xjwsforChrist

JUSTMOM SAID









Hello William

I would like to comment on this question.
NONE of us are without sin. That is the consequence that Adam handed down to us. Our sinful flesh. So we cannot be fooling ourselves that we do not sin.
In order for Christs blood to cover over our sins and purify them, we must first acknowledge they exist and need cleansing. (That was the problem with the Pharisees) "Those not sick (or think they are not) do not need a physician." When in actuality our Lord was trying to tell them how spiritually sick they were. But they refused to come to HIM> Matthew 9:9-13

Then we must use the provision he told us to heal us and cleanse us. By coming into union with him by "eating his flesh and drinking his blood" John 6:35-58 The true manna that gives life and the true drink/blood that covers over us and cleanses us by means of holy spirit.

If we claim to be without sin the ransom sacrifice that continues to be a daily sacrifice would have been in vain.
But once an individual enters into this covenant by eating and drinking and remaining in it, there is no condemnation! Their sins are covered. Romans 8:1 The blood of Christ has purified him of sin.

I hope I was able to help some
Love justmom

AGUEST SAID



Wait. Make??? So, you think 'cause there's ladies here we BAKE?? What "make" some more? Dude... YOU can buy them! Online, if not at the local grocery! Really - get in yer car/on your bike/horse/skateboard, or put on your tennies... git yo'sef on down to the A&P... break out the ATM card... and buy some more cookies!

I mean, really? Dude... this is 2012! Women work... and men cook. And bake. Or at least should know their way around the cookie section of the Piggly Wiggly.

Seriously...

J/K!!

Peace!

SA, who prolly made more of this than necessary, but ahm jus' sayin'... nohmsayin'?

WILLIAM SAID






No, I believe it is impossible to survive without judgement. For example, suppose I were sitting in a crowded theatre and suddenly realized the place was going up in flames. Against my better judgement I would just sit there to be consumed by the fire. Who wins?

If I had witnessed the arsonist setting the fire before it consumed the theatre would I not have to make a judgement against the arsonist and do my best to prevent the fire from killing innocent people?

This is an extreme example but relative to everyday decisions we all have to make.

PS still in mulling mode.

WILLIAM SAID

You guys are killing me! ROFLMAO

Moms, I have never ever considered myself without sin. Just to be clear on that !

And YES MAKE! Store bought just ain't the same!

*straps on an apron // grabs a rolling pin*

JUSTMOM SAID

Dear W

It's clear!!! Didn't think you did. My apologies!

AGUEST SAID

Ahh, you're speaking of "judgment" as in "discernment," dear one (again, peace to you!). I misunderstood and took "judgment" here to mean considering another as "unworthy" - judging, as done by a jury in a criminal case so that another is deemed "guilty" and thus MUST be subjected to [some manner] of "divine" punishment.

Glad we're on the same page now!

Peace!
_________________
Paz a todos!

Su sirviente, compañera de estudios, y un esclava de Cristo,

SA

WILLIAM SAID

Sorry I had you confused. I've had tendency to do that to people most of my life.

Pretty much what I want to say is not something I am comfortable posting on a public forum because it's rather personal and private and coming from me, usually confusing.

*hands out a plate of home baked shortbread cookies*

TEC SAID

Confusing is fine... as long as people care enough to ask questions, and you have the patience to answer them

Oh, and I would love some of those cookies, thanks!!!

My grandmother used to bake me shortbread cookies at christmas and then mail them to me. We lived a few provinces apart. I used to love getting them in the mail... yummy...

Peace,
tammy

AGUEST SAID




Okaaayyy? So long as we're clear (peace to you, dear one, and... LOLOLOL!).

*Grabs several cookies from the plate... 'cause she just can't help herself*

Peeth!

SA, on her own... "talking" with cookies in her mouth...

NAMBO SAID



A fine thread with much helpful perspective, especially by you AGuest.

I feel the above has yet to be addressed however, are these old principles really out of date and no longer relevant in today's society, now that we have the likes of contraception?

I would consider they are just as relevant and necessary as when God first instructed us.

Today's society is full of broken children and broken marriages as a result of our abandoning Gods principles, I was one such child, the only happy time of my life was when I was in a Children's home, but even there we 4 and 5 year olds would stare at the electric light hoping to make ourselves go blind because, "our Mummies didn't want us".

Modern views of morality and contraception certainly didn't stop the lifelong destruction of an innocent child's life, no wonder the reason God gives for his soon to be judgement against man is "because of the increase in fornication", though somebody would have to remind me where the verse is.

AGUEST SAID




I would agree, dear Namb' (peace to you!). What some are missing is that the issue (adultery) is not solely about the sex act as many in the western world today believe it to be. This is borne out by the gazillions who think adultery has not occurred until there has BEEN a sex act. Some even believe there are sex acts that don't [quite] constitute "sex" and therefore don't constitute adultery ("I did NOT have sex with that woman!").

While this might be understandable coming from, say, atheists, agnostics, and non-"christians", coming from "christians" is laughable. Not because of Paul's (?) words, but because of Christ's ("If a man so much as looks at a woman to have relations with her he has already committed adultery in his heart"). WE don't know of another's sin in this regard... until an act is actually committed; however, God... who examines the heart and kidneys, not the flesh... knows.

The issue is the UNION... and the supposed "pledge" that comes with it... which isn't supposed to be "broken"... without good and valid reason. That's why a man who raped a woman HAD to take her as his wife: he had essentially made a PROMISE to her... by means of giving his seed TO her. Just as giving those who belong to Him holy spirit... which is the blood, breath, and semen of God... constitutes a PROMISE... by God... to those who receive it.

And, in God's eyes, one must have a really good reason to break a promise. For JAH... it was Israel's continued breaking of HER promise to HIM, HER adultery, insubordination, defiance, lack of faith, etc.

It is by means of this "union" via God's "seed"... holy spirit... that one becomes betrothed... promised... to Christ, the SON of God and the One who dispenses such "seed"... as his Bride. To receive it, then, and then "fornicate" with another "woman" (religion)... constitutes a breaking of that promise. That is why Babylon the Great is called a harlot: she is made up those who were PROMISED to God, through Christ... who later profaned and defiled that promise... by breaking the "union"... when they took other "husbandly owners", the "kings of the earth."

Thus, the principle of keeping one's PROMISE is what is at issue, first and foremost. That one's yes... means yes. Because anything else is "from the wicked one."

Again, adultery is not an unforgivable sin, but it would behoove those who've committed it to know what it IS... so as to be able to ask for... so as to RECEIVE... forgiveness for it.

I hope this helps and, again, peace to you!
_________________
Paz a todos!

Su sirviente, compañera de estudios, y un esclava de Cristo,

SA

MEDEWTYSENU SAID

Thanks Shelby for clarifying what marriage/Adultery and Fornication is.

I'll admit that at first I thought you'd made a mistake and I was in the middle of typing a long reply when the Spirit spoke up and told me to look up the definition of Fornication, of which I discovered Adultery is a type. Because of the WTBTS I always thought Fornication was premarital sex and Adultery was sex with someone other than your marriage mate These scriptures clarified for me that Adultery is just one type of Fornication and not two entirely different things. There is also Spiritual Adultery and Adultery without sex (which is what is mentioned by Yaheshua if we keep looking at a person so as to have a passion for them).

I am thinking part of the problem may lie with the various translation of the Bible where Adultery and Fornication are used interchangeably when in fact Adultery is a type of Fornication and not just limited to married person as some suggest.

Thanks again.

Your servant and fellow slave of Christ.

MM
_________________
"Those that matter don't mind and those that mind don't matter"--Dr. Seuss