More than likely, there's a lot of talk about loving each other, but not much about
fighting against sin or fighting for each other.
Advances in computer technology, programs to build self - esteem, scientific leaps forward do not ultimately win the
war against sin, death and the devil — just ask any teenager.
We are in a period (some call it a disposition of grace) where there is a restraint against the
judgment against sin but that time will come to an end.
Our
fight against sin is noble and good, but make no mistake: we are not fighting to be righteous.
Furthermore, people say that God had to pour out His
wrath against sin upon somebody (either us or Jesus) in order to satisfy his justice.
We must repent not once, but many times; for life is a continuing
battle against sin even after its power has been broken by the divine mercy and forgiveness.
This specialism may help to explain the fervour of his
preaching against the sin of anthropomorphism — attributing human qualities to other animals.
The warning of Jesus
against this sin in Matthew 12 seems to indicate that one commits it intentionally; not accidentally.
Absent a more critical analysis of what drives consumption itself, Fox's proclamations come across as just another environmentalist
railing against the sins of modern life.
The knowledge of the Holy Spirit as given in the atonement ought to guard the
Church against the sin of claiming to exhibit unambiguously the holiness of God, but sadly this sin persists and may even find reinforcement in the claim to possess the Holy Spirit.
They often start Christian, aware that there are certain
laws against sin: the 10 Commandments, and NT teachings.
So the Valentinians chose an abundance of sin, all
injunctions against sinning being the means the Demiurge uses to enslave them in the time - bound material world.
So Fred Phelps, if your son or daughter had just died in battle, would you want people to show up at the funeral to
picket against the sins in or advocated by the nation they died for?
We are quick to quote other
commandments against sins that are repulsive to us, but what about the sins of ambition, greed and egomania that manifest themselves in empire - building, money - grubbing, Babel - erecting success stories?
So Christianity, loftily estimating what human personality was meant to be, has
raged against sin, has said terrific things about man's wickedness, not because it held a low opinion of him, but because it held a high opinion.
They have not lifted human quality primarily by
thundering against sin; they have lifted it by heightening the positive conception of life's dignity and value.
Kaiser understands God's wrath as an act of
love against sin which hurts those He loves.
Lutheran ethics, following certain tendencies in Luther's own thought but neglecting his main intention, conceived the social orders outside the Church as necessary
bulwarks against sin, but obeying principles of a different order from the demands of the Gospel of love.
It is very susceptible to being confused with patriotism or politics and to the dangers of making worship a
rally against sin or sinners.
For every heart, purity demands constant watchfulness, a daily fight against the flesh, and a firm
attitude against sin.
Notably missing from the study is the Lutheran view of marriage as an order of creation that serves as a restraining
dike against sin, but which does not and can not play a role in human salvation.
The biggest clue we have is the Bible and it seems to
lean against sin, even speaking of the bondage of sin.
... Disgust, self - contempt, self - hatred —
rhetoric against the sin and (still more) vilification of sexuality or the body in themselves — are emphatically not the weapons for this warfare.
When I am tempted to sin, the Holy Spirit warns me that such is wrong — not a remembrance of some religious
rule against sin.
Fifth, I was shocked to read this statement on page 81: «If God did not spare His own Son from His
curse against sin (see Rom 8:32), then why would He spare us from that curse?»