Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jeff@slovax.wa.com (jeff) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Natural Man (was RE: homosexuality) Message-ID: Date: 13 Jul 90 09:00:27 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: R & D Associates, Fort Lewis, WA Lines: 82 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu All of us suffer from an affliction known as 'the natural man'. The Bible teaches us that the 'natural man' is condemned by God. God, however, saw fit to provide Christ Jesus as our salvation from our 'natural' condition. This salvation is not 'in' our condition, but 'from' our condition. A thief is not offered salvation so that he can continue stealing. An adulterer is not offered salvation so that he can continue in adultery. The same goes for every 'natural condition' of man. Jesus taught that we cannot follow Him until we have shed the burdens of our natural lives. We 'naturally' tend toward the very characteristics for which God condemned us in the first place. Christ Jesus calls us OUT of this tendancy, to be His disciples. *************************************************************************** ** THE NEXT 3 PARAGRAPHS ARE SOMEWHAT SARCASTIC - I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE ** *************************************************************************** Pardon my ignorance, but where was I when they threw out the old testament? You remember, don't you? That wonderful history of how God admonished and nurtured His chosen poeple. I've read a lot of responses talking about the 'opinions' of Paul. Since when do we get to pick and choose what's inspired word of God and what's merely opinion? Appearantly, we can choose when it best suits us. I suppose I'll choose to ignore the 'opinions' regarding the loving respect of my wife and family. You know, of course, that I was born with a natural tendancy to dominate and beat women and children. Or maybe I should protest the adultery 'opinions', cause there's just something about me - It just seems natural for me to chase the ladies. From the very beginning, we've had God telling His poeple what He likes and what He detests. I guess all that 'stuff' He told them about holiness and righteousness just doesn't apply anymore. Sad. I must seem pretty naive, what with believing that murder and stealing and lying and adultery and homosexuality and the like are still sins. I mean really - just because God said it was wrong, how can I possibly think it's still wrong? After all, that was a long time ago! ***************** ** END SARCASM ** ***************** My point is, Paul is not the only 'opinionated' person in the Bible. God has a few opinions of His own! And most of them will be found in the history of the original covenant. For a start, try Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Dueteronomy. Good old likes and dislikes of God. Hard to argue against phrases such as "...these things are destestable to the Lord." jeff -- [ jeff@SLOVAX.WA.COM -- Jeffry H. Loucks, RDA, Inc. (206)967-8018 ] [ -or- 1304 34th St Ct NW, Gig Harbor, WA, USA 98335 (206)851-8908 ] [ Buried with Christ in baptism, raised with Christ in a newness of life! ] [I'm tempted to call the comments about picking and choosing opinions a "cheap shot". It's cheap because it suggests that people are making their choices based on ulterior motives, which is a judgement that you aren't in a position to make. There are a number of Christians that believe Paul's judgements were guided by his understanding of the society, and might be different in a different society. Adopting this position certainly opens up the *opportunity* for ulterior motives, because it means that people are going to have to use judgement in deciding how to apply what Paul says to our situation. But people who operate in this way do attempt to exercise some controls. Using judgement is always "dangerous". No doubt people do succumb to this danger at times. But the only way to know whether this has happened in an individual case is to look at the analysis. To dismiss arguments without examining them, and simply assert that the person is picking things as he likes is making an accusation about someone's motives that seems a violation of Christian charity. They could just as well respond that you are refusing to consider the context of Paul's judgements because you are a bigoted person who wants to avoid having to reconsider your prejudices. The point is that you can attribute unworthy motives to any position. It never settles anything. Let's instead adopt a charitable interpretation of what our Christian brothers and sisters are doing, and simply say that we think they have made a mistake. --clh]