How do we actually stop sinning? (Part 2)

"We can not do anything in 'our own strength,'"  according to some Christians.

By "anything," they mean the act of submitting to God and resisting the devil, or doing God's will and refusing the devil's.  This is an attempt in humility, according to Jesus' words, "Abide in me, and I in you. .. Apart from me you can do nothing." (See John 15)

The impression I've always gotten from this concept is that a miraculous power has to come over me, enable me to want to do God's will, and then make me do it.  So if I was tempted by sin, I should pray, quote scriptures, and wait for "the power."  According to those who hold such a belief, I should pray something like this, "I can't do it.  God, do it through me."  I should "let go and let God."  After all, "it's not about trying, it's about trusting."  And so the cliches go. 

I understand the desire of those who believe this, having been one who was taught the same, and one who practiced "letting go and letting God."  I know the desire to abide in Christ, to stay connected to Him in total dependence and total surrender, seeking His power.  But there are two problems with this belief:

1. A Deception.  The power never happened when I would wait for it to hit me.  No matter how many prayers I prayed or scriptures I quoted, God never made me want to obey Him, and He never made me obey Him.  No feeling came.  No internal motivation to resist sin came.  No internal supernatural ability came to say "no" to Satan and sin, and "yes" to God.

2. The reason is that God is not Satan or a demon.  He does not partake in possession or domination in the ways of Satan and demons.  With God there is the cooperation of free will submission. 

Understand these two truths: 

God does not do for us what He has given us the ability, responsibility, and authority to do. 

God does not require of us what He does not give us the ability, responsibility, and authority to do.

For example, in Judges 6:11-14, when God called Gideon to save Israel from the Midians, the LORD said to Gideon, "Go in the strength that you have and save Israel from the Midanites.  Am I not sending you?" 

What is the difference between Gideon "going in the strength that he has" and "going in his own strength," according to the present day cliche?  Nothing.  These are  two ways of saying the same thing.  And it is actually very encouraging for God to say this to Gideon.  It shows that all Gideon had to do was to  be as strong as he presently was  at that moment.  No more strength is required of him than what he had.   I believe this is what happened in the Old Testament, the New Testament, and what happens today with God's children in their God given missions.  We see this with Adam, Abraham, and Moses in the Old Testament.  We see this with Jesus in relationship to His disciples.  We'll discuss this in the coming blog....

How do we actually stop sinning? (Part 1)

I'm considering this as an additional chapter in my ebook, Is It Possible To Live Without Sin?  For now, I've had many thoughts about actually resisting sin. 

So, how do we actually stop sinning?

The answer to this question is given in Joseph’s resistance to temptation:

Now Joseph had been taken down to Egypt. Potiphar, an Egyptian who was one of Pharaoh’s officials, the captain of the guard, bought him from the Ishmaelites who had taken him there.

The Lord was with Joseph and he prospered, and he lived in the house of his Egyptian master. When his master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord gave him success in everything he did, Joseph found favor in his eyes and became his attendant. Potiphar put him in charge of his household, and he entrusted to his care everything he owned. From the time he put him in charge of his household and of all that he owned, the Lord blessed the household of the Egyptian because of Joseph. The blessing of the Lord was on everything Potiphar had, both in the house and in the field. So he left in Joseph’s care everything he had; with Joseph in charge, he did not concern himself with anything except the food he ate.

Now Joseph was well-built and handsome, and after a while his master’s wife took notice of Joseph and said, “Come to bed with me!”  But he refused. “With me in charge,” he told her, “my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.

One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. She caught him by his cloak and said, “Come to bed with me!” But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house. Genesis 39:1-11 NIV

Before we look at the situation with Joseph, let's look at what Paul says to the Corinthian Christians:

 "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it."  I Corinthians 10:13 ESV

For me, a problem in some Bible teaching is the divide between theology and history or practicality.  In other words, some read the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife and make a Sunday School Lesson out of it, but don't think of this as a situation that really happened between a real man and a real woman.  This is exactly what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 10:1-6

For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert. Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did.

Apply this to Joseph's temptation.  He was a man like I am a man, just like James said about Elijah:

"Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth."

So was Cain when God came to him, and so was Joseph, whom God was with as well.

Now, what do we see with Joseph when he is tempted?  What did he actually do to keep from sinning when he was tempted over and over again?

HE REFUSED! 
Plain and simple.  

But how did he refuse?  We will explore this in part 2....

An Introduction to My E Book

I  used to want to be a psychology major.  In fact, I was a psychology major and a music minor in my freshman year of college.  I remember sitting in psych classes and thinking to myself, "All we are doing is studying the sin nature."  Because of this, I dropped psychology and majored in music.

But the question of sin and our nature of sin never left me.

Are we doomed from birth with irresistible vices?  Vices so strong that even the Lord Jesus Christ cannot save us?  Habits so powerful that even the Holy Spirit's empower is not enough?

I never knew anyone else had these thoughts until I read the works of William Law, Watchman Nee, John Wesley, and Charles Finney. In reading them, I found hope and truth for what I had been seeking as long as I can remember--an answer to this question, which is now an E book I've recently written:

Is It Possible To Live Without Sin?

This book has been on my mind and in my heart from those days in college, practically already written.  It explores my thoughts and reasons for believing in the possibility of sinless life.  If you want to find the hope of the liberation from sin that comes from Christ, I invite you to think with me through the scriptures and our deepest desires.  May God bless us as we seek our truest salvation.

For and in depth look at the doctrine of Christian Perfection, also read
Cleansed and Abiding:  A Proposed View of Christian Perfection by JM Smith.

Frodo, Neo, and Freedom from Sinning (Part 2)

We've seen the salvation of Gollum, if you will, when he received Frodo as a new master, setting him free from the dark lord Sauron.  Think of Sauron as Satan, the ring as sinful desire, and Mordor as the Satan's evil kingdom or world system. 

Now we move from Mordor to the Matrix, and into the second analogy of being set free from sinning. 

Morpheus speaks to Neo about the Matrix, telling Neo what the Matrix is.  Neo, having been introduced to the truth, is now presented with a choice:  to reject falsehood and enter into truth, or to reject truth and remain in falsehood.  And what is this truth that Neo must accept?  That he's "been living in a dream world," that he is "a slave." 

Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

Neo:   What truth?

Morpheus:   That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.

If Neo is to become "the one," he must first accept the reality of his slavery.  He cannot be truly free, or "unplugged" until he sees that he is not free.  Like Gollum, he must have a revelation of his true situation.  So it is with every man and woman.

We too, were born into slavery, a prison of self centered passion, under a slave master named Satan, with this present world as his plantation. 

Satan=Slave master
Selfish passions/sin=Overseer
This world/matrix=Plantation

As an African American I've thought of the concept of embracing slavery.  Not of being a "sell out" or an "Uncle Tom," meaning one who loves oppression and refuses resistance.  The issue with the evils of slavery in America is idolatry--false gods, false masters.  "The white man" did not rightly own my ancestors.  He did not rightly own them, define them, or determine their actions.  Some of my ancestors sold some of my ancestors.  Yet even this does not come to the point.

It is written,
"The earth is the LORD'S and everything in it, the world and all who live in it."
"You are worthy O LORD to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they exist and were created."
"In Him we live and move and have our being."
"All things were created through Him and for Him, and in Him all things consist."
"You are not your own, you were bought with a price, therefore honor the Lord with your body, which is the Lord's"

In all of these scriptures, we see the true Owner, Definer, and Determiner, the true Master.  It is Him we embrace, and it is this slavery that we accept.

But our first father gave the earth to a rebel spirit.  Adam rejected God as his rightful Creator, Father, and Master, and accepted Satan as his new creator, father, and master.  And all of Adam's children belonged to Satan from that moment on--born into slavery, into a prison for their minds....

Frodo, Neo, and Freedom from Sinning

In Scripture sin is presented as a slave master.  (See my friend James-Michael's Sin as Conqueror, Captor, and Enemy.)

Look at Paul's description of sin in his letter to the Roman Christians:

"Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness."

Romans 6:16-18

In "The Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers," and "The Matrix," I see three very good analogies of sin as a master, and the way to freedom from sinning.

The first analogy is in "The Two Towers." There is a scene with Gollum in which he talks to himself about "the one ring."  Gollum is a slave to the ring--which tempts all who wear it with DESIRE, and POWER.  The ring's master is Sauron--THE DECEIVER...who for me is a kind of Satan figure. So Gollum is ultimately ruled by Sauron when he is ruled by Sauron's ring.  He cannot escape this master....until he has the revelation of a NEW master! Upon this realization, he sees that HE NO LONGER NEEDS THE OLD MASTER--THE RING, or SAURON/SATAN/SIN. So what does Gollum do with this realization? He commands his "sinful nature/the side of him enslaved to the ring" to "leave now and never come back!"

Upon experiencing his new found identity and authority, Gollum says, "We told him to go away, and away he goes!  Gone, gone, gone!  SMEAGOL IS FREE! "   Through Frodo, Gollum is reminded of who he really was and who he really is. It is only when Gollum is deceived concerning his new master that he turns back to his old master. I believe the same is true in relationship to sin as a master and Christ as a liberator from sin.

 Smeagol's nature became warped by the ring, and he couldn't find freedom until he received a new master. This is the same in relationship to Christ setting all who believe in Him free from sinning.  We must acknowledge the truth: that self-centered desires are our master.  We must then HATE self-centered desire as a master (just as Gollum hated the slavery of his ring ruled self.)  We must then reject the old master, which is sin, and accept a new master, which is Christ the Lord.  In accepting a new master, WE NO LONGER NEED THE OLD MASTER.  As Gollum said to his ring ruled self, so we would be able to say to the sin that rules us:  "Christ looks after us now.  WE DON'T NEED YOU ANY MORE!"

When Gollum realized he had a new master, there was nothing in his "warped ring ruled nature" that kept him from choosing Frodo and refusing Sauron. In the same way, our natures are warped from birth.  This is so because Adam listened to the Satan, the deceiver.  But our warped natures are not so warped that we cannot accept the freedom Christ offers us.  We still have a choice.  We can choose or refuse "the ring" of power and self-centered desire. And we can choose or refuse "the red and blue pill".....(To be continued.)

God does not predict the future.

God does not predict the future.  He has already experienced it.  (This truth was applied on the TV show "Fringe" to "The Observers," on the episode "Forced Perspective?")

I thought about this.  The usual thoughts.  Free will.  God's sovereignty.  Etc.

Conclusions?

Yes.

On the night that Jesus was betrayed, He "predicted" the Apostle Peter's denial, and told Peter the prediction: that before a rooster crowed, Peter would deny Jesus three times.  Peter denied the Lord's prediction of his denial.   Was Peter destined to fulfill the prediction?  I don't believe so.

I am free right now to type or stop typing.  God has already experienced this.  But I find no contradiction in God's experience because of the perfect intimacy in which God knows me.  I see it like this.

God sees me, or "perceives my thoughts from afar," as David says in Psalms 139.  Again, David says,

"You have searched me and known me.  You know my going out and coming in....Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely."

To experience what I will say or think in the future is to experience the totality of what I am saying right now, and thus of what I said yesterday.  In other words, who I am now expresses who I was and who I will be.  If I am fixed in my intention, then you, the reader, are experiencing my future, right now, as I write.  Yet God's experience of me is perfect, infinite, and eternal.   What seems a prediction for you and me, being of time and space, is really perfect intimacy for God.

Of course I'm not saying I've got God all figured out, and that there is no mystery for me as far as the Deity goes.  I'm saying I can "feel God" on the future thing,  to a certain extent, though I can't explain it.

Let's go back to Peter.  If Peter's wife, for example, heard Peter's conversation with the Lord that night, assuming she had an intimate knowledge of her husband, she could have said something like this,

"Peter, I feel like you have very good intentions, but I also get the feeling that you are not as resolved to die for Jesus as you think.  In fact I get the feeling that if it came down to it, you might actually deny Jesus emphatically!"  

Now Peter may have very well become angry with his wife's intuition, denying what she sensed with intensity.

Now apply this the Lord's perfect and intimate connection to Peter.  I don't see it as Jesus "reading Peter's mind."  I don't see this "looking into the future" thing that we do. I see Jesus knowing Peter perfectly, AND EVERYONE ELSE INVOLVED, INCLUDING THE ROOSTER THAT WOULD CROW THREE TIMES!

Intimate knowledge.  Perfectly all knowing intimacy.  Not this kind of scientific informational "fortune telling."  God's omniscience encompasses the all knowingness of "predicting the future" with 100% accuracy, but I believe it is in the context of intimacy, not mere information.  

What are you thinking?

Why arguing is stupid

Why is arguing stupid?

Some love arguing.  Some think arguing is healthy and necessary for intimacy.

This is my definition of arguing:

Verbal combat.  Two or more who seek to verbally conquer another by force of will, emotion, or reason, words being the weapon.

How is this healthy or necessary?

Disagreement and discussion can be healthy and necessary.  But forcing someone to listen is never necessary, healthy, or even intelligent.

Arguing is stupid because those who argue get locked in.

You've experienced it.  You've done it.  I've experienced it.  I've done it.
It's easy to notice when others do it, a little harder when we do it.  (But we DO know when we are doing it.)

You're arguing.  A button has been pushed on an issue you refuse to budge on.  There comes a point in the argument when you feel it ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to interrupt the one who is arguing with or against you.  You talk over her, BUT SHE WON'T STOP TALKING.  You YELL.  But he won't stop speaking!  On and on he goes!  She says the same things over and over again!  He makes the same points over and over again!

He is LOCKED IN.
She is LOCKED IN.

NEITHER HE NOR SHE IS LISTENING, EVEN TO HIMSELF OR HERSELF!

When someone is locked in, listening, as a whole, as a reality or possibility, ceases.  Mental, emotional, and volitional autopilot has kicked in.  Why?

Have you ever seen one of those war movies where someone is taken captive?  The one taken prisoner is tied up and about to be questioned.  If he does not answer the questions asked, or give up information, he will be tortured.  So the prisoner keeps saying his name, rank, and military numbers OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

LOCKED IN!

War.
Verbal combat.
Arguing.

Is the man listening to the one who is about to torture him?  Absolutely not!  Why?   

Because he perceives torturer as an enemy, hell bent on taking his freedom and identity.

This is the mindset of verbal combat, of arguing.

The parent, sibling, spouse, or coworker is viewed as an enemy of your identity, hell bent on taking it.  And at this moment, this view or opinion or line of reason DEFINES EVERYTHING YOU ARE!  SO HELP YOU GOD IF YOU GIVE IN!

SO YOU LOCK IN!
LOCK AND LOAD!!!

It's so stupid!  I hate it!  It NEVER gets anywhere!  Ever!  I've never "won" an argument from locking in, and no one has ever "won" an argument when they locked in with me.  Ever!

I hate talking over people, and when people talk over me.  I hate when a person talks louder and louder, over and over, and I hate doing that.  At that moment, I feel weak, not strong.  I feel like I'm out of control, not like I'm in control.

It's so stupid!

I can feel how bad it feels to act like that, but I lock in nonetheless!

Pride!
I won't back down!  I can't!  After all, my very identity is at stake, right!
STUPID!

How do we keep from doing this, ever again?

I read something online that I found to be bordering on genius!   It used the analogy of what is necessary for fires, the "fire triangle."  Air, something to burn, something to ignite.   Take any one of those away, and no fire can happen!  Period.  It can't!

Now, three things are necessary for "verbal combat"
1.  A subject to disagree upon (One considered the very essence of who you are!)
2. An "arguer" (One willing and able to do verbal combat with you on an issue that is your very life!)
3. An "arguee"  (One willing to argue back, self-defense if you will.)

Remove one of these, and verbal combat cannot happen.  There won't be a motivation to get locked in.

(I can't find the article on arguing to link it.  It's one of those articles you read, enjoy, but don't save as a favorite.  It was a parenting article.  If the one who wrote the article reads this, know that I am indebted to you.  Tell me who you are in the comments!)

"But what about discussions?"  some one may ask.  How can we have healthy disagreements and discussions without getting locked in?

You know when you are about to lock in, or when a topic comes up that triggers you getting locked in.  You can tell when someone else is about to lock in.  (Now there are times when you stumble unintentionally upon a subject that locks someone in, or when someone does that to you.  Either way, what I'm about to say applies.)

The key is our identity.  Who are we, really?  Are we the point we are trying to make in the argument at the moment?  Is that really who we are?

ARE WE OUR "OPINIONS?"

This is a crucial question, especially for us Americans.  We consider our identity to be our "liberties."

Freedom of speech
Freedom of expression
Freedom of religion
Freedom of opinion

We can say whatever we want. 
No, wait, even better.
We have a RIGHT to say what we want.
No.  Better still.
We have a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to think, feel, believe, and say WHATEVER WE WANT.  Any one who tries to take these rights is an enemy who must be resisted.  Right?

These are "spiritual thoughts," which means I will come to a spiritual solution to getting locked in.  It is written,

In the exercise of (God's) will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures.This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.  James 1:18-20 NASB

There it is people!  What do we want?

The anger of man (expressed in defending our opinions)

OR

The righteousness of God (whether that agrees or disagrees with our opinions?)

I mean really.  

Really.  

What do we want when we are arguing?  

We can deceive ourselves and say we want "the righteousness of God."  But both parties will claim that as they are yelling over each other and not listening to each other, which shows that NEITHER party wants this, because God has said through His word to be "quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger."  THIS is what achieves the righteousness of God, NOT "the anger of man," expressed in verbal combat, in which we are quick to speak, slow to hear (if we hear at all,) and very quick to anger.

The way to stop getting locked in is to stop focusing on ourselves, our opinions, our "rights."  We must deny ourselves, according to the Lord Jesus Christ, take up our crosses (which means rejection, suffering, and death) and follow Him.  We give up our "liberties" and our so called "identities."  

Easier said then done?  Why?  It is the first thing we are supposed to do when we accept the call to follow Jesus.  When His disciples heard the words, "Follow me," they left their families and lives and did exactly that.  Along the way they had to let go of many misconceptions about their Messiah and His mission, and Christ made no apologies about that.  He didn't make it easy at times.  But those who would truly follow Christ had to give up their lives for Him, literally.

Apply this to your favorite political candidate, if you have one.  Or apply this to your denomination, if you are a part of one.  Take a fundamental political or denominational view that you not only hold, but hold to intensely.  Why do you hold to it so vehemently?  Is it for Christ?  Does Christ need you to argue for him, and to get locked in when you argue?  Does Christ need you to defend YOUR candidate or YOUR denomination, keywords being YOURS?  Do we ever read, "And Jesus yelled over the Pharisees while the Pharisees yelled over Him, until the Pharisees backed down?"  No.  We do read that Jesus silenced his enemies, and that "no one dared ask Him any more questions." (Luke 40:39-40)  But how did He silence them?  Yelling?  Being locked in?  Not listening any more and saying the same thing, over and over again, louder and louder?  NO!  He silenced them with truth!  Spirit filled, Spirit led truth! This is how He silenced those who challenged Him.  We are to follow His example.  

But the reason Christ could be filled with and led by the Spirit in silencing His adversaries is found here:

 The Jews were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having studied?” Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. He who speaks on his own does so to gain honor for himself, but he who works for the honor of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him.  

John 7:15-18 NIV

The Lord Jesus did not speak on His own authority, or seek His own glory.  He wasn't expressing His "opinions," nor did He ever seek to do so.  He only did what He saw His Father doing, and He only said what His Father wanted Him to say, for His Father's glory, and not His own glory.  

When we engage in verbal combat, we speak from our own authority, and for our own glory.  As Americans, we speak from the authority of our so called liberty, and for the glory of our "independent" identity.  And what is worse, is that we claim that God Himself wants this!  

Arguing is stupid because it is based on a false reality, a false identity--a reality and identity that assumes we are the center.  We should focus on the true reality--God's kingdom and glory, and our true identity--those who express God's kingdom and glory.  When we do this, we may discuss or disagree, but we won't get locked in and refuse to listen.

May we never argue again.