Who Has the Higher View of God?
The age-old problem is that if God has an eternal decree, then how is it possible that man has a free will? And yet both are taught in Scripture, so it must be the case that this is somehow true. Rey, also calling himself Beowulf2k8, makes light of this whole issue in a response to a video theologian John Calvin did for me here.
What Rey reveals is a low view of Scripture and a low view of God’s sovereignty. I know that Rey has a low view of Scripture based on this post, in which he claims that the Bible contains a contradiction. Instead of resolving it, Rey gives more weight to James because James wasn’t an adulterer or a murderer (as David quite clearly was). That’s the easy way out. The more difficult way out is to try to figure out what the proper way to understand both texts together would be.
If we assume that “tempting” someone means to place a physical temptation in front of them, then there is no contradiction between Psalm 141:4 and James 1:13. The psalmist is speaking of God influencing a person’s desire, not placing a stumbling block in front of them. God influencing someone’s desire is consistent with other Scriptures, such as Exodus 4:21, Joshua 11:10, Isaiah 63:17, and Romans 9:18. James is speaking of placing physical temptations in front of someone.
I know that Rey has a low view of God’s sovereignty because he continually refers to man’s free will, as though he exalts our possession of a free will–which is itself a gift from God–above the Creator’s divine will and purpose.
Let’s keep those two points in mind as we discuss Rey’s actual arguments. Rey has a low view of Scripture and a low view of God’s sovereignty. That will make it easier to see the fallacies of his position.
First, Rey tries to argue against Compatibilism. Compatibilism is nothing less than the implication that man’s free will doesn’t contradict God’s divine decree. Compatibilism states that humans will always choose in line with their greatest desire of the moment. To which Rey says:
One’s greatest desire may be sex and they may forego it none-the-less. “Ah but only for a greater desire.” Perhaps and perhaps not. It doesn’t really matter, as Scripture clearly teaches that desires are not created by God pushing you.
This assessment is problematic. First, if one forgoes sex, it will be for a stronger desire, such as the impulse to please God, if such an impulse is present. Such an impulse can be developed with the discipline gifted to us by the Holy Spirit upon becoming a believer, and nurtured over time to become a greater desire. Hence all the biblical warnings that many atheists interpret as God being your personal “thought police,” like Philippians 4:8.
Second, Scripture does teach that God pushes you to create desires, as I’ve demonstrated above.
Next, Rey says:
If the reason God can predict the future is that he causes it, it is not a prediction, as we already said. Secondly, it does not make him any different from anyone else! Behold, God says, “I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning…” but if God decares the end from the beginning only because he pre-scripted it, then I am exactly like him in this regard, because if I pre-script something (like writing a computer program) I can then also declare the end from the beginning. In order for God’s predictive power to distinguish him from other sentient beings, he must have the power to predict things that he did not pre-script.
Nowhere does Rey deal with the actual verse: “I declare the end from the beginning.” Not “I predict,” but “I declare.” It is pretty obvious that God foreordains the future.
Notice that I didn’t say that God scripts the future like a movie, but that he foreordains the future. There are several ways to foreordain the future, and one of them is to allow something to happen rather than to script it carefully like screenwriter. I don’t believe that we are some movie following a script; I believe that we are free-willed creatures living out our lives. But I think that God has determined some actions, and has allowed others to take place. Not every single thing that happens is part of a carefully written script; some of it is simply allowed to take place. But in any sense, God foreordains all of it, or else he is not God.
There is no contradiction between God’s decree to save those who believe and obey the gospel, and man’s free will. In fact, man’s free will is necessary to the carrying out of the decree, because belief cannot be forced but must be free. God cannot save those who believe if he makes them believe, because then belief is no longer belief.
Again, believing that man’s free will is somehow more important than God’s eternal decree. But, there are a collection of verses in this post from Chris Rosebrough that disprove the notion that man can choose Christ as Savior. No one, by the way, said that anyone forced anyone else believe. God simply makes it possible for us to believe by opening our hearts to him through Jesus. Without God making the first move, belief is not possible.
Now, what would Rey do with Genesis 50:20? He says that:
One need not wonder, for if one is anything more than a robot following pre-set programming then one knows that people often state erroneous opions of what God is doing in their lives, based on their best guess, and such a speech is very often recorded in the Bible and is therefore only inspired in the sense of being an accurate historical record of the speaker’s word and not as a divine oracle.
There it is, that low view of Scripture that we talked about! What about Joseph’s accurate interpretations of dreams that take place earlier? Does that not establish him as a divine oracle? If so, I think that his words carry some weight here. Rey’s attempt at a clever dodge, but not much else. No effort to engage a text that clearly contradicts what he believes.
Now, back to the low view of God’s sovereignty:
I am saying that if God decrees evil to take place, if God pre-scripts the end goal to be evil, then despite all the hierarchy of contingent causes you might imagine between God and the final evil, he is found to be the author of the evil. Unless man is the FIRST CAUSE of evil, then God becomes the FIRST CAUSE of evil.
First, if God doesn’t decree or allow everything that takes place, in some sense foreordaining all, then he is not sovereign and therefore not God. If some maverick molecule exists outside of God’s sovereign control, then we have no assurance of anything! Maybe the God Rey worships has no control over human free will, but the God that I worship does.
So I ask: Who has the higher view of God?
Share this:
Posted on May 1, 2009, in Apologetics, Sin, Theology and tagged Calvinism, Sin. Bookmark the permalink. 33 Comments.
Josiah Concept Ministries 
“I know that Rey has a low view of Scripture based on this post, in which he claims that the Bible contains a contradiction. Instead of resolving it, Rey gives more weight to James because James wasn’t an adulterer or a murderer (as David quite clearly was). That’s the easy way out. The more difficult way out is to try to figure out what the proper way to understand both texts together would be.”
The proper view is simple: David’s prayers are his personal opinion except when they are Messianic prophecies. They are only inspired in the sense of being accurate historical accounts of what he prayed. That’s also why his lie in Psalm 51:4 “Against you only have I sinned” is there for the whole world to see as a bold-faced lie. This is no low view of Scripture nor does it argue against inspiration.
“If we assume that “tempting” someone means to place a physical temptation in front of them, then there is no contradiction between Psalm 141:4 and James 1:13.”
That assumption is totally disproven by the text, because God “tempted” Abraham and Moses in this fashion, i.e. tested. But when James says God tempts no man he means God does not entice to sin. The KJV has screwed us by translating too many words as “tempt” just as they have done with “hell” but we can recover yet. God tests us, but not above our ability, “but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (1 Cor 10:13) He does not, however, entice us to do evil, for “every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.” (James 1:14) To turn a man’s heart to evil or incline a man’s heart to evil, would be to not only entice, but really force a man to do evil. David’s paranoid fear that God might incline his heart to evil (Psa 141:4), is therefore unfounded and even blasphemous. But it is nothing more than his personal opinion recorded as history for us to learn from so that we will not make the same blasphemous mistake. Unfortunately, however, rather than seeing these bad types of Psalms as the ravings of an unregenerate and fallen wretch, Calvinsts love to make them the Oracles of God Himself in all their depraved details, especially when David calls for blood or when one of the other Psalmists exudes in the possibility that his enemies might have their infants brains dashed out on rocks. (Psa 137:9) You can rant on how Compatibilism proves that your view of God is not evil all you want, but Compatibilism is nothing but an assertion and you have nothing to back it up. If you are right, then God is simply pure evil. If I am right, then God is pure Good. If neither of us are right, then there is no God. Either way, I win and you lose, because I will live a better life than you. I will not bow my knee to an evil being or worship pure evil, nor will I (as Job chides his friends for doing) “speak wickedly for God and talk deceitfully for him” (Job 13:7) nor “accept his person.” If God is evil, then accepting his person and defending him at all costs is no virtue. But you’re god is not real, so God is good not evil.
“If some maverick molecule exists outside of God’s sovereign control, then we have no assurance of anything!”
If a molecule can overthrow your crappy god if he released micromanagerial control of it for a second, then he is no god at all. If you can’t see that, not only are you an unrepentant evil man seeking to justify your sins, but you’re a hopeless idiot.
“Maybe the God Rey worships has no control over human free will, but the God that I worship does. / So I ask: Who has the higher view of God?”
He whose view of God does not make God evil, and that would be Rey obviously. What you have a higher view of is David’s erroneous opinion, not God.
Who really knows Father? “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” Matt 11:27.
Pray that He will reveal the Father (His true nature, character, Person) to you. He will not do so until we are prepared to walk away, let go of our former, clouded perspective. Lose all to gain all.
CT,
Am I understanding you correctly that you identify God as the author of evil?
-a helmet
No, you aren’t understanding me correctly. Mankind is the author of evil; but God, who foreordains everything from eternity, allows the evil to exist for his own unsearchable purpose.
But according to you, Cory, “What Calvinism does teach is that God has an eternal decree, from the beginning of time, that everything that would happen does happen.” So, your position is really not that man is the author of evil and merely allows it to go on, but that God decreed each and every instance of evil that has ever happened to happen. You know that you are saying that God is the author and finisher of evil. BUT you also that saying such a thing is evil and blasphemous. Therefore, you try to say it without people realizing it, hoping that you can both convince people that God is the author and finisher of evil and yet also convince them that this isn’t what you are really saying, all at the same time. That is classic Calvinism, “God’s the author of evil, but you didn’t hear it from me, wink wink.”
There was a typo in one sentence; here is the correction: your position is really not that man is the author of evil while God merely allows it to go on, but that God decreed each and every instance of evil that has ever happened to happen.
CT,
God hates evil. Evil isn’t in line with God’s purpose but in opposition to it. There’s nothing good to arise out of evil. A bad tree will always continue to bear bad fruit. The only way to end this misery is to cut down such a tree and burn it. But never is there any good fruit to come from a bad tree and neither does the bad tree serve the maturity of the good trees.
-a helmet
Then why allow evil in the first place? Why not create a world in which no evil exists?
If we existed in a “safe only”, predictable realm what wonder, mystery and surprise could there ever be? Risk is an important aspect of faith, otherwise what or Who would we be placing our trust in?
The other issue is our (as sons, co-rulers) God given authority and rule mandate, why has it been delegated, who are we, who were we (originally, prior to the fall)?
Is there a surprising, grand finale planned, a total restoration outside the conventional thought? Hmm…what does this verse mean…as ALL died in Adam, so in Christ ALL will be made alive?(1 Cor 15:22)
He says “Be still and know that I am God”. To which I say…thank God.
He did. Remember, in the beginning God looked at everything and it was very good? Oh, forgot that one, did you? Evil entered the world through free will, not by God’s design. But how could evil exist without God creating it? Evil is not a substance, but an act! An act which those with free will are capable of committing. Free will itself is good–it is necessary for a sentient being–but because the being has freedom of choice (the very meaning of free will) it can choose to do evil.
That was in response to “Why not create a world in which no evil exists?” I don’t know why the post didn’t get indented.
“For thus says the LORD: ‘just as I have brought all this great calamity on this people, so I will bring on them all the good that I have promised them”. Jer 32:42
Hmm? Does He do us only good, or both good and evil? Or, what is the (good) purpose behind all that He would do? And can we trust Him…anyway?
This is not about calamity, John, but about whether God decreed your sins before you did them thus resulting in you doing them, or if he gave you free will and you chose to do them and he merely foresaw WITHOUT CAUSING THEM that you would do them. Cory is on the side that says God causes your sins, and I am on the side that says God does not cause your sins.
Hello John C,
It is one thing to cause calamity in raection to an already sinful world. But it is quite another thing to be the very origin of evil in the first place. God’s exercising his just wrath doesn’t make him the author of evil.
The notion that evil serves a good purpose is biblically untenable. Evil is always antipodal to the divine purpose, not in its accordance!
-a helmet
Helmet…
Thanks for your comments, I appreciate you. We must gaurd against the old temptation to place God in our proverbial “boxes” of doctrinally convenient space, for His ways (in totality) are truly as scripture says “past finding out”.
When faced with apparent evils and opposition we are quick to pass them off as being from the enemy, or from man, etc but when asked Job’s response was “God has done it”. When ancient Judah was divided and their loyalties mixed it threatened the very existance of Israel and made her more vulnerable to her many enemies. But the Lord said…”this thing is from Me” (1 Kings 12:24).
Faith towards God in the very midst of loss and opposition simply acknowledges that God in His great wisdom is able to take all the opposing forces that would seek to hinder us in our walk with God and literally turn these weapons against the enemy himself so that Satan brings about his own defeat.
Let us not be too quick to label, to assume but rather to choose to glorify God in…no matter what or who comes against us, to dignify every trial.
That does no justice to the same passage that I’ve been arguing with Rey over: “What you meant for evil, God meant for good.” Genesis 50:20.
It is true that God does benefit even of human sins. However he does so not because there is a good purpose in the evil, but in spite of the evil. That is to say, the Lord is able to bear the evil and still (triumphiert) over it.
God is omnipotent and not dependend on evil to accomplish his purposes. That’s absolutely crucial.
An example is the betrayal of the Lord Jesus by Judas. Was this sin necessary or did it serve a good purpose? Of course not, because Jesus’ enemies were (kurz davor) to stone him many times before, they had been trying to catch him and convict him of (capital sin) several times before. There was no need to be betrayed by someone among his disciples, he would have been killed sooner or later anyway! Furthermore, he was well-known enough that he could be identified without the special sign of a kiss to be identified by. After all, Jesus rebelled in the temple, some of the (Oberen) would surely know him and help (ihn ausfindig zu machen). So Jesus would have been detained and sentenced sooner or later anyway. Thus, God (triumphiert)in spite of Judas’ sin.
The notion, that evil serves a divine purpose is heretical. This notion must either deny God’s omnipotence or His perfect goodness. Both options are incompatible with the christian worldview.
Finally, note the Genesis 50,20 text says that God intended to turn the situation into something good, not that the evil deed was itself purposed. God isn’t glorified in sin and evil! Such a conception of God is heretical!
This is why the reformed theodicy that evil serves a greater good is untenable and against the christian worldview.
-a helmet
Sorry, there are mistakes in the former comment!
Here we go again:
It is true that God does benefit even of human sins. However he does so not because there is a good purpose in the evil, but in spite of the evil. That is to say, the Lord is able to bear the evil and still triumph over it.
God is omnipotent and not dependend on evil to accomplish his purposes. That’s absolutely crucial.
An example is the betrayal of the Lord Jesus by Judas. Was this sin necessary or did it serve a good purpose? Of course not, because Jesus’ enemies were on the verge of stoning him many times before, they had been trying to catch him and convict him of a capital sin several times before. There was no need to be betrayed by someone among his disciples, he would have been killed sooner or later anyway! Furthermore, he was well-known enough that he could be identified without the special sign of a kiss to be identified by. After all, Jesus rebelled in the temple, some of the authorities would surely know him and help search him out. So Jesus would have been detained and sentenced sooner or later anyway. Thus, God triumphs in spite of Judas’ sin.
The notion, that evil serves a divine purpose is heretical. This notion must either deny God’s omnipotence or His perfect goodness. Both options are incompatible with the christian worldview.
Finally, note the Genesis 50,20 text says that God intended to turn the situation into something good, not that the evil deed was itself purposed. God isn’t glorified in sin and evil! Such a conception of God is heretical!
This is why the reformed theodicy that evil serves a greater good is untenable and against the christian worldview.
-a helmet
Helmet…
Let me ask you a question, is there any such thing as “evil” in heaven? The obvious answer is…no. The unseen, eternal realm of the spirit, ie heaven is the only true, lasting reality. What we “see” here is an illusion and tied to the Adamic dream (nightmare) that the world has not yet fully awakened from.
Think fairy tales…they are trying to tell us something beautiful. Evil only exists in the realm of appearances, what we can “see” with our eyes and Jesus already warned us against “judging by appearances as did Paul saying…look NOT at what is visible (the natural, false) but look upon the invisible (spiritual, true). How can we “look upon” the invisible except with a renewed mind and the eyes of the spirit? Paul saying that the eyes of our hearts (spirit) may be enlightened that we may know the hope of our (true) calling. Evil is an illusion my friend although for now it “appears” very real.
Christ being the intersection of heaven (the true spiritual realm) and earth (the natural, false, physical realm) saying…may it be done on earth as it is in heaven. We need Father to restore in us the image of the (original, pre-fall, pre-adamic dream) spiritual man. 1 Cor 15:49.
Let’s go deeper still…
“Let me ask you a question, is there any such thing as “evil” in heaven? The obvious answer is…no.”
It is an interesting question. Some translations of Ephesians 6:12 have the last clause as “against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” The KJV simply has “against spiritual wickedness in high places.” However, the Greek word uses is epouranios, which is normally translated as “heavenly” (like in Mat 18:35) and which is the same word as used in Ephesians 1:20 which says that Christ is set down at God’s “right hand in the heavenly places.” Since Paul indicates that there are “spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places,” Paul either does not see the casting out of the devil as yet complete, or Paul really was a Dualist who believed in two gods like Marcion thought when he produced his 10 epistle dualistic Pauline canon.
TheComingForth,
If evil is only an illusion, isn’t this painful illusion itself something evil? Isn’t the awful experience of this illusionary nightmare we call “evil” — itself evil? If we say evil is just an appearance, something unreal, then we must wonder why something which doesn’t even exist can cause us so much agony. This illusion would itself be evil. Thus, we we deny the reality of evil, we just define it away but it is still there. And when you suffer, you don’t care whether your suffering is just apparent or real, because you can’t turn the suffering off and it doesn’t matter whether you suffer from something real or from a real illusion.
-a helmet
Rey, may I ask you a question? Are we righteous, or sinful? Or both? Which do you say?
I say read Ezekiel 18. That all men sin is certainly true, but those who repent and live the best life they possibly can have always been termed righteous in Scripture. When Paul says in Romans 3:10 “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one” he is both misquoting and taking a passage out of context, John. He is quoting Psalm 14:3 which actually says “there is none that doeth good, no, not one” not “There is none righteous, no, not one.” But also, he is taking it out of context because the Psalmist clearly distinguished between the people of God and the workers of iniquity in the next verse, “Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.” When he says “there is none that doeth good, no, not one” the Psalmist is NOT referring to all humanity, but to the “workers of iniquity” who have no knowledge and eat up God’s people. Jesus himself, as you well know, John, says “I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” and “I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just (i.e. righteous) persons, which need no repentance.” (Luke 15:7) Although all men are sinners in the obvious sense that all men sin, and thus it can be argued by a sophist (like Paul) that in a way no man is righteous (because none is absolutely without fault), the Scripture generally uses the terms sinner and righteous in a different signification than that! In Scripture, the word sinner refers to someone who refuses to repent and who goes on in sin wilfully, and righteous refers to one who has repented and is seeking to live as right as they can. This is very well explained in Ezekiel 18 where the transition from being a sinner to being righteous is clearly pointed out as being repentance from sin to striving to obey God, and where the transition from being righteous to being a sinner is pointed out as being repentance from righteousness to serving sin!
Rey,
Thx, I think you mistook the meaning of my question, I was not pointing any fingers my friend. I appreciate your thoughtful response anyway.
Scripture never tells us that we are to “strive” to be good, or to be righteous, rather that we are to “strive to enter His rest”. We (our flesh) is incapable of keeping the law, only Christ could and did fulfill that high and holy calling. The secret is this, it takes Christ IN us to live the “Christian” life, we are utterly incapable yet we continue to “strive” until one day, exhausted from our own self efforts and many failures Father mercifully brings us to the end of ourselves and we simply “rest” in His life within who Father is pleased with, that “second” man from heaven who lives (unseen) in the regenerated man.
Father would not have his beloved with a sin-consciousness, but rather a righteousness consciousness (Heb 10:2), for as He (Jesus) is in the world, so are we (1 John 4:17)…and He is utterly holy & righteous. Christ IN you is the mystery of the ages. Col 1:27.
Anyway, back to my original question…the answer to your’s and Cory’s argument is found in that context.
“Scripture never tells us that we are to ‘strive’ to be good, or to be righteous, rather that we are to ‘strive to enter His rest’.”
Are you sure? What about Hebrews 12:14 “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord”? Or what about Matthew 7:12 “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets”?
I agree that the assistance of God is to be sought in perusing holiness.
“Anyway, back to my original question…the answer to your’s and Cory’s argument is found in that context.”
Not really. This is only a very incidental tangent. The argument at hand is over whether or not God is the author and finisher or evil, i.e. whether God decreed our sins to take place thus resulting in them taking place, or whether God gave us free-will and we chose to sin totally absent of any divine decree of causing our sin.
above, should read “the author and finisher OF evil” not “or evil”
Rey,
An unhealthy obsession with sin is well…unhealthy. Sin has been (past tense) dealt with once and for all…”By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all”. Heb 10:10
Self improvement is both a sin and an impossibility. Christ in you is your only ministry (pleasing sacrifice unto God). There is nothing worse than the flesh trying to be holy. He IS our holiness.
As far as your ongoing (never ending) dispute with Cory, no God is not the author of our sin (harmatia meaning to miss the mark). But neither were/are we completely free to choose not to sin while sin still reigned in our members, was our (inherited) nature, was our first father (adam). Now that we are “in” Christ, a progressive transformation is occuring, a metamorphosis, a coming forth of His nature within is being perfected, yet it is already done from the eternal perspective but we, being subject to the element of time in this temporal existance must…by patience inherit the promises (Christ’s nature) and subsequent benefits. Heb 6:1. How to speed up the process? Cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
We are moving from one level, from one glory to another as the Psalmist wrote…from “glory to glory” until…Christ be formed in us. Gal 4:19. None of us have arrived, but we…press on toward the high calling in Christ Jesus. We “miss the mark” less and less as we empty ourselves, of ourselves and He becomes Himself within us. Gal 2:20. This process (our transformation, metamorphosis into Christlikeness) is beautifully illustrated in Proverbs 4:18…but the path of the just (the justified, that’s us) is like the shining sun, that shineth brighter and brighter unto that perfect day.
No, God is not the author of our sin but neither are we fully free not to sin…until Christ’s nature has been formed within us. Thankfully, God is Love and is faithful to complete that which He begins in us, for…it pleased the Father to reveal His son in me (and you). Gal 1:16.
“An unhealthy obsession with sin is well…unhealthy.”
I agree whole-heartedly John!!!!! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! It is Calvinism that has this unhealthy obsession, however, not me. I’m trying to cure them of this obsession. They just obsess and obsess on how they think God makes people sin and nobody can do any better because God is behind their evil. They need to be healed.
You guys want to know what I really believe about just how free we really are? Then allow me to share what Father has dropped in my heart in the last year…warning…buckle your seat belt! Go easy on me Cory…I arrived here after many, many years.
—————————————————————-
There’s a deep rut in the Christian faith, as most believers experience it. It’s like a ditch that you run your car into and can’t get out of. Unless God tows a believer out of the rut, he or she will never fully live out of their union with Christ.
The rut is this: most of us believe that in the depths of our being we are both good and bad. Or, to put it in theological terms, we are both righteous and sinful. Using a common illustration, we believe that we have within us both a white dog and a black dog, a good nature and a bad nature, that are fighting for control.
But that is not true. It is vital that we know it’s not true, because if we believe that we are both righteous and sinful, it will be impossible to live out of our union with Christ and to rest, trusting that He lives through us moment by moment. Instead, we will be focused on ourselves, on getting our act together, on winning the war that supposedly rages within us, trying to suppress the bad part of us so that the good part will reflect the character of Christ. This endless self-effort is the complete opposite of what Paul wrote:
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God… (Galatians 2:20)
The only way out of this dilemma, of believing that we are both good and bad, is to understand that the realm of the spirit, above the line, is singular. It is one. The realm of appearances, below the line, is a duality. It is two.
In the realm of appearances, there is constant evidence of good and evil, both outside and inside us. If we judge by appearances, we arrive at the logical conclusion that we are both good and bad. That looks entirely valid. Christians have believed this for centuries. Except for a small minority who have come to know their true identity in Christ, the whole Christian world accepts the lie. Unfortunately, although something may not be true above the line, if below the line we think it is true, it still controls us. We must choose to live out of what is singular, rather than what is dual.
The realm of the spirit, the singular realm, is eternal reality. That is where our spirit being lives, and where our true identity is settled forever. The realm of appearance, although we must live in it in the here and now, is false as far as our identity goes. All of life depends on which realm is ultimate reality to you: the realm of spirit or the realm of appearances. That’s going to determine what you believe and how you live.
Choosing to believe that you are not both good and evil can be difficult. All of the external proof, all of the apparent evidence, all of the sight, supports the opposite: that you have two natures. “You are good, yes, a little good, but boy, you are still wicked; you are still evil.” Only the Holy Spirit can reveal to you that you only have one nature, not two. In the core of your being you are not both righteous and sinful; you are only righteous.
Helmet…
Sorry, that last comment from “The Coming Forth” was from JOHN C…
Pingback: Rey and Inconsistency « Josiah Concept Ministries