Homosexuality

[FHII]

Romans 8:1
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Unless we are following the Spirit, following Jesus, we are not abiding.

If Christ is a one time ticket you punch and doesn't require anything on our part, then why does it say 'add to your faith these things' and 'make your calling and election sure'? Why does it say 'the love of God is that you do his commandments' and 'He (Christ) became the source of salvation to all those who OBEY him'?

We please him by faith! Which means taking him at his word and being faithful.

God bless you, FHII! :)

I absolutely agree we must walk by the spirit. However, as I have pointed out dilegently (though I could've been more so if you wanted a REALLY long post), we do so while still in sinful flesh. I am not advocating sin (any one particular sin or "sin" in general). I am however, defending grace through faith. I hope everyone is able to part from flesh in the sin and stop all bad habits, but it isn't going to be possible. I for one, am working on myself, but my point is we can't eliminate sin in our lives without Christ. Even then, we will still be in sinful flesh, but it won't be accounted to us. And by the way, the sins we can't eliminate due to the weakness of the flesh (intentional, or unintentional, past, present or future) aren't held against us (directly). Neither will it be held in our favor if we do somehow eliminate them (directly). It'll save us from hell on earth... But when it comes to eternal salvation, our fleshly actions mean nothing.

I want to address something else you mentioned. "If Christ is a one time ticket you punch and doesn't require anything on our part, then why does it say...." I never said it doesn't require anything on our part. I've pointed this out many times: I am always careful to distinquish between sins of the flesh and sins of the spirit as well as works of the flesh and works of the spirit (remember the thread "works vs. good works"?). We can't do anything to earn or even inch us along towards salvation in the flesh. Under grace, our flesh doesn't condemn us, and without grace it won't save us. But works of the spirit, yes! Good works, yes! We are required to to them. This is the law of the inward man (the spirit) that Paul speaks of in Romans 7:22.

And yes, I dare concede that it does require the flesh to come along for the ride and be undersubjection. Afterall, I can't send my inward man to Church, and leave the flesh behind! If I decide the fast, the inward man rejoices but the flesh gets ticked off! I even have to go to work and make the outward man do stuff so I can earn money to give in the offering. My boss just doesn't buy the arguement that my inward man needs the money to support the spreading of the gospel!

And also, if my outward man misbehaves, my inward man will suffer. How can I learn of him on Sunday if I'm hung over because my outward man had a bit too much fun? This is what Paul meant when he said, "All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient." So yes, the flesh has to be curbed. And yes, it can even hinder the inward man. But nothing the flesh is going to do is going to add to my faith.

We must have faith, but faith is a process that is a daily thing. And it does take some work. Getting faith and keeping it is not that easy. It requires you to "die". And dying is a daily process.

All that being said, I believe 18 pages of this thread is about 15 more than should've happened. The bottom line is that I believe in grace through faith alone. Not of works EVER. If you don't believe that, fine. I will listen to parting thoughts on anyone's part and answer any questions about what I have said. But other than that.... It's time to move on.

 

[Prentis]

I do agree that there is mercy, brother. Only we are called to move beyond being just the publican who is justified because of his attitude and heart.

We must keep that humble attitude, yes, and have that same contrite heart, but we are called to holiness, if indeed we are in Christ.

 

[Vengle]

Pentis, FHI sees only the two parts of a man and he tries to read Paul's mind as to which part Paul is speaking to. You can see that clearly in his comment here below. He needs to see that Paul is talking to the whole man. Paul is talking to a soul. That is the complete and entire man. And Paul is appealing to the faculties of all souls in his audience.

"So then, they that are in the flesh cannot please God"

While he was saying that, Paul was still in the flesh and writing to people who were still alive in the flesh..."

"But ye are not in the flesh but in the spirit, if so be that the spirit of God dwelleth in you. No if any man have not the spirit of God, he is none of his."

Paul was talking to the spiritual man (the Roman Church of that era) inside carnal beings. They were still in sinful flesh. Yet, Paul says they weren't in the flesh, while he too was physically in the flesh.

"And if Christ be in you the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit gives life because of righteousness"

Right here, right now, if Christ is in us, the body is dead! Yet, as I'm actually through fleshly fingers typing this and you will no doubt respond in like fashion... We're still here in the flesh.

FHI seems set believing what he wants to believe.

He seems unable to understand these following scriptures:

Jude 1:4 "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

Titus 1:16 "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."

If what FHI claims were true then those at Titus 1:16 do not "in works they deny him."

 

[FHII]

Pentis, FHI sees only the two parts of a man and he tries to read Paul's mind as to which part Paul is speaking to. You can see that clearly in his comment here below. He needs to see that Paul is talking to the whole man. Paul is talking to a soul. That is the complete and entire man. And Paul is appealing to the faculties of all souls in his audience.



FHI seems set believing what he wants to believe.

He seems unable to understand these following scriptures:

Jude 1:4 "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

Titus 1:16 "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."

If what FHI claims were true then those at Titus 1:16 do not "in works they deny him."

No response from me... If you have a question for me then ask it...

 

[Vengle]

No response from me... If you have a question for me then ask it...

I am not sure that I didn't misunderstand what you said looking back on it.

Paul always talked spiritual things even to babes in Christ. And that way the babes could learn to be spiritual minded.

The minister of God does not talk to the carnal man unless God has commanded him to deliver a message of judgment. The minister of God always appeals to the spirit of men when seeking to teach them for the following reason:

Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."

If you seek to talk spiritual things to the carnal man you may as well talk to a brick wall.

And I know you know that. There was much good insight presented in your post #521. So I have faith that you know this. You just did like I often do and tripped up in a couple of words.

Babes in Christ are yet carnal. But they also have a spirit else they would not be there to be taught. And the best way to teach a baby to talk is to not talk baby talk to that baby. When one uses genuine and simple speech which accords to the child 's age they learn to articulate speech sooner. Similarly, to teach a spiritual babe to talk spiritual things one talks simpler spiritual truths in portions they can digest.
_________________________________________________________

Do you see this following scripture as I do?

Romans 8: 3 "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh"

Let me explain how I understand that. The reason the Old Law was weak in the flesh was that until someone existed that could keep it righteously and thus fulfill it, until that time the law had no proof that it was right to condemn those who did not keep it.

That is why Jesus was tested in every way just as we (we = 'those who were under that law') were. One needs to remember that Paul was speaking to a Hebrew audience there who had been under that law. So when Paul said "we", he meant those Hebrews.

Hebrews 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

Paul was soothing their fears of letting go of that Old Law.

That does not mean it is not also true for us, but that was Paul's mind-set pretty obviously. And we know that at the same time it killed those Jews it killed the entire world because Jesus' obedience to it proved that all men were without excuse not to come to that Law and obey it. (Romans 3:19)

We could correctly say that that Old Law gave sin its strength to kill us only because Jesus gave that Law strength by his proving that it could be kept by a man while wearing flesh. Thus those that broke that Law became condemned by that Law and died.

Then grace stepped in, in a more powerful way. And why was it needed?

Because: Galatians 3:21b "... if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law."

And why would that Law have to give life?

Because we were all already dead under the sentence of death upon Adam. That is a number one proof that God is not using that fleshly nation if one is willing to think about it. They were just dead men in Adam being used to convict us all of sin that God could offer grace to all.

 

[lawrance]

Anyone supporting so called gay's is in fact out of line with God.
Man and Woman it is only way because God made it that way for a reason or it would not be so.
Anyone who has sexual relations with the same is a abomination to the Lord.
We have people who may seam to be gay but they are not.
We have people who run around supporting the so called gay life style disgrace and it is a fact they are doing the work of the Devil supporting it.
We would have people who just would say to a young mixed up kid that it is ok to do as so, happly content to lead one astray.

 

[us2are1]

Anyone supporting so called gay's is in fact out of line with God.
Man and Woman it is only way because God made it that way for a reason or it would not be so.
Anyone who has sexual relations with the same is a abomination to the Lord.
We have people who may seam to be gay but they are not.
We have people who run around supporting the so called gay life style disgrace and it is a fact they are doing the work of the Devil supporting it.
We would have people who just would say to a young mixed up kid that it is ok to do as so, happly content to lead one astray.

Amen MR ROSENBERGER

Those who condone sin whether by sticking up for it or not condemning it are also guilty of it and will perish with those sinners who will not repent.

 

[FHII]

Do you see this following scripture as I do?

Romans 8: 3 "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh"

I'm not sure either way.... It seems to say that because Jesus kept the law, we can too. I disagree with that, if that is what you meant.

Paul was not speaking to a Hebrew audience in Romans. He was in Hebrews and partially in Romans. However, not at the point of chapter 8.

Romans 5 tells us why the law was brought in, and why grace was brought in:

Moreover, the law entered that the offense might abound, but where sins abounded, grace did much more abound.

Unless you believe that grace through faith covers all sins of the flesh -- an no, I don't believe we can do it through our fleshly actions or lack of -- then we aren't on the same page. Talking about getting faith is another matter, but it's not done through the flesh.

 

[Vengle]

I'm not sure either way.... It seems to say that because Jesus kept the law, we can too. I disagree with that, if that is what you meant.

Paul was not speaking to a Hebrew audience in Romans. He was in Hebrews and partially in Romans. However, not at the point of chapter 8.

Romans 5 tells us why the law was brought in, and why grace was brought in:

Moreover, the law entered that the offense might abound, but where sins abounded, grace did much more abound.

Unless you believe that grace through faith covers all sins of the flesh -- an no, I don't believe we can do it through our fleshly actions or lack of -- then we aren't on the same page. Talking about getting faith is another matter, but it's not done through the flesh.

A certain percentage of the Roman congregation were indeed Jews. After you do a verse by verse search of those first five chapters then come back and tell me if you do not see that.

Paul's focus in his letter did not turn more specifically to the Gentiles until chapter 10. Yet both the Jews and the Gentiles could be edified by all that he said.

In so far as your saying, "It seems to say that because Jesus kept the law, we can too", I take it you to be referring to this comment that I made:

Romans 8: 3 "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh"

Let me explain how I understand that. The reason the Old Law was weak in the flesh was that until someone existed that could keep it righteously and thus fulfill it, until that time the law had no proof that it was right to condemn those who did not keep it.

That is why Jesus was tested in every way just as we (we = 'those who were under that law') were. One needs to remember that Paul was speaking to a Hebrew audience there who had been under that law. So when Paul said "we", he meant those Hebrews.

Let's take it slowly.

Have we assumed that it is not possible for a man wearing flesh to keep that Law just because we are told that all have sinned and that the carnal mind is incapable of keeping that law?

Find me one scripture that actually comes out and says that directly and take the memory of this one with you as you look for that one:

Matthew 17:20 "And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you."

 

[Prentis]

What is impossible with men is possible with God.

The whole good news of the gospel is that the veil is torn, and grace (the power of God at work in us) can make us overcomers. If we submit to the Lord, 'believe and repent', he will live in us.

The good news is that we can be empowered! Now it is up to us to respond, seek, and conform our character to Christ ('add to your faith') that we might be as he is. By our own power it is impossible, but if we are adequate in character, and we seek his equipped, we can then be empowered to be carriers of the glory of God.

Peter, Paul, the disciples, where they superhuman? They were men of lusts like ours, yet they raised the dead and healed the sick! And that doesn't mean it's about signs, but rather I point to the fact they were empowered by God to do his works and walk as he walked.

 

[Vengle]

What is impossible with men is possible with God.

The whole good news of the gospel is that the veil is torn, and grace (the power of God at work in us) can make us overcomers. If we submit to the Lord, 'believe and repent', he will live in us.

The good news is that we can be empowered! Now it is up to us to respond, seek, and conform our character to Christ ('add to your faith') that we might be as he is. By our own power it is impossible, but if we are adequate in character, and we seek his equipped, we can then be empowered to be carriers of the glory of God.

Peter, Paul, the disciples, where they superhuman? They were men of lusts like ours, yet they raised the dead and healed the sick! And that doesn't mean it's about signs, but rather I point to the fact they were empowered by God to do his works and walk as he walked.

That is right Prentis.

We often fail to realize what Paul meant when he said that sin is not imputed when there is no law, but law must be justified also. Christ justified that Old Law by proving it was not unfair to demand what it did from man. If it were true that we have absolutely no ability to keep it then it would be unfair and could not have killed us. It could only kill us if we had the ability to keep it but did not. That then would be justice.

So the problem was only that the carnal minded man cannot keep it. But we have learned in Christ that we need not live in the carnal minded man. We can live as a spiritually minded man after the model of Christ and follow the Father's holy spirit as does Christ and then we are totally capable of over-coming.

Paul would not have told us that we can fulfill that law if we couldn't, and neither would have Jesus.

Matthew 5:19 "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 22:37 "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt (must) love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt (must) love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

(Shalt means "you will do it" as in "you must do it".)

Romans 13:8 "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."
Romans 13:10 "Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."
Galatians 5:14 "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
James 2:8 "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well."

Galatians 5:18 "But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law."

Galatians 5:16 "This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh."

And just think about all 1 John says about it.

Can't you just hear God saying as he did to ancient Israel, "How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?" (Exodus 16:28)

"How long will this people provoke me? and how long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among them?" (Numbers 14:11)

God would not have said those things to them if it were impossible for them. He would have been unjust to punish them if it were impossible for them.

We like fools have read into the scriptures and came out of it with false ideas centered around a desire to be easy on ourselves.


Matthew 5:48 "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."

1 Peter 1:16 "Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy."

Leviticus 20:7 "Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God."

1 Peter 1:15 "But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation."

"Sanctify yourself" means "clean and purify yourself".

It is up to us to use the washing of Christ that way. Christ is doing his part to help us, and we must do our part.

And man has always had that ability in him, else the law would have been unjust to put man to death.

Man is just stubborn and prideful and needed convincing of this before he would commit to learning how.


There is going to be a lot of surprised people, sad to say.

 

[Prentis]

Men have turned the grace of God (power working in us) into lasciviousness (free mercy given arbitrarily, by respect of persons).

In our own power, it is indeed impossible, for there is nothing good that is in us. We cannot keep the law by our own strength, that is true. Thus men could sacrifice for their sins. Take the example of John the Baptist's father; it says in one place that he was righteous and blameless before the Lord.... And yet he had unbelief when told his wife would bear a son!

There is a difference between the righteousness man can attain in his power, and the righteousness of God, which is only available by his power. We should be careful not to lose this distinction.

 

[Vengle]

Men have turned the grace of God (power working in us) into lasciviousness (free mercy given arbitrarily, by respect of persons).

In our own power, it is indeed impossible, for there is nothing good that is in us. We cannot keep the law by our own strength, that is true. Thus men could sacrifice for their sins. Take the example of John the Baptist's father; it says in one place that he was righteous and blameless before the Lord.... And yet he had unbelief when told his wife would bear a son!

There is a difference between the righteousness man can attain in his power, and the righteousness of God, which is only available by his power. We should be careful not to lose this distinction.

This time I will partly agree with you.

We need to be careful because we find ourselves in conflict with those verse I cited if we are not careful. And God himself tells us what justice is, so we had to be capable of keeping that Old Law or it would have committed injustice to put us to death.

We were created in the image of God. That ability (that power you speak of) was laying latent in our spirit and we were not using it. And so we needed Christ for a number of things:

We needed that law to kill us but the law was weak through the carnal mind. And we need to distinguish between that and our actual flesh. The carnal mind is also called a spirit in the scripture, just not a good spirit. It is a selfish spirit that thinks only in terms of the immediate needs of the individual's flesh. And that is why we also sometimes refer to it as the flesh when in fact it is a spirit of our mind.

None of us who had been programmed through our training through generations could see that our thinking was wrong, that the spirit regulating in our mind was an ill one. There is nothing mysterious about this. Men want it to be mysterious so that they have an excuse to ignore much of it, picking and choosing only what they want of it. It was that spiritual blindness that called for God's mercy just as Paul said he was shown mercy because of his spiritual blindness.

With the spirit of our mind causing our thinking to be wrong we were bound to fail at that Law. But if we had an example of one with a true godly spirit regulating in his mind and whose thinking was good because of it there would be hope for us to see that and learn from it and begin to wake up. Jesus provided that to us and he justified that Law to put us to death.

Why don't many see this today? Why do so many believe it is impossible for we in this flesh to keep that Old Law?

There are certain things man has to recognize (be woke up to) before he can come out from under that veil of blindness. God lifts that veil by the word in the mouth of preachers of righteousness. But Satan knowing that has worked hard to give them many choices to distract them and keep them blinded under that veil:

2 Corinthians 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

While the true body members of Christ lift that veil of darkness by shining the of the true Christ, these false ministers of righteousness who are really ministers of Satan are spreading darkness and seeking to dim that true light.

There is a difference between the righteousness man can attain in his power, and the righteousness of God, which is only available by his power. We should be careful not to lose this distinction.

I want comment on your last line here by itself.

From the beginning when man was created in God's image that is how it was to be. Man is created to rely on getting his mental/emotional and physical power from God.

So what you are describing is just what is supposed to be by our design.

We needed help to realize what God has designed in us.

Why do you think Jesus was able to say that if we only had faith the size of a mustard grain we could move mountains?

Your eyes are seeing more everyday. I see that about you.

 

[Prentis]

:)

It is what it was supposed to be, communion with God, yes.

But what I'm saying is that there are two levels, the first being that we do what is right in our capacity, and then when we fail, we offer a sacrifice, that is, repentance. I'm making the link with the Old Testament here. From this, man can move on to walking in God's power, where God's grace keeps him. There, man must keep his eyes on Jesus, if he does this, he will not fall.

We are capable of being just in our own power. BUT not just as God is, thus the distinction.

I agree with you about being 'programmed'. Nowadays, indoctrination is the main well of 'faith', which is really no faith at all, but belief. This indoctrination happens on the cultural level always, and now also on the 'church' level. Each has it's doctrine, tells you why you must believe it and cling to it, and the heart is then hardened.

 

[Vengle]

:)

It is what it was supposed to be, communion with God, yes.

But what I'm saying is that there are two levels, the first being that we do what is right in our capacity, and then when we fail, we offer a sacrifice, that is, repentance. I'm making the link with the Old Testament here. From this, man can move on to walking in God's power, where God's grace keeps him. There, man must keep his eyes on Jesus, if he does this, he will not fall.

We are capable of being just in our own power. BUT not just as God is, thus the distinction.

I agree with you about being 'programmed'. Nowadays, indoctrination is the main well of 'faith', which is really no faith at all, but belief. This indoctrination happens on the cultural level always, and now also on the 'church' level. Each has it's doctrine, tells you why you must believe it and cling to it, and the heart is then hardened.

Yes, as I said, that was what you were describing.

A game I like to play with myself is that once I think I understand it, then I deliberately seek different words to express it in.

What I have found is that sometimes when I put it into different words, I then am able to see flaws with my thinking that were hidden by the words I was using previously.

So if you feel like I sometimes make you restate yourself, you are right.

You see, as I found that was true of me, I also found that sometimes others can say something that sounds right until you have them put it in other words. Then you get a chance to see what they really mean.

But yes, I agree with you.

Often times in teaching, it is just a matter of saying the same thing different ways until you find the right way to say it for the listener's sake.

That and discerning what foundation pieces they are missing, which takes well aimed questions.

That works well for sharing, also.

 

[Prentis]

It is good to have to restate it, I have found the forums very useful for this; you have to explain and explain again what you mean, what you understand, what is said, etc. It is iron sharpening iron!

It's a wise way of doing things! :)

 

[Vengle]

:)

It is what it was supposed to be, communion with God, yes.

But what I'm saying is that there are two levels, the first being that we do what is right in our capacity, and then when we fail, we offer a sacrifice, that is, repentance. I'm making the link with the Old Testament here. From this, man can move on to walking in God's power, where God's grace keeps him. There, man must keep his eyes on Jesus, if he does this, he will not fall.

We are capable of being just in our own power. BUT not just as God is, thus the distinction.

I agree with you about being 'programmed'. Nowadays, indoctrination is the main well of 'faith', which is really no faith at all, but belief. This indoctrination happens on the cultural level always, and now also on the 'church' level. Each has it's doctrine, tells you why you must believe it and cling to it, and the heart is then hardened.

Yes, as I said, that was what you were describing.

A game I like to play with myself is that once I think I understand it, then I deliberately seek different words to express it in.

What I have found is that sometimes when I put it into different words, I then am able to see flaws with my thinking that were hidden by the words I was using previously.

So if you feel like I sometimes make you restate yourself, you are right.

You see, as I found that was true of me, I also found that sometimes others can say something that sounds right until you have them put it in other words. Then you get a chance to see what they really mean.

But yes, I agree with you.

Often times in teaching, it is just a matter of saying the same thing different ways until you find the right way to say it for the listener's sake.

That and discerning what foundation pieces they are missing, which takes well aimed questions.

That works well for sharing, also.

I would be interested to get more precise thoughts from you about what I said concerning man having to have the innate capability within him, else it would violate God's justice to punish him for what he is incapable of doing. That would violate love and justice.

You see, they had a simpler Law than we do by spirit in all actuality, because they could not claim that they lost his voice for even one second as it was all written down. They were punished for not listening to what was written down. They were without excuse.

If you have noticed, the NT does not detail a ton of laws for us but outlines only the most serious ones. There is good reason for that.

 

[Prentis]

I would be interested to get more precise thoughts from you about what I said concerning man having to have the innate capability within him, else it would violate God's justice to punish him for what he is incapable of doing. That would violate love and justice.

You see, they had a simpler Law than we do by spirit in all actuality, because they could not claim that they lost his voice for even one second as it was all written down. They were punished for not listening to what was written down. They were without excuse.

Okay, here's how I understand it! :)

Firstly, I absolutely agree that God will not hold you accountable for something you cannot do.

Now, there are two standards, because there are two strengths we may walk by. One was always there, the other was partially there, but is revealed fully in Jesus Christ, and made available through him.

The first standard is this; do good in whatever you can, honor God, love your neighbor, and do what is right. When you fail on something, have a broken and a contrite heart, be repentant. It is the righteousness of the Publican and of the Good Samaritan. This man is not empowered by God, and so he is not held to the standard of 'woe is me if I do not preach the gospel', he has not received this. That is also why there is space for error; the one who sins can seek forgiveness in the old testament by bringing a sacrifice. This represents the sacrifice of the Publican; his repentant heart, honest and willing to admit his weakness.

The second standard is this; be as Christ. This is only possible by the empowerement of his Spirit. Only the works of God are perfect, because it is HIM who is holy, and so the only way to be holy as he is holy is that he would do his works through us. For this to happen, we must be emptied of ourself and like him in character, that we might be carriers of his glory. For this also, God leaves some space for mercy, because we are learning, and need to be trained. So he says 'if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ'. But by this power we can be just as he is.

Under both we can be considered by the Lord to be blameless and righteous before the Lord, but it is a different level of righteousness (the righteousness of man and the righteousness of God). It says of John the Baptists parents that they were righteous and blameless before the Lord. Yet John's father had unbelief when the Lord told him he would have a son! Does a sanctified saint, walking just as Jesus ever have unbelief about what God tells him? No. Thus they walk at a different level of righteousness.

 

[Vengle]

Okay, here's how I understand it! :)

Firstly, I absolutely agree that God will not hold you accountable for something you cannot do.

Now, there are two standards, because there are two strengths we may walk by. One was always there, the other was partially there, but is revealed fully in Jesus Christ, and made available through him.

The first standard is this; do good in whatever you can, honor God, love your neighbor, and do what is right. When you fail on something, have a broken and a contrite heart, be repentant. It is the righteousness of the Publican and of the Good Samaritan. This man is not empowered by God, and so he is not held to the standard of 'woe is me if I do not preach the gospel', he has not received this. That is also why there is space for error; the one who sins can seek forgiveness in the old testament by bringing a sacrifice. This represents the sacrifice of the Publican; his repentant heart, honest and willing to admit his weakness.

The second standard is this; be as Christ. This is only possible by the empowerement of his Spirit. Only the works of God are perfect, because it is HIM who is holy, and so the only way to be holy as he is holy is that he would do his works through us. For this to happen, we must be emptied of ourself and like him in character, that we might be carriers of his glory. For this also, God leaves some space for mercy, because we are learning, and need to be trained. So he says 'if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ'. But by this power we can be just as he is.

Under both we can be considered by the Lord to be blameless and righteous before the Lord, but it is a different level of righteousness (the righteousness of man and the righteousness of God). It says of John the Baptists parents that they were righteous and blameless before the Lord. Yet John's father had unbelief when the Lord told him he would have a son! Does a sanctified saint, walking just as Jesus ever have unbelief about what God tells him? No. Thus they walk at a different level of righteousness.

That is right. And even under the Old Law there was mercy. That mercy was really based on the ransom of Jesus even though it was represented by the sacrifice of an animal.

Some of those animal sacrifices actually represented sacrifices we are to make, though. Did you know that?

For example David speaks of our offering the young bulls of our lips as sacrifice.

Psalms 51:17 "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
18 Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem.
19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar."
Hebrews 13:15 "By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name."

I'm sorry, the young bulls of the lips is Hosea chapter 14:1-2.

And Paul also speaks of the sacrifice of praise which is based in Leviticus.

 

[Prentis]

That is right. And even under the Old Law there was mercy. That mercy was really based on the ransom of Jesus even though it was represented by the sacrifice of an animal.

Some of those animal sacrifices actually represented sacrifices we are to make, though. Did you know that?

For example David speaks of our offering the young bulls of our lips as sacrifice.

Yes, once again we see that everything is a shadow.

I hadn't given thought to what they might specifically represent, though I realized they represented what actually happens in us. Could you explain 'offering the young bulls of our lips as sacrifice'?

And do you know of others? I'm interested! :)