Private convictions?

[missmuffet]

Maybe legalism can become confused with convictions??

[BlessedByTheBest]

if i attempt to justify sins against this body in the name of the liberty i am graced with in Christ, i am stacking sin upon sin.

 

it is not i that would "bind the conscience" of my fellow brethren, but the very Word of God which does so.  

we are bought at a price, spirit, soul, and body.  bought at an unspeakable price.

 

do i truly have the liberty to do as i please as a steward of the temple of God's Holy Spirit?

is this my body, or the body of Christ?

i would say any indulgence of this flesh is bondage to its whims, and evidence of slavery.  all things are lawful indeed.

the effects travel beyond the flesh to our minds where the sin originated.  our actions grieve the Holy Spirit.  

how could i possibly be glorifying our God with a cigarette and a beer?  when i look like the world, how can i claim to be set apart?

 

i think the devil likes setting up his chapels next to these so-called temples of Christian liberty.

Paul was anxious not to be brought under the power of any, even that which is lawful.  i would tell my brethren to tread carefully along that path of grace.

 

i own nothing, and am nothing, without Christ.

[Guest]

I smoke...and I can't say that God has ever convicted me to quit, but the church and society sure have. I think the same disgust should apply to other things like Fast food, chemicals we use in abundance in our homes, and other things I could name. lol and I a, not condoning smoking, by any means. I have begged God over and over to take the cravings away, so far I am still a smoker, and can't say I enjoy it.

 

A word of encouragement: Keep praying about it. The fact you don't enjoy it is a good sign that the Lord is changing your heart about it. That can take awhile. I used to be one of those smokers who would tell you where to go and exactly how to get there if you started talking about "you shouldn't smoke" and all that. I smoked for over 20 years and it took years before I was ready to give it up for good, but the Lord did so in His time.

[Guest]

What do you think of Jerry's comment?

 

"We must not seek to bind the consciences of other believers with the private convictions that arise out of our personal walk with God. Even if you believe God has led you in developing those convictions, you still must not elevate them to the level of spiritual principles for everyone else to follow." - Jerry Bridges

 

 

What are some example of private convictions?

 

God bless,

GE

 

Over all I agree with the statement in things that are not clearly right or wrong. Other examples could be alcohol, clothes, music, and lots of other things.

 

I'm a former smoker, so that comes to mind. There are whole threads about whether its a sin or not. I wasn't about that for me. I got to a place in my walk with Christ where I knew it needed to go. So I prayed. For years. It finally went when it was the Lord's time for it to do so. Smoking began to be an unwanted burden I wanted to be free of. It was a hassle, a bad witness, etc. Eventually it was gone and I don't miss it. Thank you, Jesus!  

 

It would be wrong for me to try to stuff "don't smoke" down some else's throat, though I might mention something if I feel led by the Spirit to do so. The Lord is working on them too, even if it takes time, so I generally leave 'em alone otherwise.

[Guest ninhao]

I smoke...and I can't say that God has ever convicted me to quit, but the church and society sure have. I think the same disgust should apply to other things like Fast food, chemicals we use in abundance in our homes, and other things I could name. lol and I a, not condoning smoking, by any means. I have begged God over and over to take the cravings away, so far I am still a smoker, and can't say I enjoy it.

 

Hello BFP,

 

Perhaps it would be wise to investigate the highest priority question insurance agencies ask, aside from age, when underwriting life policies.

[Guest]

What do you think of Jerry's comment?

 

"We must not seek to bind the consciences of other believers with the private convictions that arise out of our personal walk with God. Even if you believe God has led you in developing those convictions, you still must not elevate them to the level of spiritual principles for everyone else to follow." - Jerry Bridges

 

This Dear Man May (Inadvertently?) Try To Shut The Mouths Of Believers

 

Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. Acts 5:28-29

 

But The LORD Jesus Will Set

 

“Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. “What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:26-28 (NASB)

 

Them Free Again

 

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

 

My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one. John 10:27-30

 

~

 

Personally I Am Convicted

 

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:19-20

 

Only Jesus

 

To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Romans 3:26-28

 

Saves

 

Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. Jude 1:24-25

 

~

 

IN THE GARDEN

 

I come to the garden alone

While the dew is still on the roses

And the voice I hear falling on my ear

The Son of God discloses.

 

And He walks with me, and He talks with me,

And He tells me I am His own;

And the joy we share as we tarry there,

None other has ever known.

 

He speaks, and the sound of His voice,

Is so sweet the birds hush their singing,

And the melody that He gave to me

Within my heart is ringing.

 

And He walks with me, and He talks with me,

And He tells me I am His own;

And the joy we share as we tarry there,

None other has ever known.

 

I’d stay in the garden with Him

Though the night around me be falling,

But He bids me go; through the voice of woe

His voice to me is calling.

 

And He walks with me, and He talks with me,

And He tells me I am His own;

And the joy we share as we tarry there,

None other has ever known.

 

http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/i/t/g/itgarden.htm

[GoldenEagle]

Private convictions often involve the "weaker brethern". A person may not be able to play cards because it has involved gambling or because he does so in an intense, cut throat competitive attitude. I used to play pinnocle or rummy with my family as recreation. It was always good natured fun that never involved money. While he should not impose his private convictions on me, neither should I give him occasion to stumble. However, I don't cease from playing cards unless I am aware such a person might be tempted. I should not flaunt my freedom in his face, but in love do what is best for him.

But I agree that we should dress modestly. Some might equate that to wearing hats and gloves. I equate that to loose fitting slacks or blue jeans. People near bikini attole required pastors to wear 3 piece suits but they could go bare footed.

 

Thanks for sharing sister.

 

There seems to be two views on this matter of modesty. Option A. Some believe it is pretty much the man’s responsibility on how he should respond to women. Option B. Others believe that women must take great care to not incite negative responses from men.

I believe a balanced view is that Option C. it is both a man’s responsibility regarding what his eyes see and what he thinks regarding women but it is also women’s responsibility to consider the environment she’s going to be in when wearing clothes.

 

I also think context, culture, and social norms have a lot to do with this discussion. It is perfectly acceptable to bare your belly button in India, but you better not show your legs/ankles. It seems that if you bare your legs/ankles, you are dressing immodestly.

 

Personal observation: Men can view women as objects even if they’re covered from head to toe. It's a heart issue IMO.

 

I think it's perfectly fine for a woman to embrace fashion and looking beautiful. I believe the focus should be on being tasteful.

 

One young lady, Jessica Rey from Rey Swimwear, put it this way: “We need to teach girls that modesty isn’t covering our bodies because they’re bad. Modesty isn’t about hiding ourselves. It’s about revealing our beauty. We’re made beautiful in His image and likeness. My question is how will you use your beauty?”

That said... I'm uncomfortable with many who espouse placement of blame, shame, and condemnation on women. The tendency is to focus on what is tangible: how women dress. From a man's perspective this is an inner battle that is waged against the flesh and the enemies of God (Satan, demons, etc.).

 

Bottom line: Men are responsible for their thoughts and actions. Women are responsible for their thoughts and actions.

[Willa]

Private convictions often involve the "weaker brethern". A person may not be able to play cards because it has involved gambling or because he does so in an intense, cut throat competitive attitude. I used to play pinnocle or rummy with my family as recreation. It was always good natured fun that never involved money. While he should not impose his private convictions on me, neither should I give him occasion to stumble. However, I don't cease from playing cards unless I am aware such a person might be tempted. I should not flaunt my freedom in his face, but in love do what is best for him.

But I agree that we should dress modestly. Some might equate that to wearing hats and gloves. I equate that to loose fitting slacks or blue jeans. People near bikini attole required pastors to wear 3 piece suits but they could go bare footed.

 Thanks for sharing sister.

 There seems to be two views on this matter of modesty. Option A. Some believe it is pretty much the man’s responsibility on how he should respond to women. Option B. Others believe that women must take great care to not incite negative responses from men.

I believe a balanced view is that Option C. it is both a man’s responsibility regarding what his eyes see and what he thinks regarding women but it is also women’s responsibility to consider the environment she’s going to be in when wearing clothes.

 I also think context, culture, and social norms have a lot to do with this discussion. It is perfectly acceptable to bare your belly button in India, but you better not show your legs/ankles. It seems that if you bare your legs/ankles, you are dressing immodestly.

 Personal observation: Men can view women as objects even if they’re covered from head to toe. It's a heart issue IMO.

 I think it's perfectly fine for a woman to embrace fashion and looking beautiful. I believe the focus should be on being tasteful.

 One young lady, Jessica Rey from Rey Swimwear, put it this way: “We need to teach girls that modesty isn’t covering our bodies because they’re bad. Modesty isn’t about hiding ourselves. It’s about revealing our beauty. We’re made beautiful in His image and likeness. My question is how will you use your beauty?”

That said... I'm uncomfortable with many who espouse placement of blame, shame, and condemnation on women. The tendency is to focus on what is tangible: how women dress. From a man's perspective this is an inner battle that is waged against the flesh and the enemies of God (Satan, demons, etc.).

 Bottom line: Men are responsible for their thoughts and actions. Women are responsible for their thoughts and actions.

From a woman's perspective, we are much less visually aroused than men and don't even understand this fact very well. So for that reason we should take care to be more modest. Immodest clothing used to be called "advertising" and was used in connection with a lack of morals in a girl. It is better to dress in a manner that appropiate to ones age and body type and which does not call attention to ones self; this also rules out a swim suit from the 1800s, even though it might be more appropriate for my age and body type .

In addition, some body language is not the harmless flirtation that 16 year old girls imagine. It is a strong invitation for sex in the minds of boys. This shòuld be discussed more than morning after pills or safe sex. In contrast, women may be more attracted to gentleness and a soft voice in a man, together with his being bold to take a stand in regards to others when necessary (not a wimp). At any rate, teens should be taught how to keep out of trouble. It is more than just say no. It is don't invite problems. Also, the tremendous responsbility of raising a baby should be discussed: the sleepless nights, the change in social life that is necessary, and that your whole life will revolve around supplying the needs of babies and children. And I do consider this all one subject. It is all about taking responsibility.

[Fez]

Maybe legalism can become confused with convictions??

That is a good point and I agree that this can happen. In a round about way here is a story.

 

A family had Sunday lunch together for years, it was a family custom. Every time they had a leg of lamb they would cut off about 6 inches of the lower part of the leg before putting it in the oven. One day one of the kids asked, "why do we cut the lower piece off mom?" She could not answer, and nor could anyone in the family, they just always did it.

 

Until a few months later when a long lost family member was invited to lunch. He saw them cut the lower piece off and laughed and said "just like great grandma used to do".  They asked him if he knew why and he replied that great grandma's oven was too small to take the whole roast.......

 

So legalism is born......

[GoldenEagle]

 

Maybe legalism can become confused with convictions??

That is a good point and I agree that this can happen. In a round about way here is a story.

 

A family had Sunday lunch together for years, it was a family custom. Every time they had a leg of lamb they would cut off about 6 inches of the lower part of the leg before putting it in the oven. One day one of the kids asked, "why do we cut the lower piece off mom?" She could not answer, and nor could anyone in the family, they just always did it.

 

Until a few months later when a long lost family member was invited to lunch. He saw them cut the lower piece off and laughed and said "just like great grandma used to do".  They asked him if he knew why and he replied that great grandma's oven was too small to take the whole roast.......

 

So legalism is born......

 

Lol so true Fez.