Forgiveness

[davo]

To forgive someone presupposes that that someone has offended you.

Question: Can you forgive that one even if they refuse to accept your forgiveness – seeing as "forgiveness" is in your power to give. So, if you deem someone to be "forgiven!" are they indeed forgiven; is forgiveness affected towards them regardless of their personal response to it? i.e., whether they accept it or not.

If one answers "No they are not forgiven" – then this needs explaining how it is that they are not forgiven.

If one answers "Yes they are forgiven" – then how is it that God cannot have ministered the selfsame forgiveness through Jesus Christ toward humanity. Does humanity's "apparent" refusal, be it in ignorance or arrogance, nullify the work of the Cross in drawing "all" to Himself? [Jn 12:32]. What did Paul say...

Read more HERE (http://pantelism.com/Forgiveness.htm) -- then perhaps we can discuss it more below:

[Infinite Grace]

Davo,
I am with you on this one. I asked a Romanist friend once when she talked about her priest telling her that she needs to forgive if the person that has offended her must first ASK for her forgiveness. Her answer was 'no' so I asked her why then God demands that we ask for forgiveness before he will in fact forgive us. She had no answer other than to back pedal on her original answer. Of course, she needed to ask her priest...

I also have had some questions in my mind concerning this whole idea of forgiveness anyway. Keep in mind two NT examples: 1) Jesus says in the model prayer that we are to ask to be forgiven as we have forgiven others. Jesus goes on to say that if you do not forgive your neighbor, then God will not forgive you, 2) Jesus also tells the story of the man who is forgiven an inordinate amount of money, then fails to forgive his brother who owes him a mere dollar. The man is thrown in prison until the whole debt is paid.

With these two points made, what does that mean for Christians? If Christians do not forgive, does God not forgive them? This would mean that they were no longer Christians, by the definition of what it is to be a Christian, and it also sets up the problem for the Reformed Protestant in that WORKS are involved.

Of course if forgiveness is untied from its harness to an endless duration of blessing in "heaven" then the problem becomes less severe.

anyone following me on this?

[Paige]

Yes Ed, I'm following. The last article I wrote caused me to think about the very same thing below.


If Christians do not forgive, does God not forgive them? This would mean that they were no longer Christians, by the definition of what it is to be a Christian, and it also sets up the problem for the Reformed Protestant in that WORKS are involved.

There is a school of thought out there that we're 'saved' one minute and damned the next, all depending on what 'we' do in any given situation. I'd be interested to know how this is answered.

Paige

P.S. I'm in agreement w/ you too, Davo!

[ozark]

Ed,

I have wondered the same thing. There are a lot of possibilities. Some of this could be specific to first century Israel as some of Jesus sayings obviously were. For example, He said that the person who lived by the sword would die by the sword. Some try to apply this to everyone in the military. First of all, that is quite ridiculous. How many for example in the U.S. military who take up arms actually die in battle? Yet, in that day, all who did take up the sword against Rome indeed died by the sword.

Likewise, those who would not forgive faced the wrath of God in a way that was peculiar to that day. To not forgive your enemies in that day could end up with the death by the sword mentioned above. Also, those who would not forgive were more likely to hold fast to the Old Covenant world that was passing away. To enter into the age that was coming required not only that one accept God’s forgiveness but also that one forgive as God was forgiving. To deny forgiveness to one’s brother was to deny the grace of God.

Another possibility for Christians today is that if we do not forgive, we are denied the experience of God’s forgiveness for ourselves. That does not negate the reality of God’s forgiveness, just its experience. Davo’s work on belief and salvation might have an application here?

[Infinite Grace]

Doug,
I am so with you on the first century application. Even the idea of telling Christians to love their enemies, we so often assume in our day that "our enemies" are those unbelieving folks out there, you know, those evil-doers - whores, whoremongers, homosexuals, idolators, adulterers, etc. Truth be told, the Church's enemy in the first century was God's enemy, those who denied the grace of God - the old covenant Pharisees and Judaizers.

To apply this to our day, we are to "love our neighbor," this most likely applying to those "sinners" like the rest of us. We are still under obligation to "love our enemies" but need to understand that they are the same folks who lived in Christ's day - the Pharisees.

Tough one now - wouldn't this include our self-righteous buddies who accuse us of wrong-doing for emphasizing GRACE - we all know who they are. Are we not called to love them, as God loves them? They are enemies of the gospel, for they lay upon men's souls requirements that they themselves are unable to meet. Yet, we are told to love them.

Yes, I think it is important to speak the truth in love, but we must also be careful (as I have not been in the past) to hold our tongues concerning the opinions of others. Although it is difficult, I find that being here at Talk-Grace, I am more able to live in a gracious attitude towards others. I hope that we are all feeling the same...

[davo]

Another possibility for Christians today is that if we do not forgive, we are denied the experience of God’s forgiveness for ourselves. That does not negate the reality of God’s forgiveness, just its experience.

Yes Doug, I think this is hitting close to the mark on that issue -- when we know the good to do [to forgive] but hold back on it, it then robs the peace of God from not only being experienced, both theirs and ours.

Things just don't "sit right" when there is that something gnawing away at us -- and this is because this area of forgiveness is indelibly tired up in "relationship". With those we care little about it is hard for "offences to sit", BUT NOT SO with others more important to us. Which just goes to show HOW MUCH this whole issue of forgiveness rests in the heart -- and getting back to the essence of the article -- God has the bigger heart :clap2:

Activating an attitude of acceptance helps keep this conduit of forgiveness open -- something no doubt we all try to work on.

[ozark]

Ed,

I think that is a very good point. Who turned out to be the enemy of God in Jesus’ day must have been astonishing. I was reading a little about the tax collectors in the first century. We really don’t understand why people hated them so. They, of course, worked for Rome or the Herods. That was bad enough, but they also had the right to use extreme means to collect their taxes. They could torture either the man of the house, or they could torture his family and force him to watch. They could take away a person’s land, force him into indebted slavery, or even call down the wrath of Rome on an entire village. Probably all tax collectors were not this cruel, but some obviously were. Yet, Jesus dined with these folks and even called a tax collector as one of the twelve.

Jesus also had a disciple called Simon the Zealot. I assume since he was a Zealot that he supported the violent overthrow of Rome. Wouldn’t you be afraid that Matthew and Simon would kill each other? LOL, talk about the power of forgiveness.

[Amie]

Howdee all,

Ya know, my Dad used to often make it a point to tell me "The Lord's Prayer is out of date because the Kingdom has come". Perhaps then, the "trespass" applied to that day as well. Do we sin today? I realize that we make choices that are not the best - no one is perfect personally. What does it mean to be "perfect" like God though? Didn't the work of Christ cover all of that so that God no longer sees us as sinners and sees us as perfect? What trespass is left to forgive today now that the law is fulfilled?

I understand the "live by the sword, die by the sword" to be referring to the law. If they lived by the law, they would die by that law. If they held a person accountable by the law (hence not affording them the forgiveness of God given them), they would also be accountable (because "all" were guilty).

I wonder sometimes if the bible story wasn't a journey for God as well. Since forgiveness is really about loosing someone from their accountability by loosing ourselves from the negative emotions attached to what that someone did - could it be that God healed as well?.. That he felt sad about the choices of humanity, and that His anger ("wrath") sprung forth from that?

Amie

PS :)- Wouldn't God's forgiveness then be synonymous with His accepting us as we are?

[Infinite Grace]

Amie wrote: Wouldn't God's forgiveness then be synonymous with His accepting us as we are?

You see, here is where I have a problem. If forgiveness has to do with God's accepting us, then how is it that he could have said in the first century that those who didn't forgive wouldn't be forgiven? Forgiveness seems to me to be something irrespective of "salvation" or "redemption."

BTW, I agree that, as far as the law is concerned, there is no more sin. However, I don't think that it is wrong to say that we are sinners, in the sense that we do harm to ourselves and others due to things like unforgiveness.

I don't know. I'm just trying to get this straight in my head.

[Barry]

My take if ya don't mind:
It is the ego man of the terminal generation that would not be forgiven if they did not forgive. They themselves were already forgiven in the spirit through the cross (forgive them for they know not what they do). It would take repentance (change of mind) for them to "see" it.
Barry

[Amie]

If forgiveness has to do with God's accepting us, then how is it that he could have said in the first century that those who didn't forgive wouldn't be forgiven?

That brings to mind the "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. They were forgiven, but didn't accept/receive to themselves that forgiveness.


It is the ego man of the terminal generation that would not be forgiven if they did not forgive. They themselves were already forgiven in the spirit through the cross (forgive them for they know not what they do).

If they were saved "as though through fire" (because they already had forgiveness/acceptance though they wouldn't receive it), then it would have been the old creation that would have been 'cooked off' so to speak - I think that's the same thing Barry is saying? Ultimately, the "new man" or "spiritual man" would have been all that was left of them.

I don't think that Jesus was threatening them by telling them that they would not be forgiven, I think he was forewarning them about the consequences of their choices. It's like our telling our children that if they drink and drive, they will crash (if we knew for sure they were crashing). We wouldn't tell them that if they drink and drive, we'll crash into them - know what I mean?

I could be way off and if I am, I pray for the patience of others :)

Amie

[Barry]

If they were saved "as though through fire" (because they already had forgiveness/acceptance though they wouldn't receive it), then it would have been the old creation that would have been 'cooked off' so to speak - I think that's the same thing Barry is saying? Ultimately, the "new man" or "spiritual man" would have been all that was left of them.

I don't think that Jesus was threatening them by telling them that they would not be forgiven, I think he was forewarning them about the consequences of their choices. It's like our telling our children that if they drink and drive, they will crash (if we knew for sure they were crashing). We wouldn't tell them that if they drink and drive, we'll crash into them - know what I mean?

I could be way off and if I am, I pray for the patience of others :)

Amie

I agree Amie about the Old Creature the ego man being destroyed in his standing.
I'm still seeing that unless you forgive as a warning (in this first century setting). But in the context that they would not forgive unless they saw forgiveness through repentance. However once they or if they were granted repentance for the forgiveness of sins (to enter into that realm of the spirit) then they would start forgiving others. In this category then they had growth issues. They were admonished to forgive without the gun to head of the others.
Any thoughts?
Barry

[Bill]

Hey folks,

Have any of you read a book called, "The Gospel Solution" by Tom Weaver? It is not Preterist by any means but it is about understanding the "hard sayings" of the gospels. He presents these for principles of what he calls "Transitionalism."

Principle #1 Transitional
The ministry of Jesus is lived under the old covenant. While it prepared people for the coming new covenant, it was primarily directed towards those still living under the law.

Principle #2 Conviction
The purpose in the Lord's teaching ministry was to bring his people, the Jews, to a conviction of sin so that they could grasp their need for a savior and be ready for grace.

Principle #3 Evocative (i.e. to call anew) Jesus meant to evoke (or even provoke) a response from his audience rather than just to clarify his meaning. The significance of what he said was often meant to dawn on his hearers with unexpected and subtle power.

Principle #4 Interwoven Context
Any single passage with the synoptic Gospels should be viewed and understood in the light of the larger context of Scripture
surrounding it. Adjacent passages are often interwoven together to interpret one another.

I thought that lots of what he said was very helpful and I wondered if any of you had any thoughts on this.

Bill

[davo]

Bill that sure sounds interesting -- I checked it out over on Amazon and there are some interesting comments. What's your take on it, have you read it?

[Bill]

Yes, I read the book a few years ago. I think it's helpful because it points out the transitional nature of the gospels. We, as Preterists, recognize the transitional nature of the period from the cross to 70ad. We understand the transitional nature of many of the sayings of the post gospel writings. Weaver does the same sort of thing with the gospels. Most of what Jesus said was limited to a certain audience or to the time period before the cross and yet many today take the words of Jesus as if he were speaking directly to the world today. Weaver points this out and gives good explanations (to me at least) of what Jesus meant and why He said some of the things He did.

I think you would find it worth reading.

Bill

[Paige]

Well, this topic has hit home again recently...

I've read some statements recently that give rise to the idea that forgiveness is absolutely not possible unless it takes place between 2 parties. IOW, it is impossible to forgive someone that has not asked for your forgiveness.

I'd really like to hear what you all think about this.

My take? I believe it is possible to forgive someone who has not come to me and asked for forgiveness. If I have let someone know that they hurt me, but they are unwilling to acknowledge it, it seems the only person I'm hurting is myself if I stew on this until they do right by me.

Aren't I better off in releasing them, forgiving them, and moving forward?

I can truly forgive and not wish harm to someone who has hurt me. I can even seek their good in life. These things are possible when God has shed His love abroad in our hearts, IMO.

This brings me to another issue. I'm finding that many are interpreting the events of AD 70 as an outpouring of God's wrath. Is this scriptural? I keep coming back to Jesus' lament over Jerusalem. He says that He wanted to gather them together as a hen gathers her chicks, but they weren't willing. When I read these words, I am reminded that Jesus said He did what He saw His Father doing, and that if they had seen Him, they had seen the Father also. This tells me that Jesus and the Father are One; and therefore, Jesus is not the big softie, and the Father a big meanie (know what I mean?) The Father is lamenting over Jerusalem through Jesus...Not scheming, plotting, and fantasizing about AD 70.

What would we say to someone who interprets AD 70 as God "lashing out in anger?"

Paige

[mparkes]

Hi Paige
I suppose you could look at the seige against Jerusalem as God's wrath but I am growing a litle tired of trying to read God into these events. It seems like it was the Romans who were lashing out in anger. Of course you could say that God was using the Romans, but that angle just seems to perpetuate the "old Adam" viewpoint, ie God over against man.

I sometimes wonder if our attempts to interpret these past events as God vs. man, serves only to prolong the illusion of our old life outside of the Father, rather than letting it all go and discovering the plain reading of these events. Nothing wrong with trying to understand the events around AD70 as the final wrap-up of the old age, I suppose, but I am less and less inclined to try and interpret it all as some form of God's wrath.

Perhaps the wrath was exacerbated by their own attempt to cling to the old ways, and they brought it on themselves. By holding to the law as their validation of a self-righeousness, they were reaping their own judgment. They brought it to a fever pitch. But was it "God" administering it? I don't know.

For example, if you believe that you "have" to go to church (or tithe or pray or study your bible) in order to be reckoned righteous before God, and then you abandon these practices, and then feel guilty and ashamed, is that the wrath of God being poured out on your soul? Seems somewhat self-inflicted if you ask me! :)

Blessings, Mike

For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
(1Th 2:14-16)



This brings me to another issue. I'm finding that many are interpreting the events of AD 70 as an outpouring of God's wrath. Is this scriptural? I keep coming back to Jesus' lament over Jerusalem. He says that He wanted to gather them together as a hen gathers her chicks, but they weren't willing. When I read these words, I am reminded that Jesus said He did what He saw His Father doing, and that if they had seen Him, they had seen the Father also. This tells me that Jesus and the Father are One; and therefore, Jesus is not the big softie, and the Father a big meanie (know what I mean?) The Father is lamenting over Jerusalem through Jesus...Not scheming, plotting, and fantasizing about AD 70.

What would we say to someone who interprets AD 70 as God "lashing out in anger?"

Paige

[Paige]

Yes, that seems to be where my thoughts are on this topic, too. So much of how God comes over in scripture can be transference (I hope I'm using that term correctly). Take the Genesis account of the fall. Some people read it and assume God is angry. Some read it and assume God is sorrowful. How much of how we are seeing the story is "us"?

Paige

[Barry]

Concerning the destruction of the old covenant man:

Is it possible that God reserves the right to manifest wrath to the person that we think we are?
Romans 1:18-32 (I interpret this as old creation, "what has been made")
Barry

[Paige]

Excellent point, Barry!

God knows who we "think" we are, and God knows who we truly are.

Paige

[Barry]

IMHO, hence God's "apparent" duality.
Love does not keep a record of wrongs suffered. (An egocentric personage does).
Just a thought.
Barry

[Amie]

Perhaps the wrath was exacerbated by their own attempt to cling to the old ways, and they brought it on themselves. By holding to the law as their validation of a self-righeousness, they were reaping their own judgment. They brought it to a fever pitch. But was it "God" administering it? I don't know.

Ephesians 5
5 For be knowing this, that every fornicator, or unclean one, or covetous one, who is an idolater, has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for through these things the wrath of God comes on the sons of disobedience.
7 Then do not become partakers with them;

The "cup" is metaphor for inheritance in the OT. IE, "my cup runneth over" (Psalms 23:5), "I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling" (Zech 12:2), "I will take the cup of salvation" (Psalms 116:13), "Nor shall they give them the cup of comfort to drink for one's father or one's mother" (Jer 16:7).

The wrath of God was brought "against" the nation of Israel more than just 70Ad historically. Over and over again God tells Israel that they are praying to the wrong gods for deliverance. If they had prayed to him, and when they prayed to him, he delivered them.

It seems that apostate Israel in the day of Christ will have done nothing any differently than before. They will have continued praying to the wrong god.

If they did not ask for the presence of God, the presence of God wasn't there -- at least per protection. Who would have been there to protect Jerusalem from the invasion from Rome if God was not found in that place?
I think that God may have been angry, that they chose the fate that they chose. And they tasted that wrath via their choice. It must be like when we watch our children make bad choices. Reality is reality but that doesn't mean that we have to be happy with it.

Those rejecting God (blasphemy of the Holy Spirit) will have drank from the cup of "the wine of the wrath of God". It's metaphorical language describing their inheritance.

Without ever having to read into it, there are clear biblical accounts of God being angry (it uses those words) and that his wrath is the result thereof. I think that understanding the intent of the writer helps with our reading our own thinking into things.

Like "hate". That was not a literal and abstract emotion either by the intent of the author, but an action which would repell or reject. Interesting, is it not?

God's forgiveness did absolve the "elect" from the consequence that apostate Israel would suffer, but in what way?

Amie

[Paige]

God's forgiveness did absolve the "elect" from the consequence that apostate Israel would suffer, but in what way?

If I'm understanding your question correctly, then I would say the eyes of the "elect" were opened, and they were able to see what was coming down the proverbial pike.

I would say that coming out of the OC afforded one the ability to be transformed from the natural to the spiritual. As a spiritual man, there was a whole new understanding in God's word. Those who stayed under the mindset of the natural man, missed it all.

Paige

[Amie]

Paige,

Sounds like the whole "saved to serve" thing, as well as the blessings that participation/awareness brings. Jesus told the sons of Zebedee, "Indeed you shall drink My cup, and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized" (Mt 21:13), the "elect" would experience the tribulations and the entire world was "kept for fire". So they suffered too, albeit differently.

Do you think that the story in Daniel of the fiery furnace is related in any way?

I'm thinking too that God forgave them and that they would not receive it. How could that have been a reality then, and not now? I have my own thoughts on that but am really interested in yours if you don't mind :).

Amie

[Paige]

I'm thinking too that God forgave them and that they would not receive it. How could that have been a reality then, and not now?

I'm not so sure that it is not a reality even now. I do think that there are some who are very hardened, even to the point that when told that God has forgiven them, it doesn't bring on a spirit of gratitude, but rather a spirit of indignation.

I heard someone say the other day that just as Jesus said the kingdom of God is within you, so also did this person believe that the kingdom of hell could be within as well. That rang true to me in that I do believe we have the capability of creating our own "hell", so to speak, by the choices that we make. If I choose to carry around bitterness, then I'm choosing to miss out on the peace and joy that relationship with God brings. If I choose to be self-righteous, or choose to cling to "law" over grace; I choose to miss quite a bit of God's very best for me, IMO.

Again, I hope I properly understand what you were asking.

Paige

[Amie]

Again, I hope I properly understand what you were asking.

I reckon if there were a breakdown, we'd work it out, lol!

What consequences did apostate Israel have for not receiving/accepting God's forgiveness?

How is that different than the consequences that we experience now? (If you see them as different at all)

Amie

[Amie]

Also --

Using the biblical example, was forgiveness absolved consequence?

[Paige]

What consequences did apostate Israel have for not receiving/accepting God's forgiveness?


I'm thinking they missed out on inheritance, and also they suffered through the end of the system they placed their faith and trust in (shame).


How is that different than the consequences that we experience now? (If you see them as different at all)


Not entirely sure, so I'm going to have to think on that.


Using the biblical example, was forgiveness absolved consequence?

I don't think so. Paul knew he was forgiven, yet referred to himself as "chief of sinners". After his conversion, people still remembered him for what he stood for and who he had been previously. There wasn't an instantaneous lifting of consequences (that I'm seeing, anyway).

Paige

[Amie]

I'm thinking they missed out on inheritance, and also they suffered through the end of the system they placed their faith and trust in (shame).

They missed receiving the inheritance and would receive into themselves "the wine of the wrath of God", I agree. Does that mean that they missed the inheritance altogether? We didn't receive the inheritance -- do we have it? Or do we have to receive it to have it? (I think the former)


I don't think so. Paul knew he was forgiven, yet referred to himself as "chief of sinners". After his conversion, people still remembered him for what he stood for and who he had been previously. There wasn't an instantaneous lifting of consequences (that I'm seeing, anyway).

The "tribulations" were the fulfillment of Eve's consequence: suffering in childbirth. It seems to me that apostate Israel experienced the fulfillment, "to dust you shall return".

For a while I have been trying to grasp the concept of the difference between consequence, and punishment. Finally last week, with my hubby's help, I put this together:

A consequence is the logical result of a choice. If that logical result is negative, anything added to that is punishment.

If the house rule is, "You may watch TV when you finish your homework", then the logical result of not finishing the homework, is not watching TV. If we additionally ground them from playstation for not doing their homework, we are punishing them.

I'm thinking that what God told the three in the garden were logical consequences and not punishment. Of course, as is with us, God made the "house rules", therefore, creates the consequences.

It seems to me that among all of the consequences that awareness/participation was the only difference between the elect, and the apostates.

If we also are receiving the inheritance, then it is not accomplished. We come into the awareness that it has been received.

If we also must come into awareness to experience life, then life has not been given to all. We come into the awareness that we have been experiencing life, right?

If we are called into service and are distinct, then all are not in Christ because in Christ there is no distinction. There is no more need for distinction.

I'm not stating that for sake of argument because I know that some might disagree with me. I'm interested in learning from y'all.

That's why I ask, "How is that different than the consequences that we experience now? (If you see them as different at all)" What is the difference? What was accomplished?

If God is in the heart of every human being, do we count ourselves as special because we know the story behind it? Is personal salvation dependent upon a special knowledge? I just don't think so.

Biblically, what did God's forgiveness mean if not absolution? As far as I can see, it benefits the forgiver and does not pardon the forgivee.

Amie

[Barry]

They missed receiving the inheritance and would receive into themselves "the wine of the wrath of God", I agree. Does that mean that they missed the inheritance altogether? We didn't receive the inheritance -- do we have it? Or do we have to receive it to have it? (I think the former)



The "tribulations" were the fulfillment of Eve's consequence: suffering in childbirth. It seems to me that apostate Israel experienced the fulfillment, "to dust you shall return".

For a while I have been trying to grasp the concept of the difference between consequence, and punishment. Finally last week, with my hubby's help, I put this together:

A consequence is the logical result of a choice. If that logical result is negative, anything added to that is punishment.

If the house rule is, "You may watch TV when you finish your homework", then the logical result of not finishing the homework, is not watching TV. If we additionally ground them from playstation for not doing their homework, we are punishing them.

I'm thinking that what God told the three in the garden were logical consequences and not punishment. Of course, as is with us, God made the "house rules", therefore, creates the consequences.

It seems to me that among all of the consequences that awareness/participation was the only difference between the elect, and the apostates.

If we also are receiving the inheritance, then it is not accomplished. We come into the awareness that it has been received.

If we also must come into awareness to experience life, then life has not been given to all. We come into the awareness that we have been experiencing life, right?

If we are called into service and are distinct, then all are not in Christ because in Christ there is no distinction. There is no more need for distinction.

I'm not stating that for sake of argument because I know that some might disagree with me. I'm interested in learning from y'all.

That's why I ask, "How is that different than the consequences that we experience now? (If you see them as different at all)" What is the difference? What was accomplished?

If God is in the heart of every human being, do we count ourselves as special because we know the story behind it? Is personal salvation dependent upon a special knowledge? I just don't think so.

Biblically, what did God's forgiveness mean if not absolution? As far as I can see, it benefits the forgiver and does not pardon the forgivee.

Amie

Some strange thoughts from your fiendly nut case: LOL

They missed the inheritance for who they thought they were. The self of the self defined had no inheritance. That "ego" was crushed and shamed.
They experienced the wrath of God for who they thought they were in their self defining image.

I don't think we have an inheritance. We are part of their inheritance. Our oneness.
Those that did not inherit came and worshiped at their feet. (IE, Saved from their self defining roles though it be through fire, and glorying in God's glory manifested in the first-fruits).

The birth was the bringing forth of God defining self from the natural to the spiritual.

The difference between a punishment and a consequence is within the revelation of the self. Consequence does not define self unless consequence is upon the self defined self which is punishment to the self. LOL ROLF, Can't write anymore laughing too hard LOL ROFL.

Also got to get ready for work.

Barry

[Paige]

If we also must come into awareness to experience life, then life has not been given to all. We come into the awareness that we have been experiencing life, right?

Awareness makes sense of the life given. Without awareness, confusion reigns, IMO.


If we are called into service and are distinct, then all are not in Christ because in Christ there is no distinction. There is no more need for distinction.

Would you also say there is no more need for service?


If God is in the heart of every human being, do we count ourselves as special because we know the story behind it? Is personal salvation dependent upon a special knowledge? I just don't think so.

What are you equating as personal salvation? I see a distinction between a self-centered life, and a God-centered life. I see personal salvation as key to unlocking the latter and leaving behind the former.

Paige

[Amie]

Awareness makes sense of the life given. Without awareness, confusion reigns, IMO.

What awareness makes sense of the life given in your opinion though?


Would you also say there is no more need for service?

Not to the same purpose. Certainly service has nothing to do with religious knowledge, but heart knowledge which everyone has.


What are you equating as personal salvation? I see a distinction between a self-centered life, and a God-centered life. I see personal salvation as key to unlocking the latter and leaving behind the former.

If you are defining "God centered" as "love centered" then we're on the same page.

Amie

[Amie]

The birth was the bringing forth of God defining self from the natural to the spiritual.

That has been accomplished whether folks realize it or not. Can they realize it without knowing the back-story?

Do you think that knowing the back-story makes us special? Or would that be the ego at work?


Consequence does not define self unless consequence is upon the self defined self which is punishment to the self.

I can't believe this... I think that I understood that. LOL! So the conclusion drawn by the self is what made it a punishment for them. They believed that their physical loss defined them as bad and unloved by God. Yep, that's a horrible punishment.. and then living with that thinking on top of the atrocities commited there.. they heaped punishment upon consequence.

That is somewhat what I was saying about labels given to us and our children by other people.. "fat" is only bad if you conclude that. Otherwise, someone has tried to mentally stab you with a rubber knife. (lol!)

Amie

[Barry]

Hi Amie,
"That has been accomplished whether folks realize it or not. Can they realize it without knowing the back-story?

Do you think that knowing the back-story makes us special? Or would that be the ego at work?"

If all are in all then the foot cannot say to the hand "I am more special than you".
Those who have the back story have their function. And it is an important one. But not an ego-centric one.

JMO
Barry

[Paige]

What awareness makes sense of the life given in your opinion though?

On many levels, abundant life does not look like we might envision it through the eyes of the natural. One example: Mother Theresa was one woman who was filled with joy, and knew the meaning of abundant life. How many would "choose" her path of self-denial, and self-sacrifice on behalf of the "untouchables"?

Many times, God brings people into our lives who irritate us. The natural man will seek to separate and avoid, rather than understand and learn. Many times these irritating people are a mirror image of who we have been to others, and can teach us more about ourselves than we ever cared to know. In separating, we avoid the learning (thus, staying in a confused "why is this happening to me?" mode). With awareness comes the realization that in following Christ, we can experience joy through self-sacrifice rather than self-indulgence. We can have abundant life even when surrounded by irritations and less than ideal, physical conditions. We may even learn that the conditions we formerly considered "less than ideal" were really "the most ideal."

Yes, I can agree that God-centered equates to love-centered :)

Paige

[Amie]

Hi Amie,
"That has been accomplished whether folks realize it or not. Can they realize it without knowing the back-story?

Do you think that knowing the back-story makes us special? Or would that be the ego at work?"

If all are in all then the foot cannot say to the hand "I am more special than you".
Those who have the back story have their function. And it is an important one. But not an ego-centric one.

JMO
Barry

Your answer has released a mental burden of mine. Thanks for going there.

Amie

[Amie]

Do you think that what changed is the burning away of the ego-centered works? There is no more gain there -- since spiritual prosperity (even true prosperity) can be seen?

[Barry]

Do you think that what changed is the burning away of the ego-centered works? There is no more gain there -- since spiritual prosperity (even true prosperity) can be seen?

Since consequence is still with us this takes keeps going in this way IMO.

Punishment has ended (historically). Time to heal.


There are IMHO other dynamics at work. Some things are a matter of time.
We are seeing things through present day eyes. So we look at our tendencies as who we are.
These things however will change in time.

Not really the thread for this but IMO technology will affect us greatly in the future.
The printing press, the Internet. Only the beginning.
Instant communication
Actually feeling what others feel
Thinking what others think
ECT.
The need for shame and shadow will disappear.

Our oneness will become much more apparent as technology taps into our very senses and we will change very much how we see ourselves.

This is the tip of the ice burg IMHO.
JMO
Barry

[Amie]

Barry,
I think that this does apply to this thread in that you're imagining a working out of oneness. The newer Christina Aguilara song "Hurt" is about the death of a loved one. By the look of the video, it was her dad. She sings:


Seems like it was yesterday when I saw your face
You told me how proud you were but I walked away
If only I knew what I know today

I would hold you in my arms
I would take the pain away
Thank you for all you've done
Forgive all your mistakes
There's nothing I wouldn't do
To hear your voice again
Sometimes I want to call you but I know you won't be there

I'm sorry for blaming you for everything I just couldn't do
And I've hurt myself by hurting you

Some days I feel broke inside but I won't admit
Sometimes I just want to hide 'cause it's you I miss
You know it's so hard to say goodbye when it comes to this

Would you tell me I was wrong?
Would you help me understand?
Are you looking down upon me?
Are you proud of who I am?
There's nothing I wouldn't do
To have just one more chance
To look into your eyes and see you looking back

I'm sorry for blaming you for everything I just couldn't do
And I've hurt myself by hurting you

If I had just one more day, I would tell you how much that
I've missed you since you've been away

Oh, it's dangerous
It's so out of line to try to turn back time

I'm sorry for blaming you for everything I just couldn't do
And I've hurt myself

By hurting you

To listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbcltLf2VHo

IMO, there is a reason that this song is a hit. It speaks to and from the heart of so many of us. It's learning the hard way, how much one another matters.

What I mean by "gain" per "ego man", is that his wealth and power evidenced that God favored him, in his mind. Mercy was not in his sites and prosperity gained through its' practice, for example. There may have been some alive then who saw it, but it was not at all the prodominate way of seeing things as it is fast becoming today.

It is true wisdom.

To the mind of flesh, forgiveness is the release of a personal debt. To the mind of the spirit, it is the release of the thinking that we were ever owed or could ever be compensated to begin with.

If someone has wronged us, what could they ever do that would take the wrong away? Nothing. We hurt ourselves, through expecting it of them -- through hurting and blaming them.

Amie

[Barry]

Well, this topic has hit home again recently...

I've read some statements recently that give rise to the idea that forgiveness is absolutely not possible unless it takes place between 2 parties. IOW, it is impossible to forgive someone that has not asked for your forgiveness.

I'd really like to hear what you all think about this.

My take? I believe it is possible to forgive someone who has not come to me and asked for forgiveness. If I have let someone know that they hurt me, but they are unwilling to acknowledge it, it seems the only person I'm hurting is myself if I stew on this until they do right by me.

Aren't I better off in releasing them, forgiving them, and moving forward?

I can truly forgive and not wish harm to someone who has hurt me. I can even seek their good in life. These things are possible when God has shed His love abroad in our hearts, IMO.

This brings me to another issue. I'm finding that many are interpreting the events of AD 70 as an outpouring of God's wrath. Is this scriptural? I keep coming back to Jesus' lament over Jerusalem. He says that He wanted to gather them together as a hen gathers her chicks, but they weren't willing. When I read these words, I am reminded that Jesus said He did what He saw His Father doing, and that if they had seen Him, they had seen the Father also. This tells me that Jesus and the Father are One; and therefore, Jesus is not the big softie, and the Father a big meanie (know what I mean?) The Father is lamenting over Jerusalem through Jesus...Not scheming, plotting, and fantasizing about AD 70.

What would we say to someone who interprets AD 70 as God "lashing out in anger?"

Paige

Let's take a fresh look at this if you don't mind.

Forgiveness implies a trespass.
For one to "forgive" biblically speaking is to absolve the other of their "sin" or "offence" against one's self.
This relates directly to worship and sacrifice (IE "alter").

Also the forgiving one another in the transitions of the ages relates to the "forgiveness" in the sacrifice of Christ.
Is it possible that we could move beyond this?

Our goal is not to absolve but to heal.

In general terms, when parts are not working properly we need to address this from productive angles. So far both personally (individually) and collectively we have taken far less than a productive approach.
Because IMO we start with a trespass and a shame attached to that trespass.

The shame that the old covenant man experienced while IMO "never forgotten" does not stand upon the person themselves in continuity but the person of old, the person of "history".


Eze 16:60 Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant.
Eze 16:61 Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, when thou shalt receive thy sisters, thine elder and thy younger: and I will give them unto thee for daughters, but not by thy covenant.
Eze 16:62 And I will establish my covenant with thee; and thou shalt know that I [am] the LORD:
Eze 16:63 That thou mayest remember, and be confounded, and never open thy mouth any more because of thy shame, when I am pacified toward thee for all that thou hast done, saith the Lord GOD.


The old covenant man had nothing more to say. Through fire he is accepted. Nothing that he has said has any relevance in view of acceptance.

When someone cuts you off in traffic what do you say. Well I won't put down here what I say LOL ROFL.

Things naturally go from bad to worse in "offence" mentality. The problem is not "an offence" the problem is "parts" are out of order in need of attention, acceptance and healing. The first step in getting parts back in order is acceptance.

This is not always "possible" on a collective level. Some people are too offencive. Some people should be steered away from. We need personal boundaries and frontiers.
IMHO however acceptance should however be the focus. Knowing that "offence" thinking solves little.

On a personal level:
Those things (those parts) that offend us about ourselves are trying to tell us something. We are not listening.

On a macro level, those people that offend us are trying to say something. We are not listening.
We need our boundaries and frontiers to protect from harm and protect our children and protect others in society.
We cannot solve everyone's problems for sure.
"Offence" thinking however is overall a none productive approach.
It is sectarian in its application. It brings forth wrath.
It's place is in the old age.


Just a few thoughts.
Any thoughts?
Barry

[Amie]

Barry,

Your thoughts on the "offense mentality" are what I was touching on here:


To the mind of flesh, forgiveness is the release of a personal debt. To the mind of the spirit, it is the release of the thinking that we were ever owed or could ever be compensated to begin with.

If someone has wronged us, what could they ever do that would take the wrong away? Nothing. We hurt ourselves, through expecting it of them -- through hurting and blaming them.

#1 When were we ever owed a debt?
#2 Harm cannot be compensated.

To take offense would be to claim both, wouldn't it? (Both, #1 "I am owed" and #2 "I expect compensation")

Amie

[Paige]

I understand the thoughts shared, however, how do you think this plays in what we do and how we live?

Example: I get hit by a drunk driver. I have med. bills and damage to my car. Do I just walk away and not expect compensation? Do I deal with an insurance company (if there is one) to get my med bills paid, and my car fixed? If no insurance, do I ask the driver to take care of these expenses?

I'm trying to make sense of what has been shared on a practical level...

Paige

P.S. All the same questions apply to me should I be the drunk driver, too.

[Amie]

Paige,

You can visibly see in that example that the damage is compensable and that you are owed a debt via your suffering a material loss. Those are matters of law.

If someone murdered your husband, is that compensable and does that someone owe you a debt?

Amie

[Barry]

Hi Paige, Amie everyone.

Forgive me for the following dramatization. It's rated PG 13 at least.

You have 2 children and a dog.
You are on a hiking trip and you all get lost.
You cannot find your way back.
You do find water but you cannot find any food.
You try and try to find food but you have failed to trap any animal and You and your kids are starving.
Your kids are dieing of starvation.
You are going to do what you need to do.
It's not going to be easy. It is not going to be pleasant. And is it is going to hurt you inside.

It was not however the first answer.
It was not the first thing that came to mind.
It was not something you wanted to have to do.

Let's find something less dramatic.

I feel the that you owe me an apology for getting angry with me and insulting me.
What do I do?
I can tell myself:
"That is the mind of the flesh and I need to stop!"

How about something like this:
I would like to call forward my need to recompensed. I fully accept you and love you. Please come forward. There is no shame here, you are completely accepted by the whole.
There is no cutting off, not discarding and no shame. You are fully accepted and you have an important voice.
We feel no shame and we accept you fully and love you unconditionally.
You have served us well and we needed you. You have actively protected us and endeavored to keep us safe. You are a significant part of the whole and are fully accepted.
We all want to listen to you very carefully. We realize that you may be trying to say something very significant.


Ran out of time.
Going to work.
I'll try to finish it tonight.
However perhaps you can see the direction this is taking.
Blessings
Barry

[Laren]

Barry,

I'm interested in hearing more on what you have to say re: embracing and accepting.

I was thinking how most of what I do, even if I am willing to accept or embrace the "egocentric" man, is still in an effort to obtain an outcome.

Seems to me, my focus on outcomes is giving power to the egocentric man still.

For example, in my marriage right now, we are struggling. We both have spent too many years trying to be validated by each other. I hear my heart now wanting to embrace her pain, but at the same time I still want it to be for "fixing my marriage".

Somehow, it seems the process is what we should embrace, not the outcome.

anyway, probably not making much sense, but thot i'd add to the conversation.

Laren

[Paige]

If someone murdered your husband, is that compensable and does that someone owe you a debt?


Compensable? No.

Does someone owe me a debt? That could be debatable. My husband has children that rely on his support for living. That support is lost. I can see how society could still view this as a matter of law.

Really, I do understand how this relates to the spiritual man. I'm just not seeing how it is worked out practically in life. Say that my husband is killed by a serial killer. He can't bring my husband back, but he can wreak more havoc to others in society. It is a matter of law to protect my neighbors from further harm. What makes sense when forgiveness is taken into account?

I hope I'm not frustrating anybody, it just happens to be how my mind works at times.

Paige

P.S. Barry, I'm not understanding your first example (about being lost and starving). (Why do I feel so obtuse today? :confused: )

[Amie]

Barry,

If I had to guess where you are going -- To embrace the need that we're experiencing, no matter how hard the reality may be, is to process otherwise unprocessed emotions. If something is incompensable, mourning is in order I think.

Amie

[Amie]

For example, in my marriage right now, we are struggling. We both have spent too many years trying to be validated by each other. I hear my heart now wanting to embrace her pain, but at the same time I still want it to be for "fixing my marriage".

I'm definately interested in Barry's thoughts as well. My thoughts are that this might be explored deeper in embracing "the need to fix" and what exactly "fixed" is. What, for example, does self validation look like?

This fall we'll be hosting a Transformations class (Kevin Beck with Presence, and myself) that might be a great tool/resource if you're interested.

Amie

[Amie]

Does someone owe me a debt? That could be debatable. My husband has children that rely on his support for living. That support is lost. I can see how society could still view this as a matter of law.

True, yet is this not independent from the matter of the heart?


Say that my husband is killed by a serial killer. He can't bring my husband back, but he can wreak more havoc to others in society. It is a matter of law to protect my neighbors from further harm. What makes sense when forgiveness is taken into account?

In reference to "spiritual man":

#1 If this person has taken your husband's life, to whom is he indebted for it if not God himself? It was God that gave the life.
#2 The death of your husband is not compensable.

The killer owes you nothing and couldn't compensate. I certainly am able to forgive and to not enable. My tending my need, and questioning the offense does not negate consequence for the action taken.

I have forgiven the folks who I suffered abuse at the hands of as a child IE. They owe me no debt (where's the law to claim such a thing?), nor could they compensate their actions. I empathize with them, I understand their humanity and I even love them. Does that mean that I would make the choice to have them in the lives of my own children? No, I don't trust them and my mistrust for them is the consequence of their action.

Forgiveness is not the absolution of consequence, it is the release of punishment which is really our own suffering.


I hope I'm not frustrating anybody,

Not me :).

Amie

[Paige]

Thanks Amie,

That sheds a lot of light into my questions.

To sum up, if I may...

Forgiveness doesn't work out to an "anything goes" scenario any more the universal redemption does. We are free to forgive, yet let the law (societal law) do what it is designed to do.

I hope I did that some justice from my simple mind. :)

Paige

[mparkes]

Paige, thanks for distilling it down! :)

I find myself more and more trying to remember that we are all victims (in a way) of our upbringing. My wife and I have been getting some marriage counseling lately and that has really opened my eyes to how much our childhood and life experiences serve to shape us - for better or worse. I begin to see that the situations that you face in life that may cause a hurtful remark or action are but the fruit of seeds planted long ago by others... IMHO forgiveness in this age seems to work out to an understanding that we are ALL connected somehow, and there really are no "individuals" battling it out for turf - that old man has died and the (understanding) of our connectedness - and the compassion thereby released - seems to be next "frontier"...

Easier to see than to practice, but if we can see it, that's a great beginning :)


Thanks Amie,

That sheds a lot of light into my questions.

To sum up, if I may...

Forgiveness doesn't work out to an "anything goes" scenario any more the universal redemption does. We are free to forgive, yet let the law (societal law) do what it is designed to do.

I hope I did that some justice from my simple mind. :)

Paige

[Barry]

Barry,

I'm interested in hearing more on what you have to say re: embracing and accepting.

I was thinking how most of what I do, even if I am willing to accept or embrace the "egocentric" man, is still in an effort to obtain an outcome.

Seems to me, my focus on outcomes is giving power to the egocentric man still.

For example, in my marriage right now, we are struggling. We both have spent too many years trying to be validated by each other. I hear my heart now wanting to embrace her pain, but at the same time I still want it to be for "fixing my marriage".

Somehow, it seems the process is what we should embrace, not the outcome.

anyway, probably not making much sense, but thot i'd add to the conversation.

Laren

Laren,
we are fragmented on a micro level (personally, individually, self) and on a macro level (collectively, society).
Our relationships are there for "difficult".

Here is one of many possible approaches. It is up to you whether you feel it is something you wish to try or not:

Start with self.
Look at picture of yourself and dwell for a few moments on how you really love yourself.

Afterword:
Take the worst thing that you dislike about yourself and address it.
It could be:
Anger, detail orientation, laziness, any given fear, ECT. Vocalize love and acceptance and significance. Perhaps something that really gets you defencive when your spouse or someone else brings it up.

Bring it forward consciously, and if possible, vocally, assuring that part, that feeling, that fractured ego part, (however you wish to address it) that there is no shame and that there is full and complete acceptance.
Find everything good about it that you can honestly say.

If you feel this is a legitimate part of you, then you will find times that it has served you or protected you, or kept you safe ECT.

You can be honest yet at the same time have an agenda.
When we encourage someone we may be very honest yet have an agenda of encouragement or bringing joy, or communicating love ECT. These are not mutually exclusive.

Your agenda is to bring together and unite. It is to disarm the "ego part", or the "ego agenda" (for lack of a better terms). Many time we are trying to tell ourselves something by acting out. It could be fear or attention or a need for acceptance. It could be feelings of inadequacy from a particular point or experience. The possibilities are endless.
But we have to start listening to ourselves. We need to start a defragmentation process.
It may lead in many different possible directions. But we need to give a chance to ourselves to listen to ourselves with acceptance and honestly and without shame.
It is a very large topic that I have not investigated enough yet (if ever). This is my idea of a productive starting point.
This is working for me in productive ways.

Relate what you are now learning about yourself to your spouse.
Reaffirm your love.
Extrapolate for her perspective and from her perspective as you can.
Make your preferred boundaries in the relationship known in love and Patience. Find more to love. It is there. We don't look very well.

These things have for us, repaired our relationship (my wife and I).
I build her up in honestly and love far more than ever before.
There is more to love now that I make myself conscious of the facts.

The put downs the belittles do little to nothing but distance and fragment.
If God has accepted then acceptance is a major key to healing and bringing together, and disarming that which would fragment and act out.

These ideas are still for me still in a very early developmental stage. Take only what your wisdom would chose to.

JMO
Barry

[Laren]

Thanks Barry,

As I was reading, i thot about Adam and Eve, hiding in the garden in shame, trying to cover themselves, trying to ignore and bury their wrong doings. I see wisdom in what you say. This hidden shame, is boiling on the undersurface, and continues to lead to defensiveness, need to be right, etc. So rather than ignore the shame, the hurt, whaterver we are hiding; bring it up, accept it, let Jesus love us in our now "aware" brokeness, and unite it.

We are accepted, we are loved, and hiding is no longer needed. Shame is a false perception.

I see glimpses. thanks again.

Back to forgiveness, I see the need to forgive ourselves for the shame, hiding, and false perceptions, and the need to forgive others that offend us, realizing we all our in this battle together.

thanks again.

[Laren]

This fall we'll be hosting a Transformations class (Kevin Beck with Presence, and myself) that might be a great tool/resource if you're interested.

Amie

yes Amie, how does this work??

[Amie]

yes Amie, how does this work??

You can watch here: http://www.presence.tv/cms/courses.php and I will announce it on Talk-Grace as well. There's some further info on it at that link, even though it was for the spring session.

Of course, everyone is welcome. For the past few sessions, the fee has been waived thanks to some supporters.

Maybe some folks here who have taken it can vouch for it -- I don't want to come off like a salesperson, lol!

[mparkes]

Hey Barry, thanks for this... I am slowly learning to forgive (and accept) myself after many years of beating myself over the head over how far "short" I was to God's Holy Standard. Thanks to all for the encouraging, grace-filled thoughts!:)


Laren,
we are fragmented on a micro level (personally, individually, self) and on a macro level (collectively, society).
Our relationships are there for "difficult".

Here is one of many possible approaches. It is up to you whether you feel it is something you wish to try or not...

[Barry]

I see the need to forgive ourselves for the shame, hiding, and false perceptions, and the need to forgive others that offend us, realizing we all our in this battle together.


What a great thought!
Being in this together changes everything.
Barry

[Barry]

I am slowly learning to forgive (and accept) myself after many years of beating myself over the head over how far "short" I was to God's Holy Standard. Thanks to all for the encouraging, grace-filled thoughts!:)

It is kind of hard to beat ourselves up and then have patience with others around us. The micro transfers to the macro on many levels.

We put ourselves on the defencive and then have something to prove because of it. Then we compare our "proving" with other's "proving".
Ingredients for a real mess. :eek:

Barry

[Barry]

You can watch here: http://www.presence.tv/cms/courses.php and I will announce it on Talk-Grace as well. There's some further info on it at that link, even though it was for the spring session.

Of course, everyone is welcome. For the past few sessions, the fee has been waived thanks to some supporters.

Maybe some folks here who have taken it can vouch for it -- I don't want to come off like a salesperson, lol!

You can never oversell a good thing.
Everyone here, either directly or indirectly has been blessed through "Presence".
Just a thought
Barry

[backtothefuture]

Hi,
As I have walked the path of dumping the guilt and shame what I have found to be a truth for me is when I am usually angry at my husband or someone else its actually not something I don't like in them, but something I really see in myself. Does that make sense? Once I made that connection, I have been able to process things a little better and not only give forgiveness but forgive myself for sometimes getting in the mess I got into:biggrinbounce: I guess putting the blame where it belonged. And lots of times (though I didn't want to admit to it) things were my fault.
I also started reading about 10 years ago on how we were raised plays a big part in who we are as adults. Just like de-programing from some of my theology, I have had to de-program from some of the dysfunction. Sometimes I ended up creating new dysfunction, but sometimes things have turned out for the better in my own family.
But the main thing is, without the forgiveness part, either for others or yourself, you are doomed to a life with no joy or peace or hope.
Just my personal experience.
Blessings.
Nancy;)

[Barry]

Hi,
As I have walked the path of dumping the guilt and shame what I have found to be a truth for me is when I am usually angry at my husband or someone else its actually not something I don't like in them, but something I really see in myself. Does that make sense?

That makes a lot of sense to me Nancy.
(From my own perspective at this time), instead to endeavoring to be a "whole being" in acceptance and love of ourselves, we tend to fragment off into pieces. What we have not accepted back in to our own little unity we see in others. We may then react toward them the way we feel about ourselves (on this level).



Once I made that connection, I have been able to process things a little better and not only give forgiveness but forgive myself for sometimes getting in the mess I got into:biggrinbounce: I guess putting the blame where it belonged. And lots of times (though I didn't want to admit to it) things were my fault.


Allow me Nancy to express some thought here of my own. As this may or may not relate to how you may approach things you should take it with a grain of salt :)
I'm beginning to think differently about blame. Blame implies a responsibility on our part. This I agree with completely. The first responsibility that we have IMHO is to accept what God has accepted, to love what God loves. IMHO this must be our starting point for our own healing and wholeness.

When we assure ourselves, and our parts that there is acceptance and no shame then our fractured parts are more cooperative with the aspect of unity.
Where I am at now, is in the thought that a fractured ego-part will fight for its own little survival. Tooth and nail. What we may often do then is push ourselves or a part of ourselves into denial.
The result may be that part of us want to accept blame and then the other part may not. A remaining fracture is more likely.

In regard to your statement "I guess putting the blame where it belonged":
That make a lot of sense from that angle. We have to start with ourselves. Could the law ever work? Love your neighbor as yourself. Yes but do we love ourselves truly? If not then how could it be applied in life and relationships with any large degree of success? Seems impossible to me.
Did the Pharisees love themselves? I think not. There meanness and nastiness came from their own broken hearts. From their own shame and denial.
We tend to become very hard to get along with when we can't get along with ourselves. Our internal battles shed outward.
This however should not be seen so much from the angle of blame but more as an indication that we would do well to change our mind about ourselves in connect to our changing our minds about how God wishes to deal with us.
These are just some thoughts Nancy ;)



I also started reading about 10 years ago on how we were raised plays a big part in who we are as adults. Just like de-programing from some of my theology, I have had to de-program from some of the dysfunction. Sometimes I ended up creating new dysfunction, but sometimes things have turned out for the better in my own family.
But the main thing is, without the forgiveness part, either for others or yourself, you are doomed to a life with no joy or peace or hope.
Just my personal experience.
Blessings.
Nancy;)

In my own thoughts, forgiveness is an important starting point. In many cases vital. In the transition of the ages it was all important.
Realized forgiveness may need to be seen from another angle.
Personally I would like to move beyond the perpetual needing to forgive myself.
Then I tend to put myself in the position of need to always forgive others.
I would like to move beyond this state. Not there yet mind you but really dwelling on it. ;)
Realized forgiveness is just as important a concept or study IMHO as realized salvation, or realized grace, or realized redemption.


Nancy, you have really been a blessing to us all here at this fellowship site. Your honesty and willingness to tackle the hard stuff. The personal hard stuff.
It is an honor to fellowship with you. The struggles you are honest about are what we all deal with from our own slightly different angles. And here you are helping us all with our own.
You are a real blessing sis.
I love you,
Barry

[backtothefuture]

Hi Barry,
Thanks so much for your great inspiring words! I really like the thought of Realized Forgiveness.
At bagel church today I met my best friend of 15 years. She through no fault of her own was in court all year with her Ex and its cost this single mother of 5 over 17,000 dollars, when her Ex has a lawyer who does it for free. Our big topic was Blame and forgiveness and being true to ourselves.
I would like to be free of Blame also. I guess maybe in my own crazy way of making peace with my life I have just given myself another set of rules to follow. I want to be nice from my heart and not Blame my husband or someone else who wounds me, so I have turned that all to myself. When as I talked with a friend today, she or myself are really truly innocent in some of the stuff that has come our way.
So then we asked each other about loving ourselves. And the really truth part is, I am to the part of Realized Grace, Forgiveness, but not Realized forgiveness or Realized what it is to really love myself. My friend either. We both don't feel "Gods love" although we are seeing more of God's Grace working in our lives.
I think there is so much that myself and my friend just doesn't understand about the suffering we have been through. So it makes more sense to put blame or accountability somewhere instead of facing the truth of the denial part of what has happened. That fractured part you speak of does fight for survival in all kinds of ways.
To be true to myself I would have to admit that I really don't always get it. I hurt and I want a reason for that. So like I have my entire life, it is easier to blame myself than someone else. So I would be interested in how you really get rid of the blame. Learning more about the realized forgiveness and feeling Gods love when truth be told, you maybe don't really love yourself.
Thanks for the input, gave me lots to think about today.
Blessings.
Nancy:rolleyes:

[txbchbum]

why would god forgive a guy that raped a 5 year girl and kill her and have no regerts i am open to all reasons why!!!
i know we are to forgive but if it happen to us then thats a differant story
i know gods forgiveness is without boundrys he can forgive anything but we must repent as the guy on the cross

Davo,
I am with you on this one. I asked a Romanist friend once when she talked about her priest telling her that she needs to forgive if the person that has offended her must first ASK for her forgiveness. Her answer was 'no' so I asked her why then God demands that we ask for forgiveness before he will in fact forgive us. She had no answer other than to back pedal on her original answer. Of course, she needed to ask her priest...

I also have had some questions in my mind concerning this whole idea of forgiveness anyway. Keep in mind two NT examples: 1) Jesus says in the model prayer that we are to ask to be forgiven as we have forgiven others. Jesus goes on to say that if you do not forgive your neighbor, then God will not forgive you, 2) Jesus also tells the story of the man who is forgiven an inordinate amount of money, then fails to forgive his brother who owes him a mere dollar. The man is thrown in prison until the whole debt is paid.

With these two points made, what does that mean for Christians? If Christians do not forgive, does God not forgive them? This would mean that they were no longer Christians, by the definition of what it is to be a Christian, and it also sets up the problem for the Reformed Protestant in that WORKS are involved.

Of course if forgiveness is untied from its harness to an endless duration of blessing in "heaven" then the problem becomes less severe.

anyone following me on this?

[davo]

G'day txbchbum…

Forgiveness always starts in the heart of the aggrieved. The offender benefits greatly in receiving that forgiveness – something that occurs when one "changes the mind" [repents] about accepting that forgiveness. That said though, lack of repentive response, be that either through choice or ignorance does not negate the forgiveness given by the one "choosing" to do so -- "Father forgive them for they know not what they do..."

[Me Again]

TXBCHBUM,
I don't mean to sound coy, but did you actually read my post that you quote (I was originally Infinite Grace)? The reason I ask is that my post attempted to make the case for forgiveness being separate from some post-mortem existence - it's more of a "this-world" happening.

IF forgiveness is the prerequisite for going to heaven, as most Christians believe, then Jesus teaching was that a man who was forgiven by God could LOSE that forgiveness and be tortured forever in hell, simply because he didn't forgive his neighbor a little thing. While this sounds good to the self-righteous, it creates a dilemma in those who believe that people are forgiven based on their faith in Jesus. This scenario presented by the Lord would indicate that we are forgiven based on our own forgiving of others.

What I am proposing is that we are required to forgive our daughter's murderer/rapist, not for his sake only, but our own. When we harbor unforgiveness and hate towards others, we shackle ourselves with a religious spirit under which we are unable to stand.

In addition, I have a belief that most others here don't share - that post-mortem our failures and inadequacies will be laid bare before God. Not only will be experience a sense of failing God, but almost immediately will sense His mercy and love. For clarification, the most grievous sins in the bible were pride and self-righteousness. A number of folks on this site (not me), in my mind, show an incredible sense of humility that will most likely allow them to bypass that sense of failure. Perhaps, they have already sensed it in this life, and been shown by God that they are, in fact, NOT failures, but are in fact His beloved children.

I would encourage you to meditate on various threads on this site to get a clearer picture of what we are saying about God's love and mercy. It is my hope that it will become more clear to you as you do.

[davo]

In addition, I have a belief that most others here don't share - that post-mortem our failures and inadequacies will be laid bare before God. Not only will be experience a sense of failing God, but almost immediately will sense His mercy and love.Well this brings to mind this Ed... who in all their prideful arrogance or blind ignorance would not respond in worshipful contrition post death, in kind, before the presence of God as is reflected in these Scriptures below:

Luke 5:8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!"

Isa 6:5 So I said: "Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts."

Job 42:5-6 "I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees You. Therefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes."

[Jotham]

this just came to mind while reading the above two posts (good ones Ed and Davo)...

I was raised in a Catholic home, then rebelled when i left at 18, dabled in black arts/magic, got bonked over the head by our Gracious God, and walla...the rest is HisStory ;)

I used to really get stressed out as a kid when thinking upon death and purgatory and those teachings. Eye'd envision spending centuries in some holding tank wondering when i'd be forgiven and able to mingle with the saints in heaven.

Now of course, i realize the fallacy in all that, and know that it's all been forgiven and the need of forgiveness to/from this side of the grave to live life to it's full potential. . . Also in the current mix, is the idea stated in the posts above of; "Not only will be experience a sense of failing God, but almost immediately will sense His mercy and love." This is where i've been in my belief for some time, and it sure supports peace and gratitude in one's life. Call me a stinkin' thinker, but somehow i am unable to imagine myself as anything nearing the perfection and expectations of our Loving Creator...so that sense of inadequacy is expected upon that face-to-face event.

And that, to me, makes His Amazing Grace all the more amazing.


ramblin'
Thom

[Paige]

txbchbum (would that stand for Texas beach bum?),

Many folks like to bring up examples that shock the conscience when discussing the nature of forgiveness. Hitler is usually one of those prime examples, too.

Rather than answer to each particular scenario, I'm wondering if you think that someone who would do what you describe is what you would call a "healthy, whole" person?

Paige

[Paige]

Bringing a quote from another thread over here for discussion:

Onceforall wrote:

BUT, Hebrews 10:26, if we continue to sin willfully after receiving this clean conscience and new life from God, there no longer remains a sacrifice. This is a repeat of verse 18, which was at the declaration of the new covenant. Those who DO continue to sin willfully after entering this new covenant with God can expect a terrifying judgment (Hebrews 10:27). By sinning willfully after receiving our new life from God is to "regard as unclean the blood of the covenant by which you were sanctified."

So that's our side of the covenant, to remain clean. To not sin. Notice that the term "willfully" was prominent. There was a difference between willful sins and accidental/unintentional sins, even in the Old Testament. There was no atonement for willful rebellion; the priests interceded only for unintentional sins. Hebrews 10:26 makes it clear that this has not changed under the new covenant.

I'm not picking on you, Once :) In actuality, I've heard this repeatedly stated (especially in my particular background of religious belief). I thought it might be interesting to examine this very common understanding of the above passage. I have a couple questions, which maybe might be the way to start the whole discussion.

1. According to this interpretation, every sin, willful or otherwise, is forgiven a new believer, but from then on, if one sin's willfully, they cannot even hope to be forgiven as there is no sacrifice for willful sin under the OC, so none also under the New.

How does this work out in real life? I know of several believers who have been in marriages that are now in the process of healing from infidelity. The infidelity occurring after receiving a clean slate (so to speak) from God. Would anyone counsel the offended party to not forgive the offender, as this was obviously not an unintentional act? Would it be healthy for the spouse who does forgive, to do so with the reminder that even though they have forgiven, God hasn't, and can't, so the offender should live with the constant expectation of a fiery judgment sometime in their future?

2. How would one who believes in the above interpretation, harmonize it with Jesus' teaching that every sin and blasphemy would be forgiven save blasphemy of the HS? (We have a thread around here that goes into what exactly that might be, and what it means in regard to Universal Reconciliation, so a discussion about that in particular, should probably go there.)

3. Jesus tells His disciples that they have the power to forgive, or retain another's sin. (John 20:22,23) Since there is no boundary given there as to whether one is forgiving willful, or non-willfull sin, can we reasonably expect that if they forgave someone, it was really forgiven? I would assume that the moment forgiveness was extended, it was settled and forgotten. How would someone who disagrees explain this?

That's enough for now. What are the thoughts?

Paige

[Me Again]

Paige, I will attempt to answer each question that you've asked, but have no personal dog in the fight; so, my more learned colleagues - Ozark, davo, Barry, Amie et al. - may correct me. :)

1. Sinning here had to do with returning to the Law. Just as Moses struck the Rock in the wilderness the first time, so Israel struck Jesus once (for all). The second time when Moses was instructed by God to "speak to the Rock," Moses instead struck it a second time. This was akin to "sacrificing the son of God a second time," which essentially denied Christ's finished work. This was referring to the Judaizers who wanted to mix law with faith. Paul called such teaching "witchcraft," for he asked the Galatians "who has bewitched you?"

Those who returned to their sins (the power of which was the Law) "fell from grace," and there was "no longer a sacrifice for sins," since the sacrifices of the Temple were by that time abominations - ones that would "cause desolation." This was the great "falling away" that is prophesied in the NT that would come before the son of Man "appeared a second time for salvation of those who eagerly awaited his salvation."

2. I know much has been written on this site and others about the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, but I would offer at this time a possible understanding based on the above truth of scripture. Could the BotHS actually be the denial that the spirit of God was being poured out upon all flesh, that forgiveness and mercy and grace was being poured out upon all through the work of the spirit, etc.? The "return to its own vomit" was a reference to the Judaizers "losing their salvation" by returning to the Law.

3. I have for some time here argued that forgiveness has been misunderstood by the church at large for millennia. In the sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells us that if you do not forgive others, God will not forgive you. Well, this is a problem for "Grace alone, faith alone" types. This now lays the requirement of forgiving everyone who has ever wronged you - OR YOU DON'T GO TO HEAVEN.

However, if you take forgiveness=heaven to be incorrect, we can then see that forgiveness is what frees us to live abundant lives - in this life. This would also help explain the parable of the man who did not forgive his neighbor, and then being taken by the tormentors until "every penny is paid."

This becomes a "this-life" scenario rather than post-mortem existence.

[Paige]

Ed, I agree with your points. I too, see that the issue in question was a return to the law.

I guess I'm really trying to understand the idea that is espoused that "God only forgives unintentional sin." Ultimately, to believe that pretty much erases the entire human race from forgiveness period (AISI). This is what I was taught for many years. Its not what I believe today, for sure.

I believe that we each emulate the "god" we believe in. How can I be expected to forgive, if my underlying belief about God is that He doesn't? (Well, only in certain circumstances. So, if God only forgives unintentional sin, then I will make it my business to second guess/judge the motives of all around me in order to come up with who is actually worthy of my forgiveness.)

[Robert]

Paige- so glad i came across this thread and your question!!! This is something that I have had deeply buried inside,afraid to really deal with it. I picked up the idea of God not forgiving willful sin once you were a baptized believer as well. So, once i was baptized and i had any angry outburst or engaging in the *big m* then God held me responsible for these sins!!! It seems so crazy thinking about it but like paige has shared, emotionally and in a small corner of my mind this was a reality.

What answers do all of you have for this?? The other troublesome thing is the whole idea of loving/forgiving myself in order to love God and others. Gods love is far greater than any love i can have isn't it?? If i find it difficult to love myself and forgive myself, even with all the knowledge of God stil, does He not still love me?? Paige just helped me to think through these things more by her posts. Thanks for all responses.

Robert

[ozark]

If i find it difficult to love myself and forgive myself, even with all the knowledge of God stil, does He not still love me?? Paige just helped me to think through these things more by her posts. Thanks for all responses.



Robert,

I think opposing God sometimes or even most of the time takes on forms Christians rarely acknowledge. If God loves us, and we don't love ourselves, we are actually fighting God. Same goes for forgiving ourselves. Likewise, if we hate someone God loves, we might have a problem with him, too. The trouble is we don't recognize these as problems, but they are perhaps the greatest problems we have. We are far too concerned about things like the "big M" than the much greater issue of grace.

If we look at the conflicts Jesus faced, they all centered around this issue, not any great sins of the day.

[Paige]

Robert,

I think we impressionable human beings carry around the teachings of God that were laid upon us. Those impressions lead us to self-condemn according to the standard and ideology we hold. Once examined, we can find relief from the condemnation we've placed upon ourselves. We can also find better ways to do things if we are not liking the way we are now doing things. This may sound too simple, but it is the truth I've been living for a long time. Once I realized that the doom I was expecting in my marriage due to my previous failings was self-inflicted, I was able to let go of the thought that we were doomed. Haven't had those thoughts in over 15 years, and it has been such a blessing, and so freeing.

[Jotham]

...Once I realized that the doom I was expecting in my [thom's note: Fill in your own fear] was self-inflicted, I was able to let go of the thought that we were doomed. Haven't had those thoughts in over [xx] years, and it has been such a blessing, and so freeing.This is soooo true for me in so many areas [health, career, relationships, goals...] of my life over the years also Paige. The old saying; "The only thing we have to fear is Fear itself" is so true!

[Me Again]

so much of what passes for Jesus' teaching is actually the teaching of the pharisees. the blood of bulls and goats could not cleanse one from sin - seems that neither can baptism in that kind of thinking. the sacrifices could only cleanse past sins. Had to be killed again each new year - wipe the slate clean, so to speak.

In the new covenant, believers were cleansed from their sin - because they were dead to the law. The law empowered sin. Without it, there was no sin. With no sin, there was no death. Life reigned.

With the parousia, the law was done away with for EVERYONE. No law; no sin. No sin; no death. No death; no separation from God. All has been restored.

We are told in Acts 2 that Jesus must sit in the heavens until "the restoration of all things." That happened in AD70. All things restored.

Restored to what? The Garden. Adam and Eve, naked and not ashamed. No law to condemn. Abundant Life, sabbath rest, Jubilee. All debts forgiven - for all. All resting. All alive. No death; only Life.

No death; no sin. No sin; no condemnation. Only Love and Life, for that is what/Who God is.

[Robert]

Doug- my apologies for calling you danny DOH what you shared in your last post really hits me and makes me wonder if i am a lil bit insane because here i am wondering and seeking to actualize Gods love,grace and forgiveness yet at the sametime wonder just how to do that??? It is like the pushme-pullyou in Dr Doolittle, I have 2 desires working against each other!!! God is love and He has given us His kingdom NOW to live in His love,peace,grace and goodness. So why do I have a hard time simply doing that??? Especially when I seek to understand Him best i can and to grow closer to Him and all that goes with discipleship, yet I am somehow fighting accepting He loves and accepts me and to do the same myself. Am i some kind of psycho to be in this mess?? I want to live as Ed layed out in his post, but there is this something that I let make me think I can't just rest in His love and I have to fight Gim in some way. Being as raw as can be here. God gave me life, it is His to do with as He pleases, and of course He is love. Why the heck do i find it so hard to just go with that???

Robert

[Me Again]

Doug- my apologies for calling you danny DOH what you shared in your last post really hits me and makes me wonder if i am a lil bit insane because here i am wondering and seeking to actualize Gods love,grace and forgiveness yet at the sametime wonder just how to do that??? It is like the pushme-pullyou in Dr Doolittle, I have 2 desires working against each other!!! God is love and He has given us His kingdom NOW to live in His love,peace,grace and goodness. So why do I have a hard time simply doing that??? Especially when I seek to understand Him best i can and to grow closer to Him and all that goes with discipleship, yet I am somehow fighting accepting He loves and accepts me and to do the same myself. Am i some kind of psycho to be in this mess?? I want to live as Ed layed out in his post, but there is this something that I let make me think I can't just rest in His love and I have to fight Gim in some way. Being as raw as can be here. God gave me life, it is His to do with as He pleases, and of course He is love. Why the heck do i find it so hard to just go with that???

Robert

Same reason we all do.

[ozark]

Am i some kind of psycho to be in this mess??


I'll answer to Danny or whatever you want to call me, LOL!

I think we all struggle with the things you are talking about. As Ed said, you are not alone. So, welcome to the nut house!

I think one of the best things to do is to simply pray to see. All is accomplished. God has defined who you are in Christ. You can't change what he has done. You really can't even fight against it. It simply is. He has won. What we can do is ask to behold the beauty of what he has done. I think that is a prayer God always answers. Also, realize that the people God has in your life, even your enemies, are part of the answer to that prayer. We are all here to help each other see.

[Amie]

Robert,

For me, calm is the most foreign to my life. I enjoy it yet at the same time it takes adjustment. It is hard to believe that life is that simple sometimes, but there it is in front of me.

Amie

[Laren]

I have 2 desires working against each other!!! God is love and He has given us His kingdom NOW to live in His love,peace,grace and goodness. So why do I have a hard time simply doing that??? Especially when I seek to understand Him best i can and to grow closer to Him and all that goes with discipleship, yet I am somehow fighting accepting He loves and accepts me and to do the same myself.
Robert

what in you is fighting and resisting his love for you?

are you identified with this "resisting person in you"?

Is this "person in you that is resisting" really you?

Are you willing to give up the search, and just be?

Is the "one in you" seeking and fighting, fulfilled? or does "he" speak from "lack"? How can "lack" find "fulfillment"? Which voice do you choose to identify with?

Does this voice have to be no longer existent in order for you to experience your true nature? or can you accept that there is something "in you" that fights and resists, but is no longer you?


These questions have helped me along the path that you go through.


Romans 7 is helpful to me,


it is NO LONGER I, but sin in me.

who do u identify with?

[Me Again]

it is NO LONGER I, but sin in me.

who do u identify with?

And SIN is our shame...it's what WE SEE, rather than what God sees.

I think this is where Amie may be seeing the idea of God always seeing us as PERFECT, but we didn't. We "sinned," i.e., saw ourselves as less than. God made us complete by revealing our completeness to us. Shame is gone. We are naked and downright comfy.
:clap2:

[Laren]

And SIN is our shame...it's what WE SEE, rather than what God sees.

I think this is where Amie may be seeing the idea of God always seeing us as PERFECT, but we didn't. We "sinned," i.e., saw ourselves as less than. God made us complete by revealing our completeness to us. Shame is gone. We are naked and downright comfy.
:clap2:

I might even go as far as to say, God revealed that i am complete by revealing the voice of INcompleteness "in me" as "not me".

[Laren]

When we "search" for acceptance, "what in us is searching"? to me it's a voice of "discontent". Can "discontent" convert itself?

When we see ourselves as whole, then why would "wholeness" need to search? and why would "the voice of wholeness" need to mingle with the "voice" of "discontent".

God is not out there needing to convert my "voice of discontent", he is in me, identifying the voice, and realizing it's not me.

[ozark]

Laren,

That is a very interesting way of looking at things. Do you think there is any connection with Paul's statement..."I have been crucified with Christ..." (Gal. 2:20)?

Btw, is that a Boston Terrier in your avatar picture?

[Robert]

Laren- those are great questions!!! I am not sure exactly what it is in me resisting, or how much i identify with it. I want to just accept and let it be. I think my problem in doing that is mixed up in a perfectionist ideal. I have read all the places where God and Jesus say do not be afraid and i have still held onto fear in various forms. Then I have heard fear and faith dont mix and not to be a doubleminded man and it messes with my head in just what can i do??

I want to have all of me stand with God and Jesus no resisting, but I guess that could be a wrong understanding as well since Paul seemed to struggle with resisting attimes.A huge thing for me is feeling shame over not wanting to go through pain and suffering and hardship that we all go through, just facing it and going through it as opoosed to fighting or avoiding it. I want to have the will to just accept it and embrace it in the way Jesus did. I will have to think more on your questions

Robert

[Paige]

A huge thing for me is feeling shame over not wanting to go through pain and suffering and hardship that we all go through, just facing it and going through it as opposed to fighting or avoiding it.

Robert, do you think Jesus felt shame for sweating drops of blood in anticipation of the pain, suffering and hardship He was about to face? Didn't He also voice a desire for there to be another way?

I think not wanting to go through those things is perfectly natural, and nothing to experience shame about. I would say that none of us want to go through those things. Yet, go through them we must, because there are just so many things that come our way, and we have no choice but to go through them.

Paige

[Laren]

Laren,

That is a very interesting way of looking at things. Do you think there is any connection with Paul's statement..."I have been crucified with Christ..." (Gal. 2:20)?

Btw, is that a Boston Terrier in your avatar picture?

yes, i see a connection with that verse in Galatians.

yes that is a boston terrier. Bailey is 8 months old, a one of the best dogs we've ever owned. Very loving, yet very goofy; funny personality.

[Robert]

Paige- very good points there!! I guess i somehow get caught in a perfectionistic idea of having to be fearless and as i said the teaching/preaching I have heard that says fear and faith cannot coexist so therefore i have been lacking faith all this time. I don't know where i got this constant way to undermine myself but it wreaks havoc on me always inside myself. Larens questions are good ones i need to think on. I seek to live by love grace and humility but dont do so towards myself, so i end up battling God and Jesus which I dont want to do, but sometimes I do because i feel unable or unwilling to do what is being asked. Of course, what is bein gasked plays out mostly in my head as I am not confronted with life or death decisions or real suffering normally. Again, hope i make sense out of the struggles i experience in my own skin.

If any of you would like, go to rachel held evans blog read her post on calvinism,lent and depravity. i would be curious to hear your thoughts. Just google her name. I sent Ed one of the comments she got.

Robert

[Laren]

I want to just accept and let it be.
Robert

Does this "want" bring or create in you joy, peace, and rest??


"Wanting" to accept something, is a message imo of "lack". It has a "should" attached to it, a self judgment, and definitely leads to a belief of "wretched man".

So we know we are identified with a "want or lack" if the emotion surrounding that belief is guilt, shame, blame, anger, resentment, or self condemning.



Wanting to get rid of a "want" is like trying to illuminate a dark room with darkness.

For me, acceptance of the "wants" comes through knowing/awareness that they exist in me (i'm human), letting them have their voice; and knowing that the very "awareness" of "them in me", testifies to the fact that the one "aware" is the Light. Light illuminates the darkness. just some more thots, of how i've processed the same feelings you are going through.

blessins.

[Amie]

What a great insight Laren, beautiful.

Amie

[Robert]

Laren- I agree with Amie there. I was given a personality test a long time ago, i think it also dealt with emotional abilities. It said i sometimes had trouble coping, meaning life and all within it would just seem overwhelming at times. I think this has been true for me and a part of the struggles i share in my posts. I look at people with severe disabilities or who have had some form of devere trauma and see them content with everything. i guess though they have their struggles internally as i do. Most of the struggles happen internally. I guess i tend to be overly judgmental of myself in a lot of ways because Ai expect myself to be stronger and more mature than i actually am and it is deflating to my ego but my ego should be deflated anyway. lol Thanks for sharing laren, very helpful all you share :)

Robert