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.