Sons

I don't think deductive reasoning will be useful in this case. I would say things just are a certain way. Paul says we have the mind of Christ. The guy in Romans logically deduces "Why does God find fault because he opens and closes the hearts of whomever he wills". Paul's response is not that that's not true, because he was arguing exactly that case, but rather that question is not a valid question. It makes sense logically and reasonably but it's not a legitamate question to ask. "Will the pot say to the potter, why have you made me thus". There's definitely a flavour of that in this because it's purely spiritual. (unlike Shroud of Turin, Evolution, Biblical Chronology which have hard data which can be more easily debated)

Paul encourages all Christians to agree. He tells us to have the same mind as him about things. I don't think it's a question of elite or not elite simply that he knew what the truth was. I don't have a reference but I could find where he says if they don't agree with him then have nothing to do with them. Obviously there was lots of division since day one but Paul never agreed with that kind of difference of opinion. If we all saw the universe as Jesus sees it, then there would be perfect agreement. We wouldn't be the same but we would have the same perspective as to what is going on. That's what Christians should strive for.

From the time you're born you are being thrown information. I have a hard time believing you can distinguish the sources of your "inner" knowledge as opposed to what developed in you from input from other sources. At a very early age you become what you see around you without any conscious choice or discernment. I don't think you can splice that up later in life and say you know such and such because you are a human and it's innate to our race as opposed to someone told me this and it went into my subconcious without any filters. Of course I believe the Holy Spirit is an exception because that knowledge runs counter to all natural knowledge. It is foolish from the natural perspective.

I think the issue is critical because it affects every second of every day and all relationships. Dave was the first person who spoke on spirtual issues with authority and this perspective was underlying that expression. I believe the main reason people marvelled at Christ at their initial encounter was exactly this, he spoke with authority (not like the scribes and Pharasee) It's also the difference between the guy who trys to cast a demon out and the demon says, I know Paul and I know Jesus but who are you. That being said I don't think it's profitable to continue rehashing an issue that is not making any headway. Not that I would know when or why or how that would take place which is why I am reluctant to draw any lines in the sand.

Since my spiritual life began, developed and to this day hinges on this doctrine it makes sense that I would have a lot to say on it. I think it's the fundamental issue that the church has stumbled over and the early church fought over. It runs parallel to Nygren's "Agape and Eros" in that the church has opted for the Platonic Eros as opposed to the Godly Agape. And it's in the love of God that this make perfect spiritual sense. We are sons and cry daddy, daddy with confidence. For freedom Christ has set us free.

Trying to get this

Maybe I missed something somewhere but I still don’t feel like I’ve gotten a clear answer. You have admitted that we all grow and you have admitted that you are not beyond sin but you also have the mind of Christ exactly as Christ did. Christ was without sin and did not grow, he was God, the Alpha and the Omega. Therefore we can not have the mind of Christ and still sin and grow. In my mind it is impossible to be both at the same time. This is deductive reasoning.

Your point about where the Holy Spirit takes effect brings out my doubts on the effect of the Holy Spirit. I don’t always know what beliefs are inline with the Lord. There are far too many denominations and differences of opinion on interpretation of scripture for me to believe that the Holy Spirit brings them all inline. I don’t believe that the Holy Spirit takes our free will from us therefore we have the choice to follow or not to follow hence we have difference of opinion. I don’t believe there is an elite few who all have the same beliefs inline.

You asked if there’s a difference between learned preconceptions and the sense of right and wrong written in the fabric of creation. I don’t understand how you can’t see the difference between learned and innately known? Nature vs. Nurture?

The Preacher

It’s interesting to me that you focus on the 8 word phrase where I speculate on something I don’t know as opposed to the other 2,072 words where I testify what I do know. I put that in as a rider, similar to Paul dropping: “I have not attained it yet”, simply to qualify I don’t know what I don’t know.

This is a very small needle in a gigantic haystack and it isn’t even a needle. That I will continue to grow is a no brainer but that doesn’t cause me to arm chair quarterback and think I’m not where I should be because I can see now what I didn’t see before. Satan does that enough without my support and it is, as everything he says, a lie.

That you mention it first is no real surprise and that you use it to reiterate your position is pretty consistent. I would suggest that using it to think we’re on the same page is a stretch. Everything I said, including that phrase (taken in the context it was given) is a testimony that we have the mind of Christ. Not a pretend pie in the sky mind of Christ, but exactly the same mind, perspective and attitude. I’ve had this conversation before with a number of other Christians and the framework of the argument is identical. There is a very real difference and it doesn’t have anything to do with communication.

My only continual amazement is the blatant New Testament statements of our call to be like Christ (we are the righteousness of God) and the casual way most Christians disregard these in favour of what appears as a more “humble”, “realistic” position. I need to make a list of all of these statements that hit me like a 4x4 although I don’t believe it will make a difference anyway.

Also, once you repent, then you’ve repented. Jesus washes away your sins. Then, guess what, they’re washed away. I acknowledge that your position is the standard take on things. My take on it is that I can’t really distinguish it from my mother’s viewpoint. She thinks she’s a good person and wants to do good to others. Her criticisms are usually pointed at the selfishness of others. She did lots of voluntary work at the hospital and occasionally still attends church. When she meets Jesus she’s going to tell him she did her best. I think that’s pretty much the result of the standard Christian perspective and if that’s what I was looking for then I don’t need the Holy Spirit, because my mom sure doesn’t. Dave’s testimony set off the pilot light in me which eventually turned into a bonfire. If I can’t be like Jesus, as he said I can, then I’m not interested.

Read a bit of info on the Barna Group web page. http://www.barna.org I actually agree with the thrust of his summary of the Revolution.

“There is a new breed of Christ-follower in America today. These are people who are more interested in being the Church than in going to church. They are more eager to produce fruit for the kingdom of God than to become comfortable in the Christian subculture. They are focused on the seven spiritual passions that facilitate their growth as genuine people of God and citizens of the kingdom. These people are Revolutionaries.“

I don’t really consider myself a Revolutionary nor am I focused on the seven spiritual passions but the rest of his dialogue is pretty accurate. I would suggest that true Christianity would automatically be considered revolutionary by the world as it was in the beginning. If the church is calling it that then they’ve become the world and by and large I believe that to be the case. It doesn’t resemble the early church in any way. That church gave all their possessions and it was redistributed as needed. That requires a Holy Spirit mentality that I haven’t seen approached anywhere. It’s communism that works because of Jesus. What Ayn Rand despised and degraded more than anything else and John Galt (fictional) spent every ounce of his being to halt. Of course in the world it is absurd, but in the kingdom it is the way it will be. When I find a spiritual church, like minded, I’ll be there, unless I start my own first.

I thought I’d leave your second paragraph alone (re: right/wrong) but it goes to the heart of the freedom from the law issue and became too difficult to resist. From an overview perspective, for those who are not free from the law (the norm), the question of judgment will produce some clear evidence of their thinking. Why? Because the law provides the required judgment and the Spirit really doesn’t have a function. (see previous posts) That being the case, the spirit still needs to be included because, well, we are Christians and the Holy Spirit has to be in there somewhere.

So, are “learned preconceptions” not the “sense of right and wrong written in the fabric of our creation”? If not then what’s the difference? What is handed down through people from generation to generation is the very sense you speak of. (noting that the Bible has been handed down flawlessly through countless generations – don’t use the communication flaw argument) It’s what my mother so staunchly believes in. She knows what good and bad, right and wrong are.

You mention that all the learned preconceptions are not in line with our Lord. You must therefore know which ones are and which ones aren’t. How do you know? Why doesn’t everyone know?
Great sentence: “Without the Holy Spirit our ability to discern the heart and motivation of an individual is flawed.” This is an absolutely perfect example of what I mentioned in the overview. The Holy Spirit is brought to bear, because he has to be, but really what does he bring to the table in your discussion. Zip. Nadda. You’re not even saying the Holy Spirit would render a flawless judgment, just that it will be flawed without him. So what does he really contribute? Won’t the judgment be flawed either way? In the end I believe this argument is simply that you know what’s right and wrong and always have. Clearly I don’t hold to that view. (As previously mentioned the Jesus killers didn’t know what they were doing, but according to you I guess they did or better put in your lingo, “should have”)

By the way, self consciousness is a form of knowledge. My interpretation is based on their initial reaction to eating of the tree. It wasn’t we’re sinners, we’re bad for eating the apple, Satan’s evil, it was “we’re naked!” That’s the real evil but I don’t believe it can register according to your definitions and the majority of those who agree with you.

At least we agree Jesus Christ is Lord. Nuff said.

I’m thinking of starting my own blog just to “preach to the stones”. A way of venting on any topic and many of the crazy things that are of interest to me. I was inspired by some of the blogs I’ve seen that do a similar thing. Since Christ is all and in all, I have an endless supply of material. I’ll let you know when it gets going. Hope to include lots of multimedia to embellish my point. One topic of interest is the major events that cause the death of humans. Like how does the Vietnam war stack up to WW2 or Stalin’s purges. Just to get a frame of reference on a massive scale. I once calculated that there could have been a trillion people on earth at the time of the flood. Stuff like that.

Needed a rest

I read this first before I came home for Brit’s wedding. It was near bedtime and I was tired. Reading this made me more tired. You stating that we are rehashing the same old thing especially resounded with me. Sometimes I feel we just have trouble communicating. You say you are 100% sure you have the mind of Christ because Paul has said we do. In accordance with the Word than we agree. But then you also suggest that from Jesus’ perspective it might not be that way. I believe this is all I meant by not having the mind of Christ. Christ, who walked the earth had a mind that never sinned. This is not us. If it were, his ministry would not have been, “repent for the kingdom of heaven in near”. It is yet another Christian paradox. We are holy and complete and yet we are a work in progress; we are at war and yet the war has already been won.

I certainly agree that there are learned preconceptions of right and wrong that are not in line with our Lord. With out the Holy Spirit our ability to discern the heart and motivation of an individual is flawed. I’m still convinced there is a sense of right in wrong written in the fabric of our creation. If the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were merely self consciousness it would have been called the tree of self consciousness.

I’ve been reading a book called, Revolution by George Barna. It’s tag line is, worn out on church, finding vibrant faith beyond the walls of the sanctuary. It certainly tracks the trend of people moving away from the church but Barna finds that there are still many who maintain a vibrant Christ led life. (You’ll probably hate it from the jacket description). I’m wondering what you make of the fellowship of the early church ex. Acts 2:46,47. These men gathered daily. Jesus had his disciples and preached in synagogues where men gathered. I’m asking if you feel you need that community of fellowship as they were compelled to do? If not, why not? Do you already have that in your life? If not what are you doing to find it? I’m not talking church but like minded believers.