I spend a lot of time in the New Testament both personally and professionally. In fact, I will teach out of the New Testament far more often than out of the Old Testament. When I do reach back and tell stories from the first 2/3rds of the Bible, I will often use it to compare old law vs. new law. Sometimes, the message that people hear is that the Old Testament can be tossed because the New Testament trumps everything that happened in the Old Testament. That's not the message I want people to hear.
The Old Testament message is just as "important" as the message contained in the New Testament. In both, we read about the importance of walking in grace and avoiding the dangers of legalism. The Old Testament used the 10 commandments to express His love and desire for people to follow Him. The New Testament introduced us to a group of legalists who used the law to condemn - something Jesus rejected over and over again. This isn't to say that Jesus avoided the issue of "sin" but He wanted people to approach the issue under a new paradigm (New Testament) - not the old way (Old Testament).
In the book of Hebrews, the author (we think it was Paul) offers this comparison:
“…the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance”. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience.”
Hebrews 9:6-9)
The sacrifices offered up by priests in the Old Testament didn’t take away peoples' sins - it only covered them. Every year the high priest would have to go into the Holy of Holies to repeat the process, pushing everybody’s sins forward in anticipation of the coming of Christ. Paul continues in chapter 10:
“The old system in the law of Moses was only a shadow of the things to come, not the reality of the good things Christ has done for us. The sacrifices under the old system were repeated again and again, year after year, but they were never able to provide perfect cleansing for those who came to worship. If they could have provided perfect cleansing, the sacrifices would have stopped, for the worshipers would have been purified once for all time, and their feelings of guilt would have disappeared. But just the opposite happened. Those yearly sacrifices reminded them of their sins year after year.”
Ahhh....guilt and shame. Two wonderful gifts that the Church has offered to people for hundreds of years. Back then, sacrifices only covered the sin, it didn’t remove sin. It was a band-aid. Far different than the true forgiveness Jesus talked about. In fact, He made it real by offering Himself to God as a "forever sacrifice" for our sins. On the cross, he said, "It is finished". One definition of "finished" is "to perform a last act which completes a process".
Hebrews 10:12 says,“having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, he sat down at the right hand of God." Why? Because there was nothing left to do regarding our sins. He dealt with our guilt and then sat down. Under the old covenant of law, there could be no guilt-free conscience, but you don’t live under that covenant. Jesus Christ did what the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament could never do – He took our sins away.
Jesus came to be a grace-giver and taught us to do the same. The truth of forgiveness is a Message for everyone. When we show His love to people, the Holy Spirit can open the way for the Potter (God) to work on the clay (you, me, them, us).
Avoid legalism and share His Message of grace today.
I can't believe it's been two months since my last post. I don't have a good
excuse but here are some options.
1. My dog ate all of my blog drafts which ha...
25 comments:
Great thoughts on the blog today. Thank God for His work on the cross and the removal of sin. A perfect expression of His love to us.
I have lived in several places throughout the USA and also lived in Europe for five years. Every where I have lived, I have met Christians who have experienced this forgiveness, total removal, of sins. However, many of them are living in shame and condemnation, lies, and addictions, among other things.
It seems like the power of the cross is not a reality in many lives. What does this mean? What can be done? What is the church's and Christ following people who might be a little further on the journey's role in helping people like this? Or is this just the reality of life and we need to live with it?
Thanks for your thoughts and wisdom.
Thanks, Scott. I'm glad that we are on this journey together.
Obviously, the power of the cross is as life-giving as it was when Christ died. Through the work of the Holy Spirit, our mission is to convey the message of the cross to a hurting world. Unfortunately, for a myriad of reasons, the Church has failed to communicate the Message effectively.
A great resource I discovered last year is a book by Joel Green and Mark Baker "Recovering the Scandal of the Cross". Amazon offers this synopsis:
"At the heart of this book is a challenge for us to view afresh the variety of contextual understandings of the death of Christ in the New Testament and to reconsider how we can faithfully communicate with fresh models the atoning significance of the cross for specific contexts today. The authors explore how the atonement has been understood within a variety of contemporary contexts--both Western and non-Western--and show how we can enter into the thoroughly Christian mission of restating the saving scandal of the cross in our multicultural world of the twenty-first century."
We need to tell the story of His forgiveness in many ways and in many contexts while honoring the meta-narrative. Times have changed and it's always good to find new ways of sharing the Truth.
Thanks. I love that book. I also believe our mission to be telling and retelling the story effectively... and inviting people in love to follow Christ as the Holy Spirit moves on hearts. I have also found "Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross" by Green excellent and helpful. Thanks for your feedback.
Hi Scott and all others. Thank God for His new mercies this morning, and the encouraging thought you have brought to us this morning Scott. May the Lord give us wisdom. I know He promises to do that in James 1.
But, to findservelove, a good morning to you also.
Just a comment and a statement/question if you will.
I have heard many, many times over the last few years, what you shared in your post, i.e "the church has failed to communicate the Message effectively"
This is an honest question to you, meant only to help us all know Him, and love each other, but ..... Did you get this idea from your own reading of Scripture, and the Lord ministering to you? Or and, I would appreciate your dead honesty here, did you get this from reading books on the subject?
A second question, has to do with how you might measure success in a church ministry?
For example, sometimes I know we focus on attendance, facilities, and finances as the measurement for success.
But, wondered how you might measure it?
Also, I'm thinking about those times in the OT and the Nt when not many were responding to the message.......In fact, the Book of Acts opens with only 120 in an upper room.
Earlier in Jesus's ministry, the crowds actually shrank as He got closer to the cross.
I'm sure not a proponent that small is spiritual and large is not. Not at all, but it does raise questions in my mind, to keep hearing about the church failing and so on.
I also wonder, and Scott maybe you could help out here, i.e your knowledge of such things, but are there records of any type that indicated the size of the gatherings in the book of acts? I know that often there are passages that talk about, 3000 were added, but, in the day to day life of the church, do you know what history tells us about the size of churches.....the church in Eph, Colosse, Thessalonica and so on?
Also, I wonder, and these are just real thoughts here, not meant to antagonize or be a trouble maker, but isn't it true that Jeremiah did not have large numbers of people respond to his message? And, I'm wondering if anyone thought that he had failed.
I do know the statement made by findservelove had to do with effectiveness.....
But, I guess, I'm asking two questions here, what are the Biblical principles that go into making one the most potentially effective as they can be in God's hands, and then, how do we measure the results or effects of one's disciplined, and committed life to Christ and efforts?
Thanks in advance for any responses and encouragements......Bob
My take on "Recovering the Scandal of the Cross," and its application to this blog topic, is that what we think we know about something often limits our interest in a deeper understanding of the original message. Having “caught” the meaning of something we stop thinking about it. And part of the reason we stop thinking about it is that our understanding, our metaphor, fits our own cultural context. Maybe Jesus understood this and that is why he commands us to “make disciples of all men.” It was a way of encountering and wrestling with the meta-narrative that would keep the Gospel moving forward.
This is an honest question to you, meant only to help us all know Him, and love each other, but ..... Did you get this idea from your own reading of Scripture, and the Lord ministering to you? Or and, I would appreciate your dead honesty here, did you get this from reading books on the subject?I got this "idea" from my conversations and personal experience with people who are not believers. I, also, believe that contemporary research provides good information about how people view Christianity and what message they hear from the religious world specifically regarding Jesus, Christianity, religion, etc. George Barna and Dan Kimball have been good resources along the way. Like Paul, I want to understand my culture and share the Message in a way that reaches all people.
A second question, has to do with how you might measure success in a church ministry?
For example, sometimes I know we focus on attendance, facilities, and finances as the measurement for success.Our church is large however I don't judge our effectiveness on the basis of "how many" and "how much". I think a church is effective when it shares a message of grace, hope, and forgiveness found in Jesus and revealed in the Bible.
I never made reference to size vs. spiritual. Not sure where you read that in my post. Grace can be shared in large churches and small gatherings - just like legalism can be shared in a variety of contexts. I don't really care about the size of a church. I just want to make sure that the Message of Jesus is being shared.
But, I guess, I'm asking two questions here, what are the Biblical principles that go into making one the most potentially effective as they can be in God's hands, and then, how do we measure the results or effects of one's disciplined, and committed life to Christ and efforts?Principles: Love God and love one another.
Effectiveness: Go and make disciples.
Awesome discussion here gentleman. The only thing I would add... or may I be so bold as to correct?
Darrin: "This isn't to say that Jesus avoided the issue of "sin" but He wanted people to approach the issue under a new paradigm (New Testament) - not the old way (Old Testament)."
Matthew 5:17-20 is very clear on how Christ approached the OT and the Law. The new paradigm that you speak of wasn't one that changed from the OT to the NT but that shifted the heart/intent of those in authority and as teachers of the law. The Pharisees paradigm is the shift that Jesus was speaking about. He did not offer a change in the way we approach sin... he fulfilled the law and added another step. The Word says that Jesus came full of grace and truth... a balance we need to strive for. In making our arguments I believe we end up at one end of the spectrum or the other. I believe we need to recognize our own paradigms and do a course correct from time to time... kind of like adjusting our golf swing for a slice. I tend to come from a OT legalism that needs to be balanced with grace. I have to remind myself to consider God's mercy and love as I lead and instruct others. IMHO Darrin and Crossroads come from a position of grace that needs some balance as well... recognizing God's mercy in the way in which he disciplines, corrects, and causes us to be mindful of our failings.
I'm a black and white kind of guy so it bugs me to say this... "Both positions are right and necessary to lead people in truth"
There really isn't a blanket answer that can cover every situation. Without conviction of sin there is no need to repent. Without God's grace and mercy we are doomed and trapped in shame and guilt. It's not an either/or it's an "and". We need the balance of grace and truth in our lives and our churches
Thank you for answering the question about where the idea that the church had failed etc. I appreciate you sharing that.
If I may respond, and ( may I add what a blessing these back and forths have been and are ) but, was thinking about the input from people who are not believers, and thought of what is said in 1st Cor
1Co 2:14* But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The other Scripture that comes to mind, ( and I hope you know that I'm simply sharing what does come to mind ) is......
1Co 11:23* For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread;
So, both of those Scriptures make me think about how the Lord through Paul viewed an unsaved person's understanding of God, and then, how wonderfully the Lord spoke to Paul, and that what he shared was from the Lord Himself........
On to the second question about measuring success, and the fact that you had not mentioned size and so on, I'm with you on that. I understand you did not mention that, but, it's something that I often think is on the mind of those who talk about the failure of the church. While they may not say it in conversation, it's my opinion, that it is in their thinking. But, no problem, I realize you did not mention it. Was not saying you did mention it, and I'm not saying you think that way. But rather, that's what I think is in the background of these discussions.
Finally, thanks for "Principles: Love God and love one another.
Effectiveness: Go and make disciples." Great encouragment.
Again, thank you for the dialogue. It's a joy. Bob
Mike, "awesome" back at you my brother.
In my own understanding, Lord Jesus is what the OT is all about. That is, that everything in the entire OT in one way or another speaks of Jesus Christ.
Jesus said concerning the OT Scriptures,
Joh 5:39* “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.
Thank You Mike....
A pastor friend of mine when trying to emphasize the balance between the Old and the New Testaments was fond of saying “The New is in the Old concealed, the Old is in the New revealed.” It’s a charming little mnemonic device, but I do think it has some truth to it. The Bible encourages us to look for wisdom as if it is more valuable than gold. There is, however, a concept in this blog that makes me do a double-take. It was that the “natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God.” I’m not sure the Apostle is talking about the unsaved person and their understanding of God. My view is that there is carnality in all of us. The “natural man” is that part of us that is out of sync with the Spirit of God. It’s not that “we” understand and “they” do not. It is more like parts of me understand God and other parts of me do not. Romans 6:19 offers a hint of this reasoning when it says “I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness.” Maybe I’m just being picky, but it seems that we are to take the beam from our own eye first.
Dan, as to the natural man, and your "not being sure Paul is talking about the unsaved person" and so on...Dan, can you take another look there in Cor, the 2nd Chapter, and look at the context, and then go into the 3rd Chapter where Paul talks about the carnal man.
In my reading, and studying, most commentators would say that there are three types of people listed in this section. The natural, or unsaved person, the spiritual or saved person, and then the carnal believer.
In fact, if you look a little earlier in 1st Cor 2, I think you will see that it is spiritual understanding that is being talked about, where people either have it, or do not.
As to there being carnality in all of us, yes, the flesh or the carnal part of a saved person is indeed there, and will be there till we see the Lord face to face. We do not have to be carnal, we can walk in the spirit and so on.
Dan, here is a question for you.....Do you believe that an unsaved person can understand the things of God, or are they dead, blind, and without understanding?
The Bible does of course speak of the saved and the unsaved, the two divisions within mankind.
Dan, if you were to do a simple, quick little study through Rom, 1st Cor, Eph, and look for the different ways people are described before being saved, and after, I think you would honestly have to rethink what you are thinking here.
For example read Eph 4:17 and following, where Paul makes the distinction between the unsaved, and the saved.
Let me know what you think Dan.
Dan, on a personal note, would you be open to sharing your conversion story with us, such as when, how, by what means, what happened, etc, etc....
When you were born again?
Thanks Dan, hope you have a restful sleep. Look forward to your responses. Bob
Wow Good stuff here. I'm so lost it isnt' even funny, but I do know what my next read will be!
This is my perspetive on the Testaments of the Bible. Anyone take 10th grade chemistry? Synergy? Yea, I think they work together to make the other one more effective. Taken alone,they mean nothing. That is why it is the BIBLE.
I view the Old Testament as foundation, the New Testament as a "change" in how we view life, God, and relationships. But without one, it would be impossible to teach the other. Still think the 10 commandments rock, but prefer the sermon on the mount better....more explanation.
Dan, may I ask on a personal level again, if you would share with us your view of the Bible, as being the inspired Word of God, from front to back, without error etc, etc......or do you have a view that is somewhat less then that.......?
Also, as one of the other bloggers had shared about the formation of his thinking and so on, and what influenced him.......I'm wondering if you can share with us, who are the major authors in your life that have influenced you regarding the views you are expressing on the blog.
I hope you don't mind the questions. It would just be of help to me, to gain a perspective and get some context on the views you hold.
If you are not comfortable sharing those things, no problem, but just thought I would ask.
Thanks for your consideration Dan. Bob
Bob, I’m not sure that sharing my credentials is the loving way to approach how believers should dialogue. Since Corinthians seems to be a reference from which you draw much of your theology, I would like to challenge you to reread the first chapter of the first book. In it, Bob, the Apostle argues that Christ is not divided. To my mind, allowing one Christian to classify another by their learning or their experiences cuts across the teaching of our Lord, and is warned against in the writings of both Peter and Paul. I know it is a subtle point, but I’ve seen it divide Christians too often. At Crossroads we have those on staff who are “theologically trained” and those who are not. Both types are respected and revered for their leadership capabilities. It is a team that God has put together. I think it is enough to say I am a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, his work on the cross and his resurrection from the dead.
Now, Bob, please do not allow me to intimidate you with my point of view. If you would like to exhibit your credentials, please feel free to do so. I don’t think this blog will judge you for that. I’m not sure that anyone will be impressed, but I am quite sure they won’t really care.
Dan, thanks for the response. Wasn't trying to "classify, or divide" was just curious. Bob
Dan, just as a p.s to my last response.
The request was as follows..........
Dan, may I ask on a personal level again, if you would share with us your view of the Bible, as being the inspired Word of God, from front to back, without error etc, etc......or do you have a view that is somewhat less then that.......?
Also, as one of the other bloggers had shared about the formation of his thinking and so on, and what influenced him.......I'm wondering if you can share with us, who are the major authors in your life that have influenced you regarding the views you are expressing on the blog.
I hope you don't mind the questions. It would just be of help to me, to gain a perspective and get some context on the views you hold.
If you are not comfortable sharing those things, no problem, but just thought I would ask.
So, I was not asking for credentials, but rather just the questions listed above. They were asked in the same spirit that you recently asked me a question. You said my answers might help you understand where I was coming from and so on. So, same kind of thing here.
Not a problem Dan. God bless you. Bob
Dan, I am glad you stayed clear of answering this question on the doctrine of the Bible and the authors that influence you. I was on my way to Panera to comment on this blog, encouraging you not to answer it. When I got to Panera I realized you beat me to it. Your response was similar to the one I would have given.
Bob, it seems to me that answering questions of the doctrine of the Bible and authors that influence us, and ones similar to that, will only serve to "classify and divide", like Dan already said, and to tempt us to place others in camps and use immature names like liberal or moderate, as well as to judge. It is also a temptation for us to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Eating of this tree is never good.
Bob, I know the scriptures regarding the importance of correct doctrine, so there is no need to place them in a response to my comment. It is easy to say that you are curious, but the temptation is to allow your heart to classify, judge, divide, label, etc.
Sorry, I wasn't quite done.
Bob, this temptation is not directed only to you, but to all of us. We are all tempted to do it. I will admit that I have done this many times throughout my life, but trying hard not to these days.
Thanks for reading and considering my thoughts and comments.
Good morning Scott. I'm a little taken back by your response. But appreciate you sharing it.
So, then, If I'm understanding you all, then in our discussions and expressions of thought, and asking of questions, it would be out of bounds to ask if someone believed in the authority of Scripture. Because that would tend to temp us to classify someone.
May I ask why it's somehow improper to acknowledge one's view of Scripture, and then say of that person, they hold such and such a view of Scripture? I honestly don't understand that Scott.
Aren't we all talking about the Bible, and isn't everyone here either quoting, or passing on what they have received from some source or another?
I'm also a little bewildered to take your "non revealing approach" and compare that with the many and consistent expressions and specific questions about what God's Will is, How can we be more effective, how can we know the meaning of certain things etc, etc. In other words, in the "conversation" that goes on in the body of Christ, I'm pretty convinced from my understanding, that seeking answers, seekers, questions are the main fare of the day. So, honestly surprised that it would be out of bounds to answer the questions I asked.
I'm not sure I agree that if you answered a question I asked, that you can assume I would automatically become less pleasing to the Lord by classifying you and dividing from you.
As to placing anyone in a camp. Well, I do know that the Lord wants us to be of one mind, and to walk in unity and love, but, the underlying reality is that we are all coming from camps, groups, associations, affiliations, and they are not bad or sinful in and of themselves, but rather, it's how we conduct ourselves that matters. I don't think it's fair Scott to assume that someone is going to judge another etc, that is to put them down, but understanding where they are coming from does not seem sinful to me.
As to it being easy to say that I am curious, well, I can sure let my curiosity lead me to sin, judging etc, no doubt about that Scott.
So, may I ask this question. Is it out of bounds to tell on this blog books we recommend, or quote authors that we are reading and so on?
I'm not being coy here, but am just trying to play out to it's logical conclusion, this exclusionary tone to the posts this morning.
Scott, sorry I missed you at Panera. Would have enjoyed seeing you. May God bless your day my brother. Love you, Bob
Bob, very subtle and very good reasoning, but I think you are missing the larger point. Questions are not “innocent” just because they are questions. It’s what they do in the minds of those who are processing them. We are our brother’s keeper. Satan asked Eve “Hath God said…?” He was, of course, also trying to play things out to their logical conclusion. But his “logical conclusion” brought on the Fall of Mankind. The Pharisees were always asking Jesus questions, and he said of them “…except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” We must always be on guard, as Scott says, not to label in such a manner so as to destroy or divide. It’s a perennial temptation now that we are so closely aligned with sin.
Dan, honestly, what do you think here? Pun intended, but, "Do you think Paul should not have asked this question"?
Ac 19:3* And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
Does the rest of the story in the chapter show that by asking this question, that it did something harmful to their minds?
In fact Dan, in thinking about your responses here, I was thinking, isn't this entire blog pretty much people asking questions, and seeking answers.
I heard a humorous acronym today, BLOG....
Bible Logic Only Gentlemen
Anyways, to use Satan's question to Eve, as an example to keep us from asking questions, is pretty way out there in my own thinking Dan.
Furthermore didn't the Lord Himself in both the Old and NT ask question over and over.........
Mt 9:28* And when He had come into the house, the blind men came to Him. And Jesus said to them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?” They said to Him, “Yes, Lord.”
Joh 9:35* Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of God?”
Joh 11:26* “And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Ac 26:27* “King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you do believe.”
Back to Satan and his question to Eve......We know of course that satan is a liar, a thief, and a murderer.
While I don't know you Dan, I would not assign those characteristics to you, or to Scott or anyone else on the blog.
I was also thinking about the Sopocratic approach to conversation, and ran across the following......
The Socratic Method (or Method of Elenchus or Socratic Debate), named after the Classical Greek philosopher Socrates, is a form of philosophical inquiry in which the questioner explores the implications of others' positions, to stimulate rational thinking and illuminate ideas.[1] This dialectical method often involves an oppositional discussion in which the defense of one point of view is pitted against another; one participant may lead another to contradict himself in some way, strengthening the inquirer's own point.
Anyways, God bless you today Dan.
On the subject of judgment... let's clear something up. I'm sooooo sick and tired of Christians playing the "Don't judge me card". Let's be very honest... when someone says that we are not to judge (in reference to believers) it often involves someone with a critical spirit (the hypocrite) and/or someone that wants to avoid any form of accountability. The truth is that Christ is not saying we have not the right to judge... even though the Father is the ultimate judge. I believe Jesus is speaking to the spirit in which correction is supposed to be given. I also believe there is a huge difference between believer and non-believer. I'm sorry, but if you say you are a Christ follower than you are wide open for judgment... better terms would be rebuke, correction, and encouragement. When I consider my own responsibility as a minster of the Gospel, I'm reminded that in 2 Timothy 4 I'm called to "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction." Ephesians 4:15 shows me what Spirit I must be careful to maintain. Matthew 18 gives a course of action for conflict resolution. James 5:20 is a call to care for the lost and not just throw up my hands and say "you want to sin go for it! It's your life and I can't judge you." We are called to do this all in love of course which is the tricky part. Our sinful nature creeps in and we do indeed fall into the realm of original sin. "I know this truth so I'm better than you. God-like." We are however called to test the spirits and discern... look at the fruit... and as 2 Timothy 4 continues we find a clear description of where we are today... itching ears looking for any combination of culture and religion that will appease the desire to not "make waves" and feel "comfortable". It's much more appealing to talk about God's love than to talk about dead growth being trimmed away and cast into the fire. Both are needed for a balanced understanding of scripture and for spiritual maturity. Just some thoughts...
Bob, I am not suggesting that all questions are evil in their intent. What I was saying is that we need to be careful that the questions we ask are not of such a nature as to be divisive.
Mike, I was not pulling the "don't judge me card." When I was commenting with Bob, I was referring to the temptation to have a critical, better than attitude, my interpretation to the Bible is the right way and everyone else is wrong, spirit. So, I was referring to the proper understanding of the term judgment. Thanks for the commentary, though.
Mike and Bob, I was warning that we all don't fall into the judgmental spirit. It is easy to do. As a pastor, I have seen what happens in this city. I have been a recipient myself. I have also been guilty of doing it... and it drives me to my knees in repentance. It is sad. Labels, camps, division, etc. That is what I was referring to. Mike, I understood the word correctly.
Bob, I would rather not get into specifics about this issue and why I would caution us all. This blog might not be an appropriate place for it. However, if you insist, I will share it with you.
I've read a few posts in the last couple of days here and have become saddened to see "Christians" using the bible as a sword to justify their interpretations amongst one another. It appears as an abuse against the Holy Spirit. As a relatively new saved soul, I hope to never become so terribly self absorbed to use the bible to judge my brothers and sisters, claiming my view as right over any others. I will continue to believe that as I read and follow the bible according to my own understanding, the Holy Spirit will continue to guide me in my life, and with the power of our living God. I pray to God that I will never forget He is a truly living God, and if I have any questions regarding sin, or any other confusing items in the bible, I would ask Him and not a fellow blogger. And I pray that the answers will be revealed to me by Him through the tremendous power of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Post a Comment