JCISGD

TJ, I think you are right - Paul had struggles and prayed to be relieved of his burden, Paul becomes very real and human to me because of his alluding to his struggles and weaknesses... I do enjoy your wisdom TJ and your encouragement - Blessings!! To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. 10That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong. hi Believer i will not think anything of it if you do not reply to me as you previously stated your reasons for not doing so in the future and i respect that. I do not think Paul was not sinning by asking for his burden to be removed just as Christ also prayed for such, they both submitted to the Fathers will and answer to their request. Weaknesses and struggles have no moral character and are also not sin. If i have a broken leg that prevents me achieving my goal or my best efforts fail to get results neither are sin, if we did all that could be asked of us, which Paul did. Its true that conceit is a sin, but Paul says he was kept from this sin not that he committed it. Paul is not the cause of the thorn in his flesh and therefore is not confessing to sin. There is nowhere in the bible that Paul confesses to sin. Rom 7 is a theological descriptrion of Gods process in bringing us to total sanctification and v24+25 are the concluding remarks that prove this. We know Paul did not walk in the flesh, but in the power of the Spirit, and "whoever is led by the Spirit does not fulfill the lusts of the flesh".

I posted this topic as so many questions are asked about, " is such and such a sin or is it ok to do such and such". These are valid questions for the enquirer and in no way do i mean to discourage or redicule any that ask any questions. What provoked me to post this topic, was the predominate replies that fail to notice that motive is the decider of right and wrong, with the exception of having good motive but doing nothing to attempt carrying it out, or doing something wrong while thinking it right. The thing remains wrong even if the motive be right. A person can go to church, heal the sick, cast out demons and raise the dead, from good motive or bad. It is the same with every activity, it can be done out of good motive or bad motive. Many seem to approve behaviour that they think is ok based on what is considerd good behaviour, but God sees the heart and knows the motive and this is what He judges on. A person may do something wrong believing it to be right and do it from a good heart/motive, God will bring them correction if they are open but He will not judge them as guilty and needing discipline. If anyone wants to know how they are doing, they must look into their heart and check their motives and not their actions, thoughts or feelings.

Paul was aware of his own sin. After his conversion he was forgiven, just like we all are, but he was just as imperfect as we all are. I am sure Paul struggled with things, just as Peter did, just as I do. <>< ><> Nathele Paul only speaks of sin in his life when describing his presalvation state and the process that happens on the way to entire sanctification, everywhere else he discribes himself as holy(sinles) blameless, with a clear conscience before both God and man, being void of offense to anyone having done all that could be expected of him to all. If this is not without sin then what is? If you are fixed in your belief then so be it, i will not argue it any further with you. My posts are for those who are open to the possibility of being wrong despite it being what they were taught to believe, or what they think the bible teaches. Peace to you.

Do people really think Paul was saying he was the worst sinner after his conversion? Think about it folks, are you saying he went around as Christ` chosen ambassador all the while sinning but yet calling others to repentance, how is this possible or even think able Christians are not called to leave their brains or common sense at the door, and believe the ludicrous. Every command implies the ability to carry it out. Of course we cannot be holy without Gods help, but who cannot see that God promises His help everywhere throughout the scriptures, and delights to show His ease of ability to do that which seems impossible to us. Of course if anyone tries to be holy they will fail, as it does not come by trying but by faith.

Its true it is humanly impossible but its not true that its impossible to God, or else it is awry for the scripture to command "Be holy(without sin) as your Father in heaven is holy(without sin)".

Its figurative language and a hyperole which was a common way to get the interest of its reader/hearer. Imo although what Christ achieved in the heavenlies is vast as the universe, its common sense to know that the 3 yrs of His ministry could mot take up more than smallish amount of books even if every waking minute was recorded. But it would be never ending if John was meaning all the implications and future effects of Jesus`ministry?

Thank you Personal unconditional election is the Calvinistic belief that God sovereignly elects certain individuals to salvation purely by God's choice not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part. It is personal because it is individual by individual. The word personal distinguishes it from God's choice of Israel as His favored nation. In that sense God choosing Israel could be called corporate unconditional election. But that has nothing to do with salvation as Paul made it clear throughout Romans 9-11 and everywhere else. Thats how i see it also.

Who said we all sin ? Jesus was truly saying not to judge if we have sin in our lives, and that very command means that one can be without sin as we are also commanded to judge with righteous judgement. The bible also says "You who are spiritual" should judge which also means not all are spiritual. Those with sin are carnal (led by the flesh) do sin, and those who are spiritual ( led by the Spirit) do not sin. "whoever is led by the Spirit will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh". I myself still sin and admit i am carnal still, but this does not mean others are or must be . I know many will refute this and point to Pauls words in Rom 7 and Johns assertion that anyone who claims to have no sin is decieved and the truth is not in him, but Paul was not refering to his present state but the state of a carnal christian and John only meant that all have sinned at before salvation and first must admit that. I dont intend to respond to this as the different positions have been amply argued on here with no change of opinion on both sides, and i dont see that changing. But i might if i sense genuine inquiry and not just repeat refutions.

I agree with that Who are you speaking of that believes in personal unconditional election? Calvinism ?

I see their respective theologies as consisting of all the various subjects of theology, whereas it seems you are more concerned with the two main differences. I dont think you are wrong to do so, only that we are possibly comparing apples to oranges? In that case i would say Finney was Arminian, im not scholarly so please excuse any butchering of standard protocol or misunderstanding of theological debate. Basically i just stumbled on Finneys systematic theology and have read little of others, but my reason has not been offended by anything of Finneys i have read and is proved to me scripturally, logically, and experientially. Im fairly confident i read of some Arminian theology that Finney found error with, and im confident i also read him saying words to the effect of agreeing with some Calvinist theology. Ill keep trying to find it.

There is alot of misunderstanding and accusation of Finney out there, Satan does not want his sucess with God repeated. He was against Calvinism but i think he did not write off everything and certainly was not predjudiced of any theology, but he did denounce the Westminister confession as Calvinism in essence i think because of the part that says a man cannot avoid sin even with the aid of God? Id have to recheck to be sure i got that right. I too dislike Calvinism for its fatalistic tendency and the general air of arrogance. The hyper Calvinist were laughable, but i suppose hyper Arminism might produce similar absurdacies. It will take some searching but im confident of my memory of his refutal of some of Arminism theology. Im not really that theologically inclined or suited for such, my main interest is in who did great works in Gods power while remaining pure and why were they so. Im am just staggered that most american christians either do not know of the great revivals wrought by God through Finney or they have mistrust and misimformation. There are quite a number of well knowns who report being majorly affected by Finney, one such person is Keith Green.

Yes, some are more richly blessed than others which make the blessings we do have even more amazing and worthy of our gratitude. I shall try not to respond to your posts anymore - it seems we do not understand each other and I try to stay grounded in my faith and my walk with God - I simply do not think I am ready to be tutored by another in what I should consider a blessing in my life or not. Be happy, blessings. Outta here. Oh Believer, sorry you feel im lecturing you or meant i was right just because i said different to you. I have a personality that sees what might be wrong before what might be right, quite a failing i think. Im not trying to be superior or want to over rule others. What i was meaning was that many wicked people enjoy those things you called the favour of God, but your right they are blessings. I guess i just see the word favour differently. There i go again more nit picking and lecturing, im sad to that you think me so rigid and sanctimonious.

I know Hes real because when i ask Him a question i always get an answer that i know is not from my thinking, and secondly when i asked God to forgive for my sins because Jesus died on the cross and i believed Jesus was raised from the dead, I just knew God was real and had come to live within me. Keep asking and you will recieve, God bless.

atleast he went to school on full belly.

I still cant get the hang of that, do i highlist, then click on quote, then click on reply ? last time i tried it just quoted the whole post? Im not griping though, atleast ive got fingers to type this.

Oh gosh.... I'll have to go back a try to read your OP again - I didn't see the rules of engagement. You are 'not sure' they mean the favor of God, though"?? What a question..... Who do you attribute blessings in your life to? If you have your basic physical needs met, loved ones whom share your prayers and blessings and are able to use your body in the ways it is intended - Call me silly - but I do attribute that to the "Favor of God".... No rules really i was just jibing you, my bad i had only thought of one liners and hadnt remembered that we are all unique and do, see, hear differently. Why i said i didnt think it proved the favour of God, is because many that have nothing have more of the favour of God than those who have much. By favour i mean they have good character, fulfilled, and living in His presence, but thats just me. Ill stop my griping because....I have shoes on my feet. PTL.

I cannot see what a neither position would be. Finley had a theology like any other preacher. His systematic theology is 1013 pages. You can find it at http://www.firesofrevival.com/st1851.pdf His theology is certainly on the Arminian side even going beyond that to Pelagianism. As far as his converts go, the best way to measure that is to look at the converts sometime after their conversion. For the parable of the soils (Matthew 13) makes it clear that a true believer will endure the test of time. From what I have found on the internet, I cannot find any documented evidence of this. In fact it seems to be the opposite. See http://www.the-highway.com/articleApr99.html for example. See also http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm I realize these are Calvinists websites. The Arminianism website did not support him either and had a link to the latter website mentioned above. Finney was a Pelagian. I am a Arminianist which is Semi Pelagian. Finney was too man centred. My favorite preacher was John Wesley. He was a Arminianist and led a revival with lasting effect. Wesley was great too, but did was not used by God in mighty revivals such as Finney. Finney was not Pelagain and refuted this and its teaching, he also recommended Wesleys book on Christian perfection, but he did take issue with some Arminian theology. Im aware of Finneys theology and have read it thoroughly, and his biography and autobiography as well as pretty much everything written by him. I recommend anyone read the account of his life and revivals before his theology as there is just so much false accusation against him that abounds. If Calvinism or Arminianism is spot on why so little fruit? http://truthinheart.com/Charles_G._Finney.html

Stop your griping if you have.....toilet paper

hi Miss Elly im suprised to see this old post back in circulation, but if its still relevant then thats good. I agree a welldone sure beats a whoppin

Good point Nebula, something to ponder till the cows come home perhaps ? I had dwellled on it myself occassionally. Yes we know its the fallen state but what changed? Apparantly we have far more frown muscles than smile muscles as well, and it takes far more good comments to correct one bad comment etc. Excercise and fitness is also an uphill process that reverts faster than it gains.

just a long shot but what did iron represent in that dream of a statue that had gold silver bronze iron and clay, talk about rusty i cant even find it.

thanks all for the empathy and encouragments, i wasnt really looking for advice although its all been good counsel, i was mostly just venting how seeing others that go through loss in accidents was a hard fact of life. God bless your tender hearts.

How much time do they get to repent before it's too late? Its not about time but about their heart, are they willing and trying to obey God as they can, or are they thumbing their nose at God and foolishly thinking the sinners prayer will save them, these ones along with unbelievers may have untill their death or the Lords return. But they might find that their day of grace has past if they leave it untill it suits them.

so you are saying that someone who smokes cigarettes will go to hell? Am I hearing you correctly? -Yod I think that needs qualifying as I think there is diference between someone genuine in wanting to be free of addiction and someone resisting God unto rebellion. Only God knows the heart, but if Jesus warns to cut of limbs or pluck out an eye, i would not rest untill i had a clear conscience. I know Jesus was being figurative but He was also saying if you think its causing you to sin, you better cut it off no matter the cost.