I said it at the end of the Grail Country stream on Saturday, but not many people were watching at that point, so I'll repeat it here: this seems like misdirecting focus on one particular passion, when the real problem is identifying with one's passions, and either trying to carve out a special amnesty or well-intentioned blindness to this particular passion, or the opposite problem of identifying anyone who struggles with this particular passion to be in need of a good stoning session. I always fall back to John 8 on this, the account of the woman caught in adultery. Those seeking to conserve the traditions of the church are prone to picking up stones, and those seeking to "affirm" certain passions and over-identification with said passions are scandalized by Christ's injunction at the end of that story to "go thy way and sin no more." We all struggle with passions. There are seven main categories of the passions, and we all have a unique blend of struggle with the various passions, and that blend also changes with time as we are healed in Christ. What gets lost in this myopic focus on this one passion is the universal struggle with passions, and that only God knows whether our struggle is pure and salvific. We love each other in our struggles, and before picking up a stone, it's good practice to do a spiritual inventory of one's own struggles with passions. I struggle with gluttony. My struggle is obvious and apparent to anyone who sees me. I have prayed and fasted many many times in my struggle. God may never heal me of this struggle, because the struggle itself is salvific. I read of a saint who had overcome all his passions for some amount of time. He mentioned this to his spiritual father, and his spiritual father said, "You need to pray for sickness. You must struggle against something for your salvation" (I'm paraphrasing the story) and shortly thereafter, the saint got cancer and suffered painfully for the rest of his life. We often take a very simplistic approach to these matters, but only God knows our struggles, and only God knows the sincerity of our hearts as we struggle against the passions. The "reasonable accommodations" that PVK mentioned really should be a private matter between a priest (or pastor) and the individual, with the intent of struggling against the passions (in this case, lust and perhaps pride) looking to Christ to be healed. Struggle well!

"Is this a salvation issue?" = "Why do you care so much?" It's a cheap rhetorical trick, underpinned by the nihilistic belief that simply caring about the truth has no meaning or value. Same with "Would you rather be right or be happy?" -- someone is attempting to force you to be wrong, on pain of making you miserable if you don't comply. This violates the commandment against false witness, and it is a betrayal of Christ as the _logos._

"... So we finish eighteen and he’s gonna stiff me. And I say, “Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know.” And he says, “Oh, uh, there won’t be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.” So I got that goin’ for me, which is nice." -- Caddyshack

We interrupt this video for this word from the New Testament: *"For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."* Unless, of course, you can find a progressive who tells you your sin really isn't sin, so just carry on doing whatever you want....

MAN: Jesus, what must I do to be saved? PVK JESUS: "Well, you know, salvation is a very broad, umbrella term, and we really need to do some careful discernment here. Are we talking realized salvation, anticipated salvation, being saved from your sin, (which is another term we need to unpack), being "saved" from your enemies, being saved from sickness, death, pain; saved in a religious sense; saved from your wealth and privilege, saved from deconstruction, what exactly are we really talking about??? The simplistic formulations of common religion don't really work here." Simple Jesus: *"So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. **_I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture._** The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly."* (Jesus preaching the prosperity gospel here? Yes, yes he is....) Paul and Silas: *"And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, **_“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”_** And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family."* Just Paul: *"The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, **_because they refused to love the truth and so be saved._** Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."* The Last chapter of the Bible: *"Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”* *"Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers **_and the sexually immoral_** and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood."* So what does God the Father think? *"You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. And you shall not lie with any animal and so make yourself unclean with it, neither shall any woman give herself to an animal to lie with it: it is perversion.* The problem with progressive "sin" is that it's all made up out of thin air, and it never has any theological basis. Conservatives do not have that problem.

Boy am I glad I got a gifted membership cause this looks too good to miss

17:00 - I've been using a framework to help think about wisdom, which has to do with the common religion ideas. Very simply it is divided into the 4 wisdom books, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Job and Song of Songs. Proverbs is "common religion" It is the lessons from a Father to a son about what you should and shouldn't do, to be wise successful and avoid suffering. Ecclesiastes is either the teenager or 20-something who has realized that even if I become wise and do the right things, time and chance happen to us all. It is the Lord of the Rings wisdom, ,where we must be wise within the times we live in. The good and the bad. Job, is a story about someone who has both the Wisdom of Proverbs (Blameless and Righteous, familial and material success) and the wisdom of Ecclesiastes ("The Lord gives and the Lord takes away, Blessed be the Name of the Lord"). But what happens is that the suffering Job encounters is not from foolishness (Proverbs) nor just time and chance (Ecclesiastes). It is caused by God. Job becomes a suffering servant. God always refers to him as "my servant Job" as if his suffering was accomplishing the work of God. The question we have is what is that work? God's answer is to look at creation, behold his works and the fruit they bear. Can we trust him when His wisdom cannot be explained. Song of Songs, is the love story. This is the depth of wisdom. A love between God and us. It contains all three previously mentioned books. The wisdom of Proverbs, the sense of time and chance and seasons in Ecclesiastes, and the blessedness, tragedy and reunion of Job. Proverbs 30:18-19 There are three things which are too wonderful for me, Four which I do not understand: The way of an eagle in the sky, The way of a serpent on a rock, The way of a ship in the middle of the sea, And the way of a man with a maid.

If I had a dollar for every time someone told me "You know Sam, believing in the Trinity is a salvation issue" I would have enough dollars to quit my job and be a full time youtuber.

Stubborn resistance to what God has revealed about Himself and His requirements for holy living and acceptance by Him is the way to self destruction and eternal loss. That is the salvation issue.

it wasn't really messy until everything after where you give up and say it's messy

Can't consider Purgatory without thinking this might be it...

25:00 - Is the "conservative" side be asking for individual repentance for individual sins and the "liberal" side asking for collective repentance for social sins?

Being saved ultimately, that is, the attainment of heaven, is dependent on being in the Truth, Who is the Lord Jesus Christ, knowing Him for Who He is, that is God in human flesh and the only Saviour, and obeying His commandments, cleansing oneself from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, keeping oneself in His love, so as to avoid the sins which He clearly warns us deprive the person committing them of an inheritance in His Kingdom. That's a brief summary. For the fuller picture, read the Bible, especially the whole of the New Testament.

9:40 - Story of Job! The undermining of "common religion" for the sake of an ineffable encounter with the living God.

"With rich people, there's a justice issue there" Paul, do you believe that The Little Red Hen from the fable was just, or unjust?

Your concluding thoughts on revisiting a prior work/study after newer inputs makes a good deal of sense to me.

Two thoughts: I'd frame this in terms of "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" or the "follow me" final command to the rich young man. The Way is imminent life in Christ and the path to ultimate salvation. In that framing the salvation question is simply "is this the Way?" Catholic thought emphasizes formation of conscience (learning the Way, the Truth and the Life) through both revealed and natural law and example. Mortal sin is acting against what you know to be good and right in a grave matter. Basically knowing the Way and choosing against following Christ. Repentance is acknowledging our departure and returning to the way.

How does our professions of propositions relate to our salvation? Can propositions save us? Are our true confessions of our beliefs valid evidence for or against our salvation? TLC's been wrestling with this topic for a long time now. Hopefully, we're making progress on it.

Common religion guides but doesn't save. If King David, who is a villain is saved ... it is very confusing!

This video wasn't nearly as messy as advertised.

32:00 hear hear. And the rebuke of those with a differing opinion.

18:15 this discussion of Salvation in the now vs later reminds me of a common disconnect in Buddhist circles: the seeking of attainment of any kind: but nirvana or enlightenment especially. How can we be enlightened before we are 'still'? I must become less. Kenosis. Anatta: not-that-self of Buddhism. Citta Vritti Nirodha: Yoga Sutra.

“Jesus Saves but Crypto-coin grows exponentially” ( insert inevitable crypto ad link here)

I take salvation as being “salved” rather than “saved”. It seems to make more sense in terms of how my life unfolds. “Jesus Salves”

Hey, I've recently been thinking about starting my own KZfaq channel similar to yours. I just wanted to ask what kind of software you use?

I get the sense that “salvation” exists along a spectrum defined by words and thinky-tally at one end and Joel Olsteen at the other. We set the thermostat to where we find it comfortable…

Thanks!

Endless guilt from overactive sensibility ... is Mark Parker's problem. The liberal problem.

The fundamental distinction that any definition of sin has to work with is the distinction between the experience of what can be described sometimes as brokenness, other times as frustration, and still other times as a willful determination towards self-sabotage and the categorization of individual sinful actions. The former gets categorized as "fallenness." It encapsulates the various aspects of a person's experience of what classical theologians understood as alienation from God. The latter is where a lot of mere human analysis gets stuck. It's important to identify specific things that are problems. We can only take steps to improve ourselves or our lives if we have specific things to address. But this sort of analysis can be weaponized by others in our communal negotiations over how we live together.

[playfully meant]: Jesus Saves ... passes to Gretsky ... he shoots, he scores!

I still think the framing on the sin questions is off, when Jesus talks about the law he is hinting at how making sacrifices for the law(to obey the law is to give up things that someone may desire)increases the holiness of someone and they do “better” and gain gods “favour” but he goes further, he demands that we sacrifice everything to him and only then can we be perfect. It’s easier for a homeless person or wretched sinner to sacrifice everything to follow Jesus because they have so little already and how hard it is for someone who is wealthy and has so much to make the same sacrifice. So when the question of sin comes around it is more a question of attachment and what is not being given up. And I think that’s where eternal salvation comes in, when a good/difficult sacrifice is made to god, god gives something even better in return. So when everything is sacrificed to god, god returns everything in ever greater multitude. Jesus being the highest good makes the highest sacrifice as shows us that this gives us internal life. So when the question of being saved come in, it’s really have you sacrificed everything to follow Jesus, and that’s something that is so hard to do.

Not directly connected, but I was curious to see which encounters in the Gospel were about people who were saved, but didn’t experience healing or exorcism first. I think it’s only Nicodemus, Zacchaeus and the Lady at the Well 🤔

To call for confession of sin you can not repent of because you inherited (not even actually inherited), rather than committed it, and discouraging repentance of your actual sin, isn't a different approach to sin, it is the rejection of the repentance of sin. It is counter sanctification. The salvation issue is false teaching.

Just to be clear, Paul. The enumerated list of sins is not a "little game"; there are a number of sins in the Bible which are capital offenses-care to take a guess as to which ones?

I am not sure this applies: Charles Taylor discusses these issues. I wonder if the personal approach(the actual contrition of the repentant?) and necessity being missing? Charles Taylor, in his philosophical inquiries, specifically addresses the concept of salvation in the context of a secular age. He explores the transformation of the notion of human flourishing, which includes "a salvation which takes us beyond what we usually understand as human flourishing". This reflects a shift from a traditional, religiously-embedded understanding of salvation to one that must be navigated individually in a secular society. Taylor’s work suggests that salvation, in the modern context, is not just about the afterlife or spiritual redemption but also about finding meaning and purpose in this life, within the framework of secularism. He implies that the pursuit of salvation has become a personal journey, one that is often in tension with the secular values of individualism and authenticity. In essence, Taylor’s view on salvation is that it is a transformative process that challenges individuals to transcend beyond conventional notions of human flourishing, especially in a world where religious beliefs are constantly pressured by other possibilities2. This transformation is central to his hope for the moral and spiritual health of individuals in the late modern West. ** This is what AI says... I love being able to use AI, but the other day it could not find a simple quote from Jung. In this case I agree with the AI ;) {Transmutation of the lower self, Metempsychosis.}

Sin is judicial condemnation, as repentance is for the remission of sins, it is unrepentant sin that condemns. We are all tempted but those that give in are condemned.

Do I think Synod made the right decision? I agree that the work of the Synod was more professional.

32:43 "What kind of crazy sin math are you doing?" Good line.

Two comments. First, as mentioned before, it is not that one side within the CRC wants to delineate sexual sin and the other not, rather they draw the line in a different place. To one side, sexual sin is determined by the physical characteristics of the two partners, to the other, sexual sin results when the physical union is promiscuous, unaccompanied by commitment and love. Two, confessions are time-conditioned human constructs. CRC synod 2024 demands unconditional submission to CRC confessions. Such a demand places the confessions above scriptures and the leading of the Holy Spirit among God's people, today. No confession can begin to comprehend and capture in human language the fullness of God. Christians do not place their trust in a confession, but in a person. The body of believers does not find its unity in a confession, we find our unity by following a person. In a marketplace of religion synod can set whatever qualifications it wants for membership, but it cannot set its qualifications without discrimination and also remain the church of Jesus.

As a side note, I appraised Neal Plantinga's house a number of year ago. Gotta love Dutch mafia.

"Being straight won't send you to heaven" -- I mean, a lot of those old guys practically thought it would send you to hell

Paul, basically Christianity suffers because is has the Cross as an altar for atonement, not the word of God, which allows Christianity to say you have been saved by Jesus.

Do not fool yourself, the sexually immoral are going to hell. Read Romans 2 about how sexual immorality like this originates. Satan's lie that love is love. Read your Bible.

Seems like at least some people will be changed "in the twinkling of an eye"

Humans are bio-logical stewards of the ecosystem that includes their biological bodies that have a responsibility to learn to heal within the context of the particular responsibility that God logically alots distinct humans; the responsibility to learn to heal our need for help - (the healing being the help) - existed before and after the fall. Repentance is deciding to be whollistically bio-logical after any illogical, disrespectful expression of the heart that was not bio-logical; the heart can have a multitude of attitudes with some attitudes judging others through repentance or support; God logically rewards a bio-logical repentance that respects the significance of the Christ with more kinds of bio-logical responsibility in His established Kingdom on earth. There are bio-logical ways to repent that are generally up to the imaginations of our stewardship in terms of possible expressions and it may be that God will only express a particular reward on the basis of a particular expression (that is an obedience of Christ); arguably, it wasn't until the Samaritans who had been baptised in Jesus' name had reconciled with - evidently through a logical recognition of - those from the Jerusalem authority that God had a logical reason to send the Spirit to them to administer the instructions of Christ's established (post-crucifixion) human Kingdom; whereas Cornelius's bio-logical repentance that respectfully helped the poor's responsibility to bio-logically steward already existed when He channelled that repentance into a respect for the Christ and was sent the Spirit evidently on the basis of the incorporation of a reverence for the Christ that was a wholistic convergence within an expression of the Genesis commission to fill the earth with bio-logical flourishing that, for example, Noah evidently respected. Regarding individual illogical issues, whilst a general affirmation of the bio-logical Genesis commission that as part of its wholesomeness incorporates a respect for the Christ's roles - a repentance that condemns sin with an appropriate memorialisation, (such as the expression of the the thief on the cross who asked for Jesus' help that desired Jesus Kingdom of healing) may be enough for a logical reward that includes a logical relation to Christ and the consequences of that relation, a particular expression repentance that relates to another may be called for which may or may not directly relate to the same issue, for example, a person can repent by encouraging other mothers to be mothers on earth now after they had committed an abortion; having said that, a person simply repents through a desire to be bio-logical and not sin in the circumstances God faces them with. It was the destruction of Solomon's temple that meant that righteous acts that qualified a person for a temple approach were as good as a disqualifying filthy cloth - the text is evidently not claiming that our good thoughts are at bottom corrupt - whilst there may be a corruption that can be repented of; whilst those who are to young or simpleminded who have not grasped the concept of theistic law evidently do not have their sins counted against them and are automatically recapitulated with Christ's salvation from the doom of decay whereas everyone else needs to repent(see Romans 5). There is a repentance for the forgiveness of sin that John the Baptist and Jesus proclaimed and a spilling of Christ's blood for the forgiveness of sin that John the Baptist and Jesus proclaimed, our repentance is to make a reference to the significance of what Christ's blood represents - a perfect logical expression of the responsibility to heal and a condemnation of sin; Christ's life uniquely qualifying Him to be a memorial for others to refer to while repenting. Apostle Paul's nuanced notion of the natural (sensual) man evidently refers to our own ideas irrespective of or disrespectful of an education that - due to a lack of respectful repentance - did not have a repentance mediated via a respect of Christ and was subsequently not sent the Spirit who is now given on the basis of an obedience of Christ, his nuanced notion was evidently not claiming that a person cannot naturally repent with respect to an education; God judges good repentant and bad, illogical, disrespectful responses to revelation and its logical implications distinctly with logical consequences. Paul's concern that the Corinthians weigh whether or not a hoped for prophecy coheres with Christ's Lordship, His teaching, should evidently not be read as if his summery statement claimed that in order to say the words "Christ is Lord" a person has to have the Holy Spirit; the Spiit is always sent, as far as I can see, on tbe basis of some repentant respect for God. Whilst Jesus is whollistically good throughout His life, the good that we do, that is to say, express, is still desired to be logically related to by God and subsequently is logically related to by God.

"Following me has salvific benefits in this life." But isn't the idea that if you do as Jesus does you will die like him and be raised like him?

Paul "saved" is a contractual term, fir the hope of eternal life in the new covenant, we are saved according to meeting our obligations by the word of God, and Jesus is our Judge.

Messy, or revealing, I say messiness is good as scripting is too careful not to reveal our weaker arguments, my videos are unscripted. As your last few minutes wandered aimlessly around judgement, because you have misquoted the meaning of Romans 3:23, as 'all' relates to Romans 3:20 the imputation of sin. All in greek is cumulative depending on context, so 'all that have sinned' is the meaning. Romans 3:10-19 is not general statement by God, but derives from arguments about Atheists and sinners, that God actually defines as unbelievers in Romans. I have a Ytube video in my series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' about this, which causes such confusion because the wages of sin is death and there is only one judgement when a baptised believer dies. There is no judgement for those not under the jurisdiction of God's laws.

Yugoslavia is coming the rest of Europe and maybe the US. Since 1914 "some damn thing in the Balkans" is everywhere ;-((

second

First?