Started by Leah, November 17, 2008, 12:18:46 am
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 19, 2008, 06:04:43 pmOh, man...I'm getting a headache LOL....All things huh?
Quote from: Pete on November 19, 2008, 12:00:58 amIt is amazing to me how one single statement can change the opinion from...
QuoteI knew you would handle it well, but what I didn't expect was how you would bring in the mandate on love (from scriptures) and insist on THAT being the plumb line of what was tolerated. Kudos to you my friend!! A rare one, you are.
QuoteIMO, your church has opened itself to something that is not supported in scripture at all. That is quite dangerous.
Quote...in just 3 short months.
QuoteNote that this is the same church that has helped to mold me into the "rare one" with a mandate for His Love. Also note that the point Sarah posted about God having forgiven Satan is something we discussed briefly at church more than a year ago. This is not a dogmatic point for me, as my discourse with leadworship has shown. It is something that I (and my church) dared to explore. It's not "dangerous" to ask the difficult question, does God harbor unforgiveness toward Satan.
QuoteAgain, I'm not talking about Jesus' shed blood for redemption of Satan. I am not advocating that Satan will repent, nor am I advocating that because of God's forgiveness, Satan will somehow escape the consequences of his actions. I am talking about simple forgiveness. There was no requirement of Jesus' shed blood to forgive. In fact, Jesus commanded His disciples to forgive 70 x 7, BEFORE He went to the cross. If His blood atonement was a requirement for them to be able to forgive, He would have been asking them to do something impossible for them to do. So if God IS Love, and Love keeps no records of wrongs, how can God harbor unforgiveness toward Satan? Note that all of what I've just posted finds plenty of support in scripture.
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 09:22:07 pmI can see that you are very offended by what I have written, Pete....which takes me by surprise, actually. I really didn't mean it as a snap judgement of your church or of any change of how I see you. My intended focus was entirely on the idea being discussed and obviously it's a doctrinal position that disturbs me. So please forgive me if what I said came across to you as harsh accusations. That wasn't my intention, believe me.
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 09:22:07 pmI think the question to ask here is....what do YOU mean by forgiveness? The common definition of the word means......absolutions, remission, amnesty, exoneration, pardon, acquittal...etc.
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 09:22:07 pmIf God has given this to Satan, and the only reason that Satan doesn't enjoy these benefits is because he won't repent (as you earlier stated), then God is able to remit sins without the shedding of blood, because I agree with you that the atonement of Christ was for mankind only. If the Devil can have the pardon of his sins without the shedding of blood, then why was it necessary for God to exonerate us by Christ's blood?
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 09:22:07 pmSo, I guess where I am confused is....what does this forgiveness that you believe God offers to Satan give him.......what does it do?
Quoteby Pete...This, for me, has nothing to do with Satan, and everything to do with the nature of God. It has to do with the belief that God can not harbor unforgiveness.
Quote from: Pete on November 19, 2008, 09:56:14 pmUnderstood. Please forgive me for misreading your intention and reacting instead of responding. As I explained in an earlier post, I apologize for my unnecessarily defensive response.
QuoteThe first definition of forgive in the dictionary is to give up resentment of or claim to requital for. That is what I am talking about. God isn't holding a grudge, or looking to "get even" with Satan. That's all I'm trying to say. Satan will face righteous judgment because of his actions.
QuoteHere's a troublesome passage of scripture to that line of thought; Mark 2:5-10 (NIV) 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." 6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . ."... At this point, no blood has been shed by Christ. In fact, NO blood was shed at all, not even an animal's blood. So then the question could just as easily be asked, if the paralytic can have the pardon of his sins without the shedding of blood, then why was it necessary for God to exonerate us by Christ's blood?
QuoteThis, for me, has nothing to do with Satan, and everything to do with the nature of God. It has to do with the belief that God can not harbor unforgiveness.
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 19, 2008, 10:48:43 pmBut can't God issue righteous judgement as the just judge?
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 19, 2008, 10:48:43 pm What does harboring unforgivness have to do with what He judges as right?
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 19, 2008, 10:48:43 pm If a judge decides that someone is going to prison for the rest of his life, it's based on the offense committed, not how the judge feels about it. So where does God holding unforgiveness because the person was sentanced for the offenses come in?
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 11:08:56 pmAll is well. If this is all you mean by unforgiveness (holding a grudge or wanting to get even), then I think we would all agree that this is not God's nature. I am surprised that anyone would leave your church over this definition.
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 11:08:56 pm This passage doesn't trouble me because it is understood that the "lamb was slain before the foundation of the world", so that those under the Old Covenant and those under the New Covernant are alike saved by faith...............one in the coming Messiah, and the other in the 'having-come' Messiah. While those under the Old Covenant couldn't yet experience the indwelling Christ, they could most definitely experience the forgiveness of their sins committed while still in their flesh through the sacrifices made by the levitical priesthood. Hebrews 9: 13-14 "For if the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 11:08:56 pmWell now that I know you just mean a "grudge" or "wanting to get even", I would agree. If people are leaving your church, shouting heresy, they are getting a different impression of what your church means by forgiveness than what you state here.
Quote from: The Lord is my banner on November 19, 2008, 10:07:29 amThere is one scripture that implies that Jesus' blood has bought peace for more than mankind. What do we do with this? Colossians 1:19,20 says of Jesus: For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earthor things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on thecross. Reconciliation and peace for ALL things?!
Quote from: Pete on November 19, 2008, 11:41:01 pmAnd it's not like it's some bizarre definition of forgiveness. It's the Merriam-Webster definition of what forgiveness is. As Christians we attach a whole lot of connotations to the word "forgiveness" that do not otherwise exist in the simple definition of the word "forgiveness".
QuoteCorrect. But in the case of the paralytic, NO sacrifice was made. There was no animal sacrifice, and Jesus had not yet gone to the cross. Yet He still said to the man, "Your sins are forgiven", without any sacrifice of any kind. That seems in violation of how atonement is made for sins, which is why the teachers of the law were upset when He said it. It's a perplexing scripture, as is much of Jesus ministry on earth.
Quote from: Pete on November 19, 2008, 11:23:53 pmYes. Nothing. I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. You said earlier you disagree that God can not harbor unforgiveness. I don't understand that. It is one thing to say that forgivness is a non-issue, which it seemed to me like what you were originally saying. But now you seem to be saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you believe that God CAN harbor unforgiveness. That's different than it not being an issue at all.
Quote from: churchlady on November 19, 2008, 11:56:37 pmSince the fall of man, all of creation has been out of sorts, corrupted, moving more and more toward chaos and brokeness (law of entropy). God's nature is truth, love, law, order, justice, holiness, wholeness, beauty, perfection, etc. etc. All of creation will one day be brought back to the state of pre-fall conditions, perfectly reconiled to God's nature. One meaning of the word 'reconcile' is 'restore'. This is my 2 cents, anyway.
Quote from: churchlady on November 20, 2008, 12:21:09 amI use an electronic Merriam-Webster Dictionary and Thesaurus and the definition that it gives for forgiveness is.....noun - release from guilt........
Quote from: churchlady on November 20, 2008, 12:21:09 amwith synonyms: absolution, remission, shrift, amnesty, exoneration, pardon, forgiveness, acquittal........and
Quote from: churchlady on November 20, 2008, 12:21:09 am I'm not sure I get where you are coming from on this one. The levitical priesthood was in place during this time, with it's once a year atonement (covering) sacrifice for the people, along with the periodic specific sacrifices that people could make. Why do you assume this man was not an observer of these things, showing his faith for a coming Messiah?
Quote from: The Lord is my banner on November 20, 2008, 04:24:08 amWe're trying to define forgiveness based on an English dictionary, but do any of you understand Greek and Hebrew in order to be certain that they were all talking about the same thing we are? I know those languages usually have a greater, richer meaning per word than we do, so might we be missing something?
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 20, 2008, 01:45:32 amAm I making your eyes do that Pete? LOL..I'm sorry.
Quote from: Wordsmith on November 20, 2008, 01:45:32 amWhat I'm saying that even though God is the righteous judge that He is, and some will be punished, doesn't mean that God is holding grudges, or harboring unforgiveness if they're sentenced. Most people send themselves to judgement. God doesn't have to do anything at all. So in that respect He's just being the righteous Judge that He is, minus all the human frailties such as harboring unforgivness. It's not needed or present. Not that He doesn't have the ablility to choose not to forgive. He chose to commended His love towards us. He chose to do so through His Son. God made a choice. I'm glad for all of us that He did. So God has the ability to chose to do whatever He so chooses.
Quote from: The Lord is my banner on November 20, 2008, 04:24:08 amAnother question for everyone -We're trying to define forgiveness based on an English dictionary, but do any of you understand Greek and Hebrew in order to be certain that they were all talking about the same thing we are?I know those languages usually have a greater, richer meaning per word than we do, so might we be missing something?
Quotequote by Pete..So it sounds to me like you're saying that God has the ability to choose unforgiveness, but He doesn't. Is that what you're saying? And I'm not sure I'd agree that God has the ability to do whatever He so chooses. One scripture in particular that riled people up at CF was this one (in 20 different translations )
Quote from: churchlady on November 20, 2008, 08:59:06 amVery good point, Sue. Here's something interesting in that regard........ Lost in translation ...
Page created in 0.154 seconds with 21 queries.