But is God all-powerful when he sees the heart? I need at least to give up my ego in order that he justify the meaning of the Oneness of the whole Spirit of hopeless justice for the propagandized into materialism those ideals of nothing valuable more than one in committed practice? :argue:
All men sin, the question is has it become a practice of sin, a willful turning away from what God says is good. Remember, it is not a matter of trying to pay for your sins with good works, that can't be done.
Good works that can't be done? Is that the works that the authority invested in the judgement of anything that would matter to primary reconciliation, or is that the good works of the scientists that are empirically familial to nations?:sunny:
Im not an avid reader of the book, though I do have a query. From what I remember the Old testament says "An eye for an eye". The New testament says "Turn the other cheek" what happened to change the philosophy? Cheers
But nowadays I know mercy can be the state of sacrificing individuals to the hypocrisy = alas it is called exchange of redneck peace.
That which you withhold from the holy spirit you withhold from your own spirit, which is holy itself. Not because you are unworthy but because love arrives by invitation only.
Eye for an eye is talking about divine justice, such as Jesus sacrificing his perfect life to ransom the perfect life that Adam through away. Whereas turn the other cheek is talking about some one insulting you and not making a big deal of it, so to speak.
Let me ask you a question. Would you rather have a body without cancer or would it be okay to you to just have cancer of the liver, just one area?
If god impregnates a virgin in the woods and no one is around to hear it does it make a 2 thousand year old sound
The purpose of the illustration is to show that sin, any sin is like a cancer that will kill you no how healthy the rest of the body seems to be, so your question; What if someone willfully turns away in only one area, but doesn't in others?, can be seen in a proper light. As for the cure, the only cure is Jesus' ransom sacrifice. That sacrifice covers a multitude of sins but a willful practice of sins is not covered.
It is the resurrection that establishes the atonement not the crucifixion. The cure is love, the cure is mercy, not one should be sacrificed for the sake of love. Every sin will be forgiven except blaspheme against the holy spirit. Why do you wish to confuse?
The fig tree represented the leadership of the religious system of the day. Jesus was saying this whole system including the temple and it's old practice of sacrifice wouldn't last.
If you look at Mark, it is the only Gospel in which Jesus curses the fig tree for no apparent logical reason (being out of season). There is an interesting exegesis about taqsh which are apparently this knobby semi-fruit which is a precursor to the true fruit. We could get into this whole Messianic prophecy thing where the people did not recognize the true fruit that was to come because the tree only has leaves (no taqsh and therefore no fruit). Traditional exegesis is meant to show the Lord's power over his own creaion.