From jefferis at petersonsales.net Fri Nov 7 19:13:37 2008 From: jefferis at petersonsales.net (Jefferis Peterson) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:13:37 -0500 Subject: [Roundtable] Hello new members Message-ID: I recently updated http://www.ScholarsCorner.com to reflect a new, more contemporary look and feel. I also consolidated all the various types of pages accumulated over the years into 2 standardized designs. This list has been quiet for some time, but new discussions are most welcome. Jeff ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jefferis Peterson, Pres. Web Design and Marketing http://www.PetersonSales.com From jefferis at petersonsales.net Thu Dec 11 08:28:52 2008 From: jefferis at petersonsales.net (Jefferis Peterson) Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 08:28:52 -0500 Subject: [Roundtable] What if Starbucks Marketed Like a Church? A Parable. Message-ID: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7_dZTrjw9I Javalujah! This is a riot. I never tried any of these tricks... Perhaps that is why the churches I shepherded didn't grow :-) Jeff ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jefferis Peterson, Pres. Web Design and Marketing http://www.PetersonSales.com From jefferis at petersonsales.net Tue Dec 30 19:29:27 2008 From: jefferis at petersonsales.net (Jefferis Peterson) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:29:27 -0500 Subject: [Roundtable] Test again from another address... Message-ID: Test... Not seeing me emails ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jefferis Kent Peterson http://www.scholarscorner.com Feeling Guilty? Are you "Pardoned or Paroled?" From jefferis at petersonsales.net Tue Dec 30 19:30:23 2008 From: jefferis at petersonsales.net (Jefferis Peterson) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:30:23 -0500 Subject: [Roundtable] The Psychology of Works Righteousness Message-ID: I had this discussion online a few years ago, but there have been a few requests lately for more information. It is rather long... Sorry... Subject: [Theologos] The Psycho-dynamics of Righteousness - part 1 On 12/19/03 9:09 AM, "William Witt" wrote: > Why would it be works righteousness to suggest that staying away from > worship is a sin, but it is not works righteousness to suggest that > stealing or lying are sins? Bill I'm going to re-title this discussion and start with a clean approach because I think both of you have missed my point. I want to take a look at Romans 7 and 8 as a means of elucidating what I believe Paul was trying to get across in the scriptures I cited. No one would argue that there is good and evil or right and wrong, but Paul's main argument is that the Law is powerless in its production of righteousness in us. In fact, if we attempt to live by the law and secure, establish or produce divine righteousness in ourselves - such attempts are counterproductive. Why would Paul says this and what dynamic is he addressing? ?But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit. What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin. I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, ?You shall not covet.? But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.? Romans 7:6-13, RSV. Paul starts this chapter by comparing our obligation to the law to the law of marriage, but when one spouse dies, one is free. In the same way, a dead man has no obligation to the Law: > Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of > Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from > the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. Now it is important to point out here that Paul uses as his example the law against covetousness. This is plainly a moral law, not a ritual one - just as is the law to honor God, parents, not commit adultery, etc. are moral laws. They are holy and they are good. Yet Paul still sees that this written code is powerless to produce true righteousness. It weighs upon the heart and conscience as an obligation, but one which cannot be mastered or fulfilled. In fact, the very awareness of the 'ought' of the law, instead of producing righteousness worked against it. This is a common psycho dynamic - what is forbidden becomes even more a temptation than that which is not forbidden. And Paul says basically that: once a person is dead, what was forbidden no longer applies to that man, nor do the obligations to fulfill that law because a dead person is dead to the whole system of good and bad. We died in Christ. Paul goes even further. He points out that the very attempt to find righteousness in ourselves or establish it in ourselves through obedience to the law fails at the root, because by looking to ourselves and our attempts to be righteous, we actually build up what Christ has abolished. We do that in two ways. One characteristic of the flesh, or sin nature, is to establish in oneself an independent righteousness or life apart from God, as if by our good deeds we might become worthy of eternal life. This process of sinful independence started with Adam who sought to establish an independent basis of judgment about good and evil and it primarily the definition of "the flesh" in Romans. An independent spirit looks for righteousness in one's own performance and meritorious service, as if by that conformity to the law, we might merit the grace and salvation and eternal life. The problem for Paul is that we can never look for any righteousness in ourselves, and especially not by our outward conformity to the law, even if that law be the moral law. The reason is that righteousness is not ours by performance - it is ours as a free gift that we have not as a possession by as an expression of our relationship of dependence upon God - who is our righteousness: > Rom 10:3 For being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they didn't subject themselves to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the fulfillment of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. If Christ is the fulfillment of righteousness for all who have faith, then how can we look to our performance of the law to gage or measure that righteousness? IF we look to our performance, we are not looking to Christ - who is our righteousness. And Paul says that the Law is powerless when used is this way. > I Cor 1:30 But of him, you are in Christ Jesus, who was made to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption > 31 that, according as it is written, "He who boasts, let him boast in the > Lord." So, let us look at the good thing of the Lord's supper and being in fellowship with one another. Are these things Bad or somehow antithetical to righteousness? NO. But they are not the MEANS of righteousness, for Christ is righteousness to all who believe. In fact, Jesus tells Paul that sanctification is the result - not of works of the law - but of faith {Acts 26:18}. Holiness is produced by faith in Christ. > Rom 3:8 We maintain therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from >the works of the law. So, if we want to attain holiness or sanctification, even that is not to be achieved by conformity to the law or performance of good deeds - rather it is to be received by faith through the gift of the Spirit of Righteousness. Let me digress for a moment and apply the Law of New Moons, and Feast days, and Holydays, and Sabbaths - which is being taught as a new law of Christian righteousness - to other aspects of the good. Paul says we should pray without ceasing. Now no one would say that this is a bad thing. It is good. However, by the account of this being good, when can we not pray without it being sin? If going to church on Sunday is good, and not going is a sin; then not praying at any time is also a sin, since we are counseled the scriptures, the saints, and the Fathers of the Church to pray without ceasing. How much therefore is enough to be pleasing to God? How much praying must we do to be good, to be righteous and not be in sin? It is also good to read the word and study to show thyself approved. But if we fail to read that word continually, are we not guilty of the same type of offense as missing Mass? If we spend time with our spouses or play with our children, we are neither praying or reading - and God forbid if we should go to a play or movie or concert, or create art or any other thing that diverts us from this instruction to pray without ceasing or reading the word. If this is a new law of good intentions placed upon the backs of Christians as the yoke of the law by well meaning leaders of the church, what harm is it since there needs to be order and the flock must be cared for and guided in righteousness? How can this not conform to Christ since these things are good in themselves to do? And obviously anyone who does not do them is showing a sinful and stubborn rebellion against continuous fellowship with God??? What pride must there be in the heart to have one not praying continuously and reading the word!? What foolish diversion is a job or pleasure that takes one's mind from these goods? The law I received when I was first saved was the law of quiet time. I must spend at least a half an hour a day in prayer and seeking God or else I was being disobedient - and suddenly Christ's righteousness was no avail to me - no, it was me who must perform that half and hour a day to stay righteous and acceptable to God. That half hour was my ticket to being obedient and therefore the MEANS of my righteousness. Who could complain against this good counsel of seeking God daily? Yet that which was supposed to produce life in me, produced death instead! If a half an hour was good, an hour was better. How much praying and seeking must I do to stay in God's good graces??? The leadership told me if I did not do these things, it was a sin. No matter how much I prayed or time I spent, it was never enough because I could always do more. The problem was that it was my performance that was the issue - not Jesus' free gift of righteousness to me. Suddenly if mass be skipped or prayers not made, Christ's righteousness was of no avail to me. The only way I could return to God's favor was to perform those outward duties no longer inspired by love and desire but by fear of rejection. The new law of quiet time destroyed the power of the Gospel. And so I came to know what Paul meant: > Gal 2 & 4 yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but > through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed in Christ Jesus, that we might > be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law, because no > flesh will be justified by the works of the law. > ... You are alienated from Christ, you who desire to be justified by the law. > You have fallen away from grace. Grace no longer mattered. Consciousness of the law produces human attempts at self justification - if the motivation is to be right with God - a motivation which Paul describes as death. and: > Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, who didn't follow > after righteousness, attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which > is of faith; 31 BUT ISRAEL, FOLLOWING AFTER A LAW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, > DIDN'T ARRIVE AT THE LAW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. 32 WHY? BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T > SEEK IT BY FAITH, BUT AS IT WERE BY WORKS OF THE LAW. They stumbled over the > stumbling stone; 33 even as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a > stumbling stone and a rock of offense; and no one who believes in him will > be disappointed." Those who seek laws fear that Paul's teaching will lead to lawlessness, and so the party of James came in to insist on retaining the Sabbath and circumcision and other aspects of feasts and fasts, new moons, and kosher foods. They feared and so mocked his teaching thinking it would produce all sorts of chaos and sensual abandon. But Paul had a better way... > Rom 10:3 For being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish > their own righteousness, they didn't subject themselves to the righteousness > of God. For Christ is the fulfillment of the law for righteousness to > everyone who believes. > If Christ is the fulfillment of righteousness for all who have faith, then > how can we look to our performance of the law to gage or measure that > righteousness? IF we look to our performance, we are not looking to Christ - > who is our righteousness. And Paul says that the Law is powerless when used > is this way. I want to add here: how can we make more full what is already fulfilled? If the law is fulfilled for us, how can we add anything to his righteousness or to that righteousness he completed on our behalf? Is it not saying to Jesus, "sorry, your righteousness is not good enough for me, I must add my own to the mix so that God will accept me..." Now on to Part 2. Rom 8 - > For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law > of sin and of death. 3 For what the law couldn't do, in that it was weak > through the flesh, God did, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful > flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh; 4 that the ordinance of > the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after > the Spirit. What man cannot do in order to be acceptable is to obey rules of the law to gain favor with God. But we are not left in the state of performance. Remember Paul says we are not dead just to ritual laws, but to moral laws as well [covetousness] since even those laws are powerless when it comes to creating inward righteousness. Nor are we left to abandon ourselves to the power of sin and all its enslaving passions. Indeed, those who try to perform according to the law, are embroiled in inner conflict in which the enslaving passions have more power through increased temptation and through the enabling power of a guilty conscience. No. That man who "must live right" has been crucified with Christ. He is dead, and any attempt to make that man righteous is like trying to perfect manure. The old man stinketh and the odor of rotten flesh testifies to the powerlessness of the old way. Instead, there is a new way - no longer compelled by the 'ought' of the law or by fear of the consequence of failure - this new way is an expression of the holiness and righteousness of God already present in us working its way out through our lives. The Spirit who is righteous lives his life in us {no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me}, and the Spirit of Holiness enables us by His righteousness to fulfill the goodness of the law through love and desire. > Rom 13: 8 Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves > his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9 For the commandments, "You shall not > commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall > not give false testimony," "You shall not covet," 10 Love doesn't harm a > neighbor. Love therefore is the fulfillment of the law. In short, we - who walk not by the law but by the Spirit - fulfill the just requirements of the law, not by following a list of do's and don'ts but by following the royal law of love. We do not obey in order to be acceptable, we obey because we are already are accepted and already have his righteousness within us. We do not obey in order to be righteous or gain righteousness - for how can we buy what is already ours? The righteous, holy God already lives within us, and we yield and cooperate with his awesome and enabling power to be the image of Christ on the earth. {Paul speaks of this conformity to the character of Christ in Rom 6 as a process of learning to yield - but the truth of the power of the Gospel is already present to us, whether we have recognized it in its fullness or not.} Because of the exceeding greatness of the righteousness of Christ, Paul weighs against the legalisms of performance because they trivialize Christ's righteousness. The outward observances of new moons and Sabbaths, kosher foods, quiet times, or Mass days put ritual acts on an equal footing with Christ's own infinite righteousness. They make man's performance equivalent with the righteousness of God, as if by the observance of outward signs we would be establishing the righteousness of Christ within. Now what I was trying to say at the beginning of this discussion is that whenever you start setting up rules and laws, do's and don'ts, like steps on a ladder which must be obeyed in order to be good and not sin, you reinstitute the psycho-dynamic of law based behavior - perform these acts or else you sin. Like reinstituting the law against covetousness, the law stirs up guilt, fear, and doubt in our relationship to God, causing us to feel condemned by our failures of performance, then striving to obey to gain acceptance and relieve the guilt, and then to either succumb to pride, thinking we have succeeded, or depression, knowing we have failed the standard. This whole pattern of performance is what Paul was talking about as the inevitable consequence of law based performance. And it is the reason I am so against the legalisms of Mass days, quiet times, etc., unless one is drawn to them not out of the need to perform in order to retain God's favor but out of the drawing of the Spirit and the desire of love to be in God's presence and seek his face. Paul was saying that the ONLY way to walk in the Spirit and fulfill the just requirements of the law is by Faith in Christ's sufficient righteousness. He has paid the full price for our acceptance and our righteousness is been bought and paid for by him. We cannot add to or take away from his purchase for us. In fact, by our attempts to purchase righteousness through our performance, we offend the Giver of the gift and cut ourselves "off from grace " by thinking we might pay for with our good deeds what Christ as paid for us with his own blood. Finally, I put it this way: Was Christ's sacrifice enough for us? Shall we say: No - I must go to Mass to be worthy of his sacrifice. No - I must have quiet time and add that to his sacrifice. No - his blood wasn't enough, I must add to his work some good deed of my own. No! Was His sacrifice good enough for us? Yes, it was more than enough that we do not need to add one iota to it. He is sufficient for our every need and his sacrifice is all the righteousness we will ever need. Do not trivialize his sacrifice on the Cross by adding some ritual act or behavior to the blood on the altar in the Holy of Holies. It would profane his sacrifice. Jeff ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jefferis Peterson, Pres. Web Design and Marketing http://www.PetersonSales.com