We get nice shiny swords.
Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
The Lord cured me of two very bad habits which were in essence spiritual diseases. I had the sicknesses because they came before God in my life. They were my idols. You need to have a serious talk with yourself and ask yourself which do I want more, my smoking etc. or Jesus? He can end the addiction right away. I am living proof.
As for writing, you need to write every day even if you don't want to. Pick a time when you can do it, and treat it like going to work. Don't have any distractions. Try to do a set number of pages a day, every day, and you'll be surprised how easily it goes.
The only counsel I have for you is this: whether it is to write a thing or save a thing written, whether to wear this or not, whether to park here or there, whether to eat this particular hamburger or not, whether to smoke this particular cigarette or not --- and so on --- in every detail of life, remain in constant prayer with God, asking Him and following Him.
Don't worry about making a bad decision, commit everything to Him - no matter how trivial - and He will guide you, one step at a time.
Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. – Proverbs 3:5-6
[There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. - Romans 8:1
I cannot guarantee this is 'in truth' for you, but I know that in much of my writing I am in need of further edification before 'putting it down on a page' ... it would surprise many how much edification comes through reading at FR! But there are so many ways for God to edify us; being open to His instruction is the key to it all 'working together for good in them that are the called according to His purpose.'
Amen, A-G!
And we generally know what "leanings" are right and wrong. It's not that difficult. Does our action or habit or desire bring glory to His name, or is it something we would prefer to hide from Him?
As if we ever could.
Kosta never read the Lord’s command to sell ones garment and buy a sword (Lk.22:36)
Amen, 1000s!
It's no coincidence what verse follows the temptation verse in 1 Corinthians...
Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry." -- 1 Corinthians 10: 13-14"There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
Our bad habits do become our idols, something we care about more than God. Therefore the habits which do not glorify God do not actually benefit us, but debilitate and destroy us.
As for writing, you need to write every day even if you don't want to. Pick a time when you can do it, and treat it like going to work. Don't have any distractions. Try to do a set number of pages a day, every day, and you'll be surprised how easily it goes.
Amen! Great advice. Writers write. Writing is hard; the fun part is having written. That's the allure of a place like this. It's easy to just speak your thoughts onto paper. And so I tell myself this is all good practice. 8~)
"Buy the truth, and sell it not" -- Proverbs 23:23
What a beautiful testimony, dearest sister in Christ! Thank you so much for citing Acts -- I find these passages profoundly moving.
Thank you for your sublime witness! Truly the Holy Spirit has been your partner in writing....
We get nice shiny swords.
It's not the story of the shepherd killing his sheep.
"I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd gives his life for the sheep."
Yes, but don’t bring a sword to a gunfight!
Those nice long capes are really good for hiding large caliber Weatherby magnums and Mossberg shotguns.
I agree with you completely on this detail.
God does not dine on (human) lamb chops.
You Catholics were always very devious.
A Jesuit invention, no doubt.
Actually the Illuminati invented it, the Jesuits improved the design, and the Council on Foreign Relations approved it. :)
Wait’ll you find out about about the secret nerve gas that we spray around the air intakes of predominately Protestant buildings that infects all inside and makes them pray the Rosary and venerate Mary. We’re coming for you...
If your definition of static in this case includes unchanging, changeless, that's exactly what it means. I think you are confusing this with the immaterial energies of the Holy Trinity or Godhead.
Perhaps I chose the wrong word. What I meant was mono-dimensional, mono-faceted, "simple" vs. complex, etc. IOW, if God can fully encompass being fully man and fully God at the same time, then why can't He be fully love, fully just, and fully wrathful at the same time? If I am understanding the Apostolic position correctly then if God is only love then He CANNOT also (ever) be angry or wrathful. Why is this? I do not see how the ABILITY to have righteous anger and wrath is inconsistent with the ABILITY to love. They are not inconsistent, God is a complete being and is multifaceted.
God is changelessly experiencing the emotions of love and hate? This is internally inconsistent.
Why? Can you love your wife and at the same time have righteous anger toward any unworthy clergyman? Did you change something if you felt both at the same time? I don't think so. Since righteous anger is no sin, why can't God do that too?
If God hates something today and loves something tomorrow it violates immutability, so you postulate an unchanging infinite immaterial ball of conflicting emotions. Turn the microscope around.
No, this isn't what I said. :) I said if God hates thing "A" today, but then loves thing "A" tomorrow THEN it violates immutability. It has to be the same thing. That God ALWAYS loves good work "B" and ALWAYS hates sin "C" does NOT violate immutability. No conflicting emotions here. He is consistent.
FK: "Well, for example on the one hand there is a grounded, sobering love, and on the other is a self-destructive, obsessive "love"."
This isn't love or isn't a fault of loving. We confuse many things for love. God's love through us is not an emotion; but this is another topic...
I agree with the first part. But also, God doesn't have human emotional failings; however, how can it be said that He does not have emotions? Did God create us in His image with something (a good something) He Himself does not possess? Godly human love is an emotion, and He says He wants it from us. Surely this cannot be out of envy? :)
FK: "There is anger that causes rash and unwise, impulsive decisions, and there is righteous anger."
"Anyone who is angry with his brother.."
Is this a denial of righteous anger? Consider these:
Mark 3:4-5 : 4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent. 5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.
Titus 1:7 : 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; ... KJV [This allows for righteous anger, or the "soon" would have been unnecessary and misleading.]
Eph 4:25-27 : 25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. 26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: 27 Neither give place to the devil. KJV
Paul explains nicely exactly what Jesus did. He was angry but did not sin. If that is possible, then righteous anger must exist.
FK: "I just meant that with all the emotions, God always correctly shows them."
Perfect anger, lust, pride, envy... :)
In a sense, "Yes". :) Now, I think it is correct that all core emotions can be used by humans for evil, but can all also be used for good? I think so. But here there is a problem. How many separate emotions are there and what are their names? I sure don't know. Are lust, sinful pride and envy really separate emotions or are they all simply bastardizations of the core emotion love? I think more likely the latter, as God does not show these. But anger God DOES show, so I consider that a separate emotion.
I honestly can't think of Biblical uses of lust or envy in a good way, but of course there is plenty on pride:
2 Cor 5:12 : 12 We are not trying to commend ourselves to you again, but are giving you an opportunity to take pride in us, so that you can answer those who take pride in what is seen rather than in what is in the heart.
2 Cor 7:4 : I have great confidence in you; I take great pride in you. I am greatly encouraged; in all our troubles my joy knows no bounds.
2 Cor 8:24 : Therefore show these men the proof of your love and the reason for our pride in you, so that the churches can see it.
I "think" that pride, lust, and envy are all included with the "7 deadly sins", but obviously it cannot be in all cases, if Paul's inspired word is correct. Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for loopholes or anything. :) I'm just saying that human failings in the emotional realm cannot be projected onto God, such that it is therefore impossible for Him to have emotions.
FK: "We humans misuse our emotions all the time."
We misuse our God-given instincts. Emotions are instinctual states. Applying animal instincts to God leads us to strange theology.
I'm not sure what this means? Does it mean that emotions themselves do not really exist for anyone because they are instinctual states? I haven't heard this contrast before. Doesn't instinct just mean to follow one's nature? If so, doesn't God have a nature?
Thank you also for your replies. I enjoy our discussions.
Really.
You know of no human shepherd willing to take up his cross and follow Christ.
Sad.
Wait a minute. What about all those missionaries who go all over the world to preach the good news with little or no remuneration.
What I meant was mono-dimensional, mono-faceted, "simple" vs. complex, etc. IOW, if God can fully encompass being fully man and fully God at the same time, then why can't He be fully love, fully just, and fully wrathful at the same time?
mono-dimensional
I'm assuming that you're obviously not referring to spatial dimensions, but past that it can have many meanings. If you mean having more than one attribute: Of course. If you mean a different state or personality: No.
mono-faceted
Same as above, with the caveat that God does not have 'parts' if you look at facets this way.
"simple" vs. complex
Is God complex? Yet another confusing term if used theologically, it's more at home in psychology.
If you mean, again, capable of being described using more than one attribute: Yes. If you're veering off into parts: No. We say God is simple and uncompound. Not divisible into elements.
You seem to be struggling here to find a way to describe God having (conflicting) emotions. Otherwise, you could just say 'we can describe God somewhat - using more than one attribute. And be done with it. The struggle is to attribute human emotions and change and still maintain immutability and perfection. It can't be done, hence the futile search for more and better phrases.
if God can fully encompass being fully man and fully God at the same time, then why can't He be fully love, fully just, and fully wrathful at the same time?
I think you'll recognize this as non sequitur, counselor. Also bear in mind we are talking about the Holy Trinity here and the Divine in essence. Your question is leading toward: If Jesus had a human nature and a divine nature, why can't the divine nature be like human nature? How can one answer other than: Because it's not, else they'd be the same.
So where comes this human understanding of God's anger, etc.? St. John Damascene helps explain again:
Many of the things relating to God, therefore, that are dimly understood cannot be put into fitting terms, but on things above us we cannot do else than express ourselves according to our limited capacity; as, for instance, when we speak of God we use the terms sleep, and wrath, and regardlessness, hands, too, and feet, land such like expressions.
Can you love your wife and at the same time have righteous anger toward any unworthy clergyman?
Can you? Try it. Put yourself in the place where the emotion of love toward your wife arises. Then do the same for anger. Now love, now be angry. Now be love/angry. Now call your mental health professional.
Emotions are a state of mind - even persons with multiple personalities have one at a time.
Does it mean that emotions themselves do not really exist for anyone because they are instinctual states? I haven't heard this contrast before. Doesn't instinct just mean to follow one's nature? If so, doesn't God have a nature?
No emotions exist. They occur instinctually as opposed to being controlled by will or reason. They are part of our God-given instincts, and directing them properly towards the divine goes hand in hand with proper use of our instincts. They can be used as guides for spiritual development - sometimes in the negative, more effectively in the positive.
Instincts are innate behaviour patterns, having effect based on internal and external stimuli. Survival, reproduction are the two primary ones. Our instincts are behavioural patterns to survive and reproduce... in other words.
You can see here that ascribing this use of "instincts" to God is nonsensical. Having a divine nature, or any nature for that matter, does not necessarily require either instincts or passions.
thanks for your reply.
You know of no human shepherd willing to take up his cross and follow Christ.
relate to:
It's not the story of the shepherd killing his sheep. "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd gives his life for the sheep."
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.