either, right???
|
|
|
Post by Paws on May 2, 2006 2:18:44 GMT 12.75
So sin is purely disobedience to God's word. It has nothing to do with any moral issues. Then it is totally possible for God to tell two men two different things that are diametrically opposed and for them both to sin through disobedience. For instance God might say "Thou shalt not kill." and tell Abraham to sacrifice his son. I guess that's where faith and trust come in.
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on May 2, 2006 5:25:58 GMT 12.75
Like Daddy said, "If it ain't the right thing to do, Don't do it". But actions are not all we are dealing with here either, right??? Right. Remember, Jesus told the Pharisees that if they hated their brother, it was the same as murder. If you look on a woman that is not your wife and lust after her, you have done the same as committing adultery. Not my words, but the Lords. So, we have to keep our mind as well as our body pure. Ain't easy is it?
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on May 2, 2006 5:35:10 GMT 12.75
So sin is purely disobedience to God's word. It has nothing to do with any moral issues. Then it is totally possible for God to tell two men two different things that are diametrically opposed and for them both to sin through disobedience. For instance God might say "Thou shalt not kill." and tell Abraham to sacrifice his son. I guess that's where faith and trust come in. Sin is direct disobedience of God. But, God would not tell 2 different men different things. The example you gave, took place before the Mosaic Law was ever instituted, in fact about 400 years before. But, I believe God never intended for Abraham to sacrifice Issac. This was a test of Abraham's faith, and it was also a picture of Jesus' sacrifice for us. If you replace the people in the story with ourselves, God and Jesus you will see what I mean. Replace Abraham with God. Replace Issac with us. Replace the ram with Jesus. We deserve to die for our sins and God has the right to kill us. But, there is a sacrifice provided. that sacrifice is the innocent lamb, Jesus Christ. Now to get back to your statement that God could tell 2 different men different things. Think about it this way. If you told 2 different men 2 different things, wouldn't that make you a liar to one? Since God is Holy and Just, He can not sin or else He would not be God. So God will not tell one man something and another something else. God is the same for you and me and for everyone. If He wasn't He wouldn't be perfect and could not be God.Understand now?
|
|
|
Post by Toby Benoit on May 2, 2006 7:20:55 GMT 12.75
"If you look on a woman that is not your wife and lust after her, you have done the same as committing adultery. Not my words, but the Lords."
Hold on a minute! Wouldn't it depend on the level of that lust? Just yesterday I watched a couple of bikini clad sixteen or seventeen year olds flying kites on a beach while I was fishing. They weren't covering up very much and were in great shape. Dang right I was lusting, but not to the extent that I would EVER consider approaching one of them. Not EVER! How can that be a sin? If it were in my heart to try to approach one, yes, it would definitely be a sin.
Kind of falls more under "Thou shalt not covet" than "Thou shalt not commit adultery", don't it? I didn't covet either of them in a sexual nature although I certainly appreciated them in that manner.
I gotta disagree on that one Fredie.
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on May 2, 2006 9:53:30 GMT 12.75
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY. But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Matthew 5:27,28.
These are some of the words spoken by Jesus as He gave the sermon on the mount. This is the same chapter as the beatitudes. But isn't this the same reasoning Paul used in our study of Romans? I think it is. Paul's reasoning was that i want to do good, but at times, I don't. There is the desire in me to do the things of God, but due to my sinful nature, I fail to do those things. Because you looked on those bikini clad young ladies, and I use that term loosely, you lusted after them. Sure, you didn't actually commit adultery with them, or since you ain't married fornication, but Jesus said you did in your heart. If you looked on them with desire and thought about wanting to jump in the sack with them, that is adultery. I probably would have done the same that you did. That is due to my sin nature. So, see, we all fall far short of being perfect like God. Thats why we need a savior. Jesus was teaching the same as Paul. That is that mankind is full of sin and depravity and that we are sinners. Even though I am saved, I'm still a sinner. I'm just a sinner saved by grace, the grace of God. And until I die, I will always have this sin nature in my life to deal with. I will have to deal with it until I put on my incorruptible body, which isn't until after I die. So see, we are all sinners. Now I will admit, that those young "ladies" shouldn't have been dressed like that, because it caused you to stumble in your service to God. I would have looked to. But, it all depends on the attitude you have when you look. Do you look with an attitude of lust, or do you look with an attitude of wondering what their spiritual condition was? See its all about attitude. I would have done the same thing as you, so i would have stumbled too.
|
|
|
Post by Toby Benoit on May 2, 2006 14:28:19 GMT 12.75
"Now I will admit, that those young "ladies" shouldn't have been dressed like that, because it caused you to stumble in your service to God. I would have looked to. But, it all depends on the attitude you have when you look. Do you look with an attitude of lust, or do you look with an attitude of wondering what their spiritual condition was? See its all about attitude. I would have done the same thing as you, so i would have stumbled too. " No, I didn't look at them with a wondering about their spiritual condition, but neither did I lust after them. I admired and appreciated the scene and I did think on what if's and such...who wouldn't look? But, if the ghost of a chance of my ever coming into physical contact existed, there's NO WAY I would have crossed that line! Jesus said, "to lust after her, has already commited adultery in his heart." I wasn't lusting after HER per say. So we agree then that INTENT has a lot to do with whether it's a sin or not? I know I'm a sinner. I too look forward to a body free of sin, but until then, I'll do the best I can. I just didn't think I was sinning by just enjoying their display. You gotta admit...HE did some nice things with that spare rib!
|
|
|
Post by Bro. Freddie on May 2, 2006 14:38:14 GMT 12.75
Instead of intent I would say desire has more to do with committing sin. What happens when you covet something? You desire it. Same thing in this situtation. Really, when you break it down, it all comes back to the first commandment. Jesus said that we should love the Lord with all our heart, mind and soul. If you do that, then there will be no room for anything else including desire. But desire is a basic human emotion that we are all born with. So desire would come undering the heading of our sin nature. So, as much as I don't want to sin, I do because I can not help myself. But I should try to contol myself, including desires, as much as possible. I should do this so that I can further the cause of Christ.
|
|