Posted on 11/04/2013 2:22:01 PM PST by RBStealth
I AM guessing that most of my readers feel that they are not holy. That holiness, saintliness, is in fact an impossibility in this life. We say, “I am too weak, too sinful, too frail to ever rise to the ranks of the righteous.” We read Scriptures like the following, and feel they were written on a different planet:
…as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in every aspect of your conduct, for it is written, “Be holy because I am holy.” (1 Pet 1:15-16)
Or a different universe:
You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matt 5:48)
Impossible? Would God ask us—no, command us—to be something that we cannot? Oh yes, it is true, we cannot be holy without Him, He who is the source of all holiness. Jesus was blunt:
I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do nothing. (John 15:5)
The truth is—and Satan wishes to keep it far from you—holiness is not only possible, but it is possible right now.
(Excerpt) Read more at markmallett.com ...
Ping for later
I going for #2.
Ditto!
Although we cannot be perfect, we can strive for it; follow the example of Jesus; pray always; ask for God’s mercy, etc..
That is holiness.
H.L. Mencken wrote a very thoughtful analysis of a news story which illuminated the difference between efforts to be righteous.
It described two states of mind, the first in which the world and people were a dichotomy, either sinless or damned, with a very fine line between the two. The other state of mind was of moderation: if not the acceptance of sin, then the understanding of the sinner who tries and fails, but tries again to be righteous.
The news story was of a preacher, who strove to be sinless and righteous in all things, and had no tolerance for sin of any kind, seeing it as leading irrevocably to damnation.
In any event, in a lapse of judgment, this preacher went astray, into the arms of his churches choir leader. But the story did not end there, for figuring that the two of them were now damned, they decided that they could not be any more damned, so went on a multi-state crime spree, involving robbery, murder and the like. Eventually they were captured and after a trial, hanged until dead.
Mencken compared this worldview with that of a Shriner, attending a convention in a city far away from his home.
The Shriner gets drunk, and in that state hires the services of a prostitute. Waking up the next day hungover, he feels bad about his transgression, but it does not stop him from going home to his wife and children, and attending church the following Sunday. He knows he has sinned, and is sorry for it, but he does not imagine himself damned. He continues to be a generally good husband and father.
Importantly, beyond Mencken, we can say that the mind of the preacher was the mind of a fanatic. A good argument can be made that fanaticism in and of itself precludes salvation, because the world of the fanatic is too small and brittle to embrace the idea.
When we look at the world, we should not see things in terms of dichotomy, because the world was created as greater than that. But thinking beyond dichotomy does not mean being relativistic, most especially when salvation is the subject; because it means that while we can interpret the world, we cannot make salvation out of whole cloth.
It must be offered to us before we can choose to accept or reject it. And we cannot offer it to ourselves.
I don't know that it's impossible in the sense that we couldn't, or how could we be held responsible for sin?
But scripture says all have fallen short of the glory of God, none are righteous. So clearly no one will other that Jesus will avoid sin entirely. So we do all need to be forgiven.
We do have to ASK for forgiveness. We also have to pay for our sins, either now or later.
I don't think you get the concept of forgiveness.
The penalty for sin is death, the second death. We're not going to have to pay that if we are forgiven.
In addition to the second death, sin often has it's own natural consequence, which can hurt us and others. And we may or may not have to pay that. And sometimes God chastises us and we have to pay that. But the idea that God is keeping score and we are each going to have to fully pay the full measure for our sins, is contrary to the concept of forgiveness.
I don't think you get the concept of forgiveness.
The penalty for sin is death, the second death. We're not going to have to pay that if we are forgiven.
In addition to the second death, sin often has it's own natural consequence, which can hurt us and others. And we may or may not have to pay that. And sometimes God chastises us and we have to pay that. But the idea that God is keeping score and we are each going to have to fully pay the full measure for our sins, is contrary to the concept of forgiveness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.