Thread: The end

2 Cor 5:14 For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.

So in other words, you and I are dead.

15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again

Yet we still live. But the life form that lived for itself is and remains dead. Instead we live for him. How is that possible ? It is possible because he was raised again and his resurrection life is in us, enabling us to live for him instead of for ourselves, ourselves already being dead.

16 So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view.

A worldly point of view involves having any regard whatsoever for the one who is dead, as if he were or even should still be alive. He is dead and buried.

Romans 6:6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin--
7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

Are you dead ? In that case you have been freed from sin.

Romans 6:11 Count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus

That's not a worldly point of view.

Romans 6:13 Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness.

How have you been brought from death to life ? By first being dead and then allowing Christ's resurrection life to live in and through you.

14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.

The one who is dead can also be alive. Sin has no mastery over him any longer.

That says it all! I think people just have a knee jerk reaction that one who doesn't feel a constant threat of hell will live a loose life. Nothing could be further from the truth for me. I have lived these 50 plus years choosing life, seeking to be in communion with the Father.

Originally Posted by curly sue

That says it all! I think people just have a knee jerk reaction that one who doesn't feel a constant threat of hell will live a loose life. Nothing could be further from the truth for me. I have lived these 50 plus years choosing life, seeking to be in communion with the Father.

Your response startled me a bit actually. I wasn't thinking about that theme at all when I wrote the above post, rather I was focusing on the foundation for overcoming sin in all its extensions. But maybe that is what you reacted to, the fact that I wasn't minded on hell, condemnation or bettering myself at all.

Agreed. I think my point about hell is we have had so many threads lately discussing being just a step away from losing our salvation. I definitely thing we need to focus on overcoming sin. Revelation in speaking to the churches makes it plain that there is the ability to be over comers.

Originally Posted by curly sue

Agreed. I think my point about hell is we have had so many threads lately discussing being just a step away from losing our salvation. I definitely thing we need to focus on overcoming sin. Revelation in speaking to the churches makes it plain that there is the ability to be over comers.

I've encountered a lot of OSAS proponents online who were non-Charismatics and who had no idea how to overcome sin. The impression I got was that OSAS was their refuge away from a constant process of sin, condemnation, halfhearted repentance, more sin, more condemnation, halfhearted repentance this time not really believing that it made much of a difference etc. And always feeling situated at the rim of the cliff with hell lurking below. Did OSAS make them any better ? I don't think so but I'm sure that some of them had found some peace in that belief rather than a license to keep sinning or to get even worse than before.

There is the other approach of getting as medieval about self-condemnation as possible in an attempt to get out of the described situation. There are lots of preachers who claim that "all condemnation is from the devil" and there is some truth to that. Godly sorrow leads to repentance but getting medieval about threatening oneself or other believers with hell is rarely a matter of producing godly sorrow even if that is what one thinks one is doing. Some of the greatest experts at religious self-condemnation are the ones who live a lifestyle of sinning on friday and saturday night then repenting on Sunday then being religious until friday night again. There was a tradition for that lifestyle among non-Charismatic Lutherans (back then that was the state church) here in Norway during the latter half of the previous century. If you'd ask the adherants of this lifestyle if their repentance last Sunday was heartfelt they would probably open Pandora's box in return for your inquiry.

There is only one way of living a life as an overcomer and that involves allowing the resurrection life of Jesus Christ to take over instead of own power, from a stable equilibrium of righteousness in Christ. A stable equilibrium is not the same as an absolute future certainty as the OSASer will have it but it is very different to the unstable equilibrium of the perpetual self-condemner. If you don't get the terms, then look them up.

Let me tell you part of the story of Ivanhoe, the famous novel by Walter Scott. It is set in 12th century England and is a story of brave knights and fair maidens. You should watch the 1982 version some time, it is a lot of fun.

The knight templar Brian de Bois-Guilbert and his buddies ambush a Jewish merchant travelling through their forests, practically a fair game at that time. He manages to fall hopelessly in love with one of the captives, the maiden daughter of the merchant. Her being a Jew, a marriage is out of the question. Besides, he has taken a vow of chastity as a Knight Templar. Not sure what to do with her he takes her with him to the Knight Templar headquarters. They pronounce her a witch using her skills with traditional medicine as an excuse and she is sentenced to being burnt at the stake. Brian de Bois-Guilbert is an expert swordsman and demands that the matter of guilt should be settled by a duel by sword to the death, if a champion will stand up for her cause. He is thinking of volunteering to be her champion, knowing that there are very few men who can defeat him in battle. Instead, the temple master's assistent accepts the challenge on behalf of de Bois-Guilbert, making him the champion of the Knight Templars, and he cannot refuse.
Given a time limit of a few days, her family of Jews manage to get hold of another knight, Ivanhoe, whose life they once saved. He is a swordsman on par with de Bois-Guilbert but he was wounded recently and isn't fully recovered. Before the duel begins, de Bois-Guilbert walks up to the fair maiden Rebecca who is tied to the stake with firewood all around her and tells her that he has two horses waiting at the edge of the clearing and that they can escape. He will renounce his vows and take her to Spain, set up a new order and make her his queen. She refuses utterly because it is against her faith.
Then the duel begins and de Bois-Guilbert gains the upper hand on Ivanhoe quite easily, inflicting a couple of minor wounds on him along the way. Just as he is about to give Ivanhoe the final blow, he looks sideways at Rebecca and keeps looking at her. Ivanhoe gathers the last of his strength and thrusts his sword through the man. de Bois-Guilbert throws his arms out and looks at Ivanhoe as if he has won, then he dies. Then they pronounce the Jewess free of guilt and she is free to go.

What happened here ? Well Brian de Bois-Guilbert decided somewhere along the way that his love for Rebecca was real and knowing that she was innocent, he couldn't let her die. He tried the avenues that were available to him but it wasn't a deal that either the Knight Templars or Rebecca could accept, whether it was fighting on her side or making for an escape with her. So in the end he decided upon an act of pure madness. He gave his own life for the one he had originally captured then lusted for. And to that act, her accusers had no reply.

Our situation is a bit similar :

2 Cor 5:14a For Christ’s love compels us

14b because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.

15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

Christ's act was an act of madness, giving his life for the unrighteous. To that act, our accuser has no reply. His love compels us to act accordingly. Not to do exactly what he did as if we could add something to what he did, but to act accordingly.

Christ's love compels us to a similar act of madness, not to fight with the flesh like Superman to overcome it, but to put it to death entirely. To place it where it belongs, on the cross where Jesus died. To live again in an other form, just like Jesus resurrected again from death and lives forever more. That is an act of madness because the flesh has no reply to that act.

Christ's love compels us to act like Brian de Bois-Guilbert did in that novel. And that act of madness is a winning move, without limitations. God himself has made it so.