John UK wrote: There's no such thing as freedom in the UK any more. the choices people make depend more on financial ability or disability than on free choice.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, John.
Lack of freedom and choices makes one feel trapped and stifles creativity and initiative. We probably only experience true freedom momentarily in this life. One can be imprisoned in a mind or body that doesn't work, or actual physical imprisonment. I've had family members who have endured such, and as a family we endured together.
I've had little material goods during periods of life. At other times, I've had more than I needed. Material goods did not make me happy. Relationships are where I find much joy and sorrow. One does need a certain amount of basic necessities to be free to pursue interests. Food deprivation would certainly have a huge impact on a person's well-being. A safe place to live, and a job that provides enough to live beyond the day to day would give one a certain measure of freedom from stress.
I look forward to and desire the Lord's return, more so, as godlessness increases.
P.S. Your mention of the water rats made me think of Wind in the Willows. Have you read that?
John UK wrote: My landlord ran a mains cable from a barn to the caravan so I have mains electric up to 13amps, and I have a 47kG propane gas bottle which fires up a gas boiler for hot water and shower, and a gas fire in the lounge. My last place was a rented bungalow, and when I moved here I brought my own bed with me, a bolt together pine single with decent mattress - very comfy. As a Christian, I like the fact that I have no near neighbours, and all caravans are detached, so I can walk all the way around; lovely. My landlord is nice man, he has given me loads of space in a field he ploughed up recently, for my veggies. The caravan is fairly stable, but it does shake a bit when the wind gets up. And being aluminium framed, it gets very hot when sunny
We really only need a few necessities to live, don't we? Do you feel free living a simple lifestyle? I think men can do it better than women, although, in a recent publication, I read about a woman who bought a house without electricity or running water. She liked the idea of foraging for her food - wild berries, nuts, etc. Of course, this was probably weekend living for her.
Was this a choice for you because of your health? Will you continue to live where you now live?
John UK wrote: Hi Candle Lit No you're not the only one; I am missing charles m (prince charles) very much, but I do not think there is anything amiss. However, if he is not back by the weekend, I may just send an e-mail to his church in Bangor and see if he is all right. Maybe there is no internet signal in the Caribbean, and if he's on board the royal yacht, we might not hear from him for weeks. If you want to see what John 10:10 looks like in Welsh, the church Charles attends is in a very Welsh-speaking area, and have posted it on their [URL=http://www.ebenezerbangor.org.uk/index.html]]]HOME PAGE[/URL] in both English and Welsh. I never could get a hold of the Welsh lingo.
I thought of you last evening when our power went out because of a storm. We had to use candles.
Do you use a generator in your caravan? Is your caravan safe when you have high winds? I was wondering how you decided to live so simply. I think simple is definitely good, but I would need hot water and a comfortable bed.
You are a good friend to check in on Charles and his well-being. If he is on that royal yacht, he probably doesn't want to be disturbed by the likes of us.
Okay, to be ON-TOPIC, I say that a confession of faith means NOTHING apart from the INDWELLING Holy Spirit. I have been most disappointed in having believed WHAT a person said in regards to belief contrasted with how they live. The demons believe, but are not saved.
Now, I'm OFF-TOPIC - Am I the ONLY one who has noticed that our dear brother, Prince Charles, went out to catch some waves on Sunday, and has not returned to these SA boards? Where is a search team to find him - somewhere in Wales? Maybe he could be found at the Creation Institute? Is there one?
P.S. I've been introspective this week, but I've been reading the posts. Good posting.
John UK wrote: Thank you Candle Lit. It is since I took up painting that the Lord has been opening mine eyes to his creation, and especially the wonderful colours, the great variety, the way sunlight affects and influences how we see something as simple as a tree. I am always praising the Lord that he grants me life to understand more and more about him and his handiwork. And sunsets really do thrill me. How I long to be able to capture on paper an impression of a glorious sunset.
Once God opens our eyes spiritually, ALL of creation proclaims His GLORY, in ways only His children can experience. When we are alive to God, we are alive to everything that He has created. We are truly blessed. Aren't we?
Scholium wrote: Here is some more of Candle Lit's Bible verses.... Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, ((CL amended = read spiritual)) sold under sin. Since the carnal flesh iaw Candle is NOT sinful then what Paul really meant to say was Quote """"we know that the law is spiritual but I am spiritual sold under sin""" OR Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. CL amended version... """"For to be spiritually minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace."""" Confusing isn't it???
Yes, that is confusing. Take note: it is YOUR translation that is both inaccurate and confusing.
Now, I am going to assume the best of you Scholium, because one time long ago, you were nice to me. I am going to assume that you misunderstood something that you THINK I siad, taht I did not say. Preahps, you dndiot raed my psot crorcetly. I tohguht if I wtore it in my new lngaugae, you wuold udnretsnad it bteter. Hpoe tihs hleps! I did not say waht you tohguht I siad!
John UK wrote: Tidbit Most interesting post, and highly delightful: it is like a summer sunset with a new gamboge sky and streaks of scarlet lake intermingled with prussian blue and permanent rose mixed to make a purple, gliding down over the distant hills until disappearing off the edge of the world, never to be seen again until the following morning when miraculously it resurrects and appears once again to delight my vitamin D recepticles.
Ha ha ha....John, you have a gift for painting a picture whether it is with watercolours or text.
Scholium wrote: 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; ((Or they that are after the spirit do mind the things of the spirit??)) [followed by] - but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
Candle lit your religion/doctrine/theology whatever has a few problems with terminology.
When I look at your 4:12 p.m. post as a whole, all I see are parentheses and = signs. 'fess up. You wanted to be a mathematician, didn't you?
Scholium, my eyes glaze over as to the meaning of your 4:12 p.m. post, and my mind goes into a spin trying to decipher your 4:57 p.m. post!
But, seriously, the ones who live according to the flesh do so because they have not been born of the Spirit. All they can do is feed the flesh, because they do not have the Spirit of God. They walk according to the god of this world.
Conversely, the one who lives according to the Spirit, brings forth the fruit of the Spirit, and Jesus said, "You will NEVER die." His spirit never dies.
What do you think of that?
Thank you for your support. I'm getting dizzy reading Scholium's posts.
DJC49 wrote: Why don't you just allow SCRIPTURE inform you as to how the PEOPLE of Jesus' day saw him? Jn 7:12 "And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people." Mt 16:14 "And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets." Mt 21:11 "And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee." Mt 21:46 "But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet." _____ Do these verses change your perspective a bit about how the Jewish people understood Jesus as to who He was? Earlier you said: "I think they [the people] KNEW he was the one they had been looking for - THE SON OF GOD!" And now?
Scripture ALWAYS says it best, and a big "thumbsup" to you for not deviating, neither + , nor -.
DJC49 wrote: *Candle Lit* -- You made an "interesting" point yesterday.
I found it "interesting" that YOU think that the PEOPLE KNEW that Jesus was the "Son of God" and here's why: In Matt 16:13 Jesus asked: "Who do PEOPLE say that the Son of Man is?" The disciples replied (v.14): "Some say John the Baptist; and others Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."
Isn't it interesting that it took a work of divine revelation by the FATHER to reveal the true identity of Jesus to Peter, yet YOU believe that the PEOPLE **KNEW** that Jesus was the "Son of God!" -- despite the evidence and testimony given us in Scripture to the contrary [Matt 16:14].
The Jewish people had the Scriptures. They were a people looking for a Messiah that had been prophesied down through the ages. They knew of Moses and of Elijah, so when Jesus came on the scene performing miracles, wherever He went, speaking with WISDOM, they knew SOMETHING was up! They knew the Scriptures that it was prophesied that Elijah would come BEFORE the Day of the Lord. So, even if they didn't know Jesus was God incarnate, they knew He was not like them. Many knew about Him, even as today, but ONLY the HS could reveal to them JESUS as SAVIOUR - as is true today.
DJC49 wrote: *Candle Lit* -- You made an "interesting" point yesterday. You said: "When Jesus arrived on the scene healing lepers, and all kinds of diseases, and opening the eyes of the blind, PEOPLE WERE BLOWN AWAY. Jesus' miracles were astonishing. He walked on water! People couldn't believe what they were seeing! He was causing a stir that had the religious and political people in an uproar! I THINK THEY [the people] KNEW HE WAS THE ONE THEY HAD BEEN LOOKING FOR - THE SON OF GOD!" I found it "interesting" that YOU think that the PEOPLE KNEW that Jesus was the "Son of God" because in Matt 16:13 Jesus asked: "Who do PEOPLE say that the Son of Man is?" The disciples replied (v.14): "Some say John the Baptist; and others Elijah; but still others, Jeramiah, or one of the prophets." Now .... You say the people KNEW that Jesus was the Son of God ... yet ... this fact of Christ's identity had to be REVEALED to Peter by the Father. You need to reconsider your position.
Okay, I'll go put my thinking cap on, and get back to you!
DJC49 wrote: Sooo ....... what exactly are you trying to say here, *Candle Lit*? That the Jews circa 30 A.D. were anticipating the coming of YHVH "in the flesh?" Or perhaps that they were looking for the appearance of the 2nd Person of the Trinity? You realize, of course, that the 1st century Jews had NO theological category for either concept, don't you?
Well, first of all, DJ, you need to leave your theological jargon with your fellow theologians when you are speaking to others - especially, if you want to communicate the gospel. The muslims, in particular, think that Christianity has 3 Gods, and, that is understandable given how theologians want to present Him. The Jews knew that God was ONE. They had looked for a Messiah with anticipation for generations. Yes, God had appeared to some in the form of an angel or man - pre-incarnate. And, they also knew God was Spirit. When you try to divide Him and define Him as a concept - the Trinity, you are trying to explain that which is incomprehensible. God is ONE. HE SAID it! Jesus is God incarnate. The Spirit is God. They are Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Beyond that, you can't present them separately and make any sense, not even to a Christian. We just don't understand it.
Scholium wrote: 1] Within what? The body - thats flesh. You cannot split the body up into parts where some bits are unaffected by sin. Flesh in Scripture describes all the working parts of man, whether body or soul. They are interconnected and one does not exist on earth without the other. 2] When do you suggest that the "flesh" bits become affected by this spirit of sin? - At birth? 3rd grade? every tuesday? Please Candle think this through! How can you separate the body and soul in regard to cause and effect of sin? Even when they become indwelt by the Spirit the mortal remains a sinner.
The hand does not say, "okay, let's steal something." The legs do not say, "Let's walk into this evil place." Let's say a man loses 2 legs and 2 arms. Is he less sinful because he has lost those limbs? The arms and legs do not sin in and of themselves. Once they are separated from the body, then what?
What if a person is completely paralyzed, but can think. Is he less sinful because he cannot indulge what is in his heart?
The body parts are not sinful. Sin is "fleshed out" through the body parts, but if a man had no use of his body, he would still be sinful. THINK!
DJC49 wrote: Peter must have struggled mightily about Christ being the "Son of the living God" and what it meant and implied. We must remember that ALL Jews were strict monotheists, and the notion of "twinity" just wasn't in their thinking. THE God of Isa 6 & Exod 19 in the flesh? THE God having a SON? The very idea must have fried all their circuits! Hey, even today, we who have SO much more light about these matters STILL wrestle with the truth of God having more than 1 Person.
There was a precedent from the very beginning, for God appearing to man. to Adam in the Garden. Then there were the "theophanies" of the OT. God in flesh pre-incarnate appearing to men like Abraham and Jacob. Then there are all the passages of Scripture looking for and anticipating the Messiah. When Jesus arrived on the scene healing lepers, and all kinds of diseases, and opening the eyes of the blind, people were blown away? Jesus' miracles were astonishing. He walked on water! People couldn't believe what they were seeing! He was causing a stir that had the religious and political people in an uproar! I think they KNEW He was the ONE they had been looking for - the Son of God! That's why the religious leaders wanted Him dead.
Scholium wrote: Sorry but I can't accept the idea that part of the human existance is an "innocent" bystander where sin is involved. It is the physical body which dies. Death is a sin! Whereas the spirit is eternal. "Flesh. Certain obvious meanings literal and figurative, are expressed throughout the Bible by the word "FLESH." The words se'er and basar in the OT and sarx in the NT describe the vehicle and circumstance of man's physical life in this world. Thus in Phil 1:22-24 Paul contrasts abiding "in the flesh" with departing to be "with Christ."" "The NT view of the FLESH as the central and dynamic principle of fallen humanity." "There can be no salvation which is not a salvation of flesh" Note Ezek 36:26. Here he implies what Paul states that the FLESH has become perverted and that GOD plans for humanity that which we have learned to call the "resurrection of the body." The NT doctrine of the FLESH is chiefly if not exclusively Pauline. The FLESH is a dynamic principle of sinfulness Gal 5:17,24, Jude 23. Rom 8:5,7. - "the mind of the flesh."" J A Motyer
Put this post in your words, please.
I have to go - honor my mother-in-law. It's mother's day, and tradition rules. I think mothers should be honored every day.
DJC49 wrote: TTAHS TLLTAOY UVLLBBNAIEEE AND AUTOELBSY AZNIAMG. GOOD SFUTF! Ttahs tlltaoy uvllbbnaieee and autoelbsy azniamg. Good sfutf! (Deos taht hlep?)
That's totally unbelievable and absolutely amazing. Good stuff! (Does that help?) I wasn't at the computer, and when I returned, it took less than a minute with yours. Totally and absolutely took about 15 seconds. The rest was a breeze, but not as easy as my post. Apostrophes and punctuation helps. It is possible to read pages of print fluidly once one gets the hang of it. We have a new language!
Mike wrote: A spelling critic, heskyden? You need be more careful if you are taking on the role. For your info, the word you sought in "spelt"(a grain) is "spelled."
Mike, In fairness to our friend, Heskyden, "spelt" has a 2nd meaning that is used by the British, and it is the past tense of "spell." I looked it up. I think it is nitpicking to find fault with a comment because of spelling or grammar. Ideas may need correcting, but if it is readable, then forget the corrections.
Sepankig of - did you konw taht you can raed a setncene if the frsit and lsat letetrs are coercert and the letetrs inbteewen are palced incoercertly? See you jsut did it? You can raed wolhe paargarphs, esaliy, qiuclky.
Okay, Scholium and DJC, thanks for the correction. The Gnostics did not value the body, only the soul. Is that correct?
Now, Scholium, you put a lot in your post, and I don't have space to address everything, but what I would like to say is this: the hand, in and of itself does not sin, nor does the eye, nor does the mouth. Sin comes from within, and is carried out in the body. Skin, muscles, tendons, bones, brain matter, ears, eyes, mouth do not sin in and of themselves, separate from the spirit!
It is the spirit within man that comes up with all kinds of evil. If your spirit is evil, then the body will do that which is evil. However, the body itself is wonderfully created by God, and it is sinful to treat it as contemptible. Scripture says that our bodies are a "temple" of the Holy Spirit. How can you dishonour the "temple" that God has created for the indwelling of His Spirit by summarily dismissing it as though it were to be disdained?
If we are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, the fruit of the spirit will be love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, self-control. And this fruit will be manifested in this body of flesh. See?
Scholium wrote: Yes I see the Holy Spirit indwelling! All too glaringly - in comparison to the lump of sin-filled clay that I would gladly give up. The presense of the Holy Spirit is what reveals and teaches me the foul, wretched and unworthy nature of the flesh,
Read your own post! The "flesh," as in "earthen vessel" molecules of earth - is NOT the problem with man! Flesh defined in Scripture is not the "physical" makeup. It is about our "spirit enslaved and manifesting itself in THROUGH the earthen vessel."
You sound like a STOIC.
When we have the "HOLY SPIRIT" - we are new creations, the outworkings of which manifest the fruit of the Spirit, in this earthly temple.
Ohhhh. . .I'm gonna leave this one with John. He'll set you straight!