How are we to reckon ourselves as being dead to sin?

[marks]

Why not? Teachings without heart are stale and robotic in my opinion. Cold. If God shares with you something during your low times…maybe I should rephrase when I asked is it wrong? Maybe instead. is it wrong to share what He gave to you in the low times with others also in a low time? Isn’t that the teaching? Help. Comfort. Rest? Edifying. Building up of one another. So what is ‘the teaching’ you said has to be separate and careful not to mix with what he has shared with you during struggles? Or open moments of vulnerability? That is concerning that is considered not able to mix with the teaching. Again, isn’t that the teaching? Or is the teaching something apart from helps, comfort, edification and building one another up? I guess if the teaching is no need for any of that…not interested…don’t want or need that…like this board returns. Then yes, I can see your point of keep it to yourself and don’t mix it with the teaching.

It doesn't sound like you are understanding what I'm saying.

One day, in answer to a concern of mine, the Lord spoke to me and gave me this, "afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city." This is from a passage concerning Israel, and Jerusalem, and that God used this passage to speak a word of encouragment to me doesn't change the meaning of the passage itself, and it's application to Israel.

Isaiah 1:24-26 KJV
24) Therefore saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts, the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies:
25) And I will turn my hand upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross, and take away all thy tin:
26) And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city.

This is a prophecy of the restoration of Israel, and it remains that. But God used it speak a personal word to me. Were I to be teaching on this passage, I would speak about the restoration of Israel.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You said “we are born again by the hand of God. not by our own hands or the hands of men, you are correct if this is what you are implying.”

That is the connection. Yes that is what I was implying. John 3 you asked what it means to me. Which this morning I do doubt what I hear. So I strongly emphasize what it has meant to me. Meaning at this point I am not arguing I could be wrong. But wondering if I am terribly wrong about so much of it.

You keep asking what does it mean. To me:
Nicodemus was of the Pharisees…to me of them stands out with “the works of men’s hands” nicodemus being one of them. Cloned. “Of” from beneath… “of” the passing down of generations upon generations of “the works of men’s hands” …asking how do you be born anew?”

nicodemus is saying what the Pharisees said “whose doctrine is this”? What is this, This fellow teaches? Or at least I think that is implied. Isn’t that which is born of God …born of us? Aren’t the works of men’s hands the same as that made without hands and of God? Nicodemus tells Christ “I know you come from God.” This coming from a man who is “of” that which is made with the hands of men… is asking how can one be made without hands, born of God?

Unless one is born of water and the Spirit.
unless you eat My Flesh and drink My blood.
…he cannot be My disciple.
…he can not enter the Kingdom of God.

Contrasted is Nicodemus being “of” the works of men’s hands …asking how is one made without hands, of God?

What is born with and out from the works of men’s hands is from beneath. The Living Water I give is from above, not that made with mens hands…but made without hands and of God. How does one drink this Living Water?

“I know you are of God.”
“I know you are this Living Water,” please give me to drink. Basically I hear Nicodemus (of the Pharisees) asking for the same thing the woman by the well asks…how can you give to drink when you have nothing to draw with? “If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto Me.”

I hear him asking Nicodemus why he is amazed when he spent time in and of “that made with the works of men” and says I have never seen another man do the works you do except God be with and for him.

Not by the works of men’s hands…but of God the circumcision made without hands.
“Who do you say I am?”
Maybe nicodemus could have said “you are Him.” “You are the circumcision made without hands, of God.”

Wait, Nicodemus did say that “I know you are of God.” …the putting off of the sins of the flesh by the body of Christ. I think this is what He was talking to Nicodemus about … the Living Water. Contrasted with what Nicodemus had experienced and his asking Nicodemus “if you being a master of Israel how is you do not know these things?” To me it is because it isn’t for the works of men’s hands…but made without hands and given of God. Same as the woman by the well, I think Jesus Christ was telling Nicodemus the difference of the works of men’s hands…same with see this well dug? Who dung it? …from “Sir, where are you going to get this Living Water you speak of?” To Nicodemus why have I not seen another man being of the works of men’s hands; I haven’t seen them do what you do?

You may say that is a mix-match. But to me it is the same teaching and does connect. Same as bread that perishes and “I am that Bread of Life.” …not isolated, and disjointed, but given of the same Spirit.

I am wondering why you did not speak of what Jesus told him..when he asked how those things could be, especially vs 14 - 18

9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”

10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? 11 Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

a) The Muslim God is the same as the Judeo-Christian God.

Muslims worshop Allah, which is the "moon God" in paganistic teachings.

It is not the judeo-christian God.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You don't think that the Bible teaches that Jesus has paid the penalty for all sins?

That's right. The Bible teaches that Jesus and God forgive sins. Penalty is waved not served.

 

[CadyandZoe]

It teaches The Fathers wrath / anger / hate was on the Son as punishment for sin

According to Paul, the death of Jesus was not a matter of punishment, penalty, retribution, or vengeance. The death of Jesus was a demonstration of God's righteousness.

Romans 3:21-26

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in God’s merciful restraint He let the sins previously committed go unpunished; for the demonstration, that is, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.​

​

 

[CadyandZoe]

It would depend on what a person believes too be the world?

To reiterate, I don't believe this theory of the atonement but some who believe this theory also believe in the theological concept of prevenient grace. This teaching postulates that man plays a part in his own salvation. God provided the lamb, who became the reconciliation for the whole world, but each individual person must make the freewill decision to accept God's gracious gift or not.

 

[Lizbeth]

One day, in answer to a concern of mine, the Lord spoke to me and gave me this, "afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city."

Yep, the city that is above....which IS built of precious stones. Living stones, God's precious jewels, in the day when He makes up His jewels.

 

[Jim B]

Muslims worshop Allah, which is the "moon God" in paganistic teachings.

It is not the judeo-christian God.

That simply isn't true.

The now disproven postulation that 'Allah' (the name of God in Islam) originated as a moon god first arose in 1901 in the scholarship of archeologist Hugo Winckler, who identified the name Allah with a pre-Islamic Arabian deity known as Hubal, which he called a lunar deity.

 

[Jim B]

That's right. The Bible teaches that Jesus and God forgive sins. Penalty is waved not served.

What does "penalty is waved not served" supposed mean?

To "waive" is to refrain from enforcing. Jesus paid the price for all sin, so the penalty is waived. (not "waved" -- LOL)

 

[ChristisGod]

To reiterate, I don't believe this theory of the atonement but some who believe this theory also believe in the theological concept of prevenient grace. This teaching postulates that man plays a part in his own salvation. God provided the lamb, who became the reconciliation for the whole world, but each individual person must make the freewill decision to accept God's gracious gift or not.

Spot on

 

[Michiah-Imla]

Most mainstream Muslims would generally agree they worship the same God that Christians — or Jews — worship.

One god sends prophet Mohammed, the other does not…

But they are the same God?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That's right. The Bible teaches that Jesus and God forgive sins. Penalty is waved not served.

how is it waved?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That simply isn't true.

The now disproven postulation that 'Allah' (the name of God in Islam) originated as a moon god first arose in 1901 in the scholarship of archeologist Hugo Winckler, who identified the name Allah with a pre-Islamic Arabian deity known as Hubal, which he called a lunar deity.

either way. The Muslim God is not the Judeo-christian God..

 

[CadyandZoe]

Again.

According to the law. What was the wage of sin. And what had to happen for sin to be forgiven?

and PS. A boatload of punishment? There is only one penalty of sin. not a boatload

The law provided the means for reconciliation between the sinner and God. A priest would offer the requisite sacrifice on behalf of the sinner, making an appeal for reconciliation (atonement) between God and the sinner. According to David, though, God was more likely to respond to a broken spirit and a contrite heart, than an animal sacrifice.

I understand your point about the "boat load", but since penal substitution theory is an "economic" theory, one often hears the objection, "How can the death of Jesus, whose suffering and death were limited to a relatively short time, satisfy such a large debt to justice?

 

[Jim B]

either way. The Muslim God is not the Judeo-christian God..

Simply your opinion. He's the same God for Muslims as He is for Jews and Christians. You should educate yourself more thoroughly.

According to the Qur'an (Q4:163; 5:69; 22:34; 29:46), Muslims worship the same divine being that Jews and Christians worship.

Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. Etymologically, the name Allah is probably a contraction of the Arabic al-Ilāh, “the God.” The name's origin can be traced to the earliest Semitic writings in which the word for god was il, el, or eloah, the latter two used in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).

 

[Lizbeth]

Is so!

a) Most mainstream Muslims would generally agree they worship the same God that Christians — or Jews — worship.
b) All Muslims and most Christians acknowledge that they believe in the same god even though their understandings differ.
c) The Catholic Church since Vatican II has taught in different ways that Muslims and Christians do worship the same God.
d) As per the Qura'an, Allah is the God of all and not just Muslims.
e) The three religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam readily fit the definition of monotheism, which is to worship one god while denying the existence of other gods. But, the relationship of the three religions is closer than that: They claim to worship the same God.
f) They both believe a powerful God who created the world and everything in it. The almighty God for Christian's is just called God, but for Muslim's he is called Allah. Different names but the same God.

... various online sources

If you believe that then you have to believe Muhammed the founder of Islam was a prophet of the one true God and hearing from Him. Do you?

 

[ChristisGod]

One god sends prophet Mohammed, the other does not…

But they are the same God?

Bipolar or schizophrenia

 

[ChristisGod]

If you believe that then you have to believe Muhammed the founder of Islam was a prophet of the one true God and hearing from Him. Do you?

Exactly they cannot tell a false god and false prophet from the True God and His Prophets and Apostles.

 

[Waiting on him]

What does "penalty is waved not served" supposed mean?

To "waive" is to refrain from enforcing. Jesus paid the price for all sin, so the penalty is waived. (not "waved" -- LOL)

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The law provided the means for reconciliation between the sinner and God.

That is not what the word says.. The word says whoever is under the law is cursed. because cursed is the one who does not obey every word.

A priest would offer the requisite sacrifice on behalf of the sinner, making an appeal for reconciliation (atonement) between God and the sinner. According to David, though, God was more likely to respond to a broken spirit and a contrite heart, than an animal sacrifice.

God required a payment for sin. He does not just let it God.. He would not be a perfect judge if he did this.. So a broken spirit and a contrite heart is not going to save you.

I understand your point about the "boat load", but since penal substitution theory is an "economic" theory, one often hears the objection, "How can the death of Jesus, whose suffering and death were limited to a relatively short time, satisfy such a large debt to justice?

Jesus is God. that's how. If Jesus was mere man, I would agree.. But As God he could take the sin of the whole world.. which the bible says he did.

If he did not, we are under law. and we have no hope..