Surrendering to Jesus/God is Not Biblical

Apparently, the Spirit makes the truth know to us yet does not run our lives like we are puppets.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

I never told you king James. FOR THE THIRD TIME I WILL POST AGAIN:Young's Literal Translation King James The king James version doesn't say disown, but a true bible scholar would not rely on the many revisions which produced the King James Version without using older versions to cross reference it. This is why RickJB. I study the bible like scientist study science books. I know a little science but I can't argue with an astrophisicist. You may have read the bible. But only a true believer would spend the time to become the astrophycisist of the word of God.

I asked you for the quote so I could find it - the version is irrelevant. You could have just said "Matthew 16:24" or linked to the post where you did quote it.You will note that neither "disown" nor "deny" means "surrender".I'm still waiting for you to address the fact that the prodigal son's father did not accept his surrender.The son planned to surrender - i.e. become a servant:

quote:

---

Luk 15:18 I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,
Luk 15:19 And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.

---

but his father never gave him the chance:

quote:

---

Luk 15:20 And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.

---

Please answer that point.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

What about John 13?You know, deny does not mean surrender. Yet, if we are denying ourselves on behalf of something better, we have surrendered to the good. The son still surrendered to the better life. He didn't have to be a servant...but I still think this parable is about the kingdom of God in heaven, and not about how we should conduct ourselves while on earth.I am not feeling that surrender is rape. It is more than following however. It is not just doing as our spouse says, but yielding to his caress. It is letting him have his way with us. This is an act of trust and love, and does not question whether we 'understand' what the lover is about or don't.Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

"Surrendering to the good" wouldn't even require God. It's hard to see how you can equate it to surrendering to God. I don't see anything in the Bible to suggest that.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Phat:Doesn't cooperation require some level of surrender? It implies giving at least partial control. A dance is not performed by two people leading.We must choose to surrender for the sake of cooperation (cooperation being intrinsic to love).

Jesus said it best in Luke 6:46 "Why do you call Me, `Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?
47 "Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them, I will show you whom he is like:
48 he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on the rock; and when a flood occurred, the torrent burst against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built.
49 "But the one who has heard and has not acted accordingly, is like a man who built a house on the ground without any foundation; and the torrent burst against it and immediately it collapsed, and the ruin of that house was great."You can either choose to live your life by hearing the words of Jesus and acting upon them, or you can choose to not hear the words of Jesus and not act upon them. The former build their life upon the Rock, while the latter build their life "on ground without any foundation."The choice is yours.

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

As I stated in Message 1 and in several posts: I don’t feel that Jesus taught that we should give up control of our lives, but I do feel that he taught that we should give up wrong behavior.So far we have gone over the various meanings of surrender, submit, and repent.When we give up wrong behavior for right behavior we can say that we have surrendered (given up) the wrong behavior, but that is not giving up self-control. The wrong behavior may no longer have control over us, but we haven't given up our self-control.Now if God/Jesus required everyone to give up control, we need to determine control of what?This article by Pastor Yau is an example of a teaching that I consider to be misleading and can be detrimental for some people.James 4:13-17 is the basis for this article. But what the author of James seems to be talking about is the future which we don't have control over anyway. So it comes back to what I said in Message 13. It is more about understanding what we have control over and what we don't.The final verse in James 4 confirms that the author of James felt they were still in control of their behavior. This is the conclusion of the article: I think it is misleading and causes some people to expect God to control what is still under their purview.In Luke 12 Jesus said not to worry about what we don't have control over, but I don't feel that he implied we should give up control of what we are supposed to have control over.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

You do realize that some of us don't make a distinction between what is 'good' and what is of God? This parable deals with repentence. It does not say one thing about how the son should live after his repentence. He may not be a servant, but he would likely have to go work as his brother did. He would still be subjected to his father's wishes.

Taking control of our lives is a seperate issue IMO.What may or may not be predictable in the future is a seperate issue.We are all going to be accountable for our actions, according to this same Bible. Therefore the idea of 'control' by GOd is obviously not the same as reckless abandon or carelessness. It may be well and good not to give people the impression that all things are provided for just by pledging some oath of surrender. We still have responsibility.Surrender is an on going thing. It is a moment by moment thing, a way of life, and not a pledge or a cure-all.When Jesus said, 'Father, not My will be done, but Yours', He does not say 'I will try to follow You'. He submits to whatever is desired by God.The beauty of the Bible is that all of these ideas can be 'true' and worthy, to the detriment of none.At this point I feel I must say that for most Christians, there is no difference in authority amoung the different books. For myself, at least, this 'Jesus/God' said so, is no more compelling than what Paul or Peter said. If you want to talk about the Bible, why are you limiting it to the parts YOU feel are 'important'? Maybe you don't want to talk about what Paul says, but as per your topic title, Paul is relevent.

That opinion really has no relevance in a Bible Study thread. And we're discussing what it does say. Being "subjected to his father's wishes" (or living by his father's rules, as somebody else put it) does not imply giving up control to his father. In the parable, the father is supposedly training his sons to take over from him one day. That would require training them to use their initiative, not blindly follow him. While that transfer of control doesn't translate directly to the God/human relationship, there is no reason (in the text) to think the use of one's initiative is discouraged.

quote:

---

When Jesus said, 'Father, not My will be done, but Yours', He does not say 'I will try to follow You'. He submits to whatever is desired by God.

---

Jesus was conceived for that purpose though. Jesus could have just as easily decided not to go through with the plan. But this isn't really about what Jesus was required or born to do, it is about what the average person is required to do.I think we've all agreed that changing one's behavior is an ongoing task. But I don't agree that it comes about by giving up the ability to control our decisions or actions. So the question is what are we supposedly giving up (surrendering) control of?

quote:

---

At this point I feel I must say that for most Christians, there is no difference in authority amoung the different books. For myself, at least, this 'Jesus/God' said so, is no more compelling than what Paul or Peter said. If you want to talk about the Bible, why are you limiting it to the parts YOU feel are 'important'? Maybe you don't want to talk about what Paul says, but as per your topic title, Paul is relevent.

---

I'm quite aware of that, but I don't feel that I have limited anything. In reality, there is a difference. Paul is not God or Jesus. The disciples are not God or Jesus. So when looking at the plain text, what is supposedly said by Jesus or God carries more weight than what was supposedly said by the disciples or written by Paul. I also haven't said that what they supposedly said or wrote has no value, but they are speaking from different positions.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Cop out, sorry. The average Christian is required to do what Christ did. Everything that we feel like doing compared to what we should be doing. Paul is spaeking from no less a position regarding plain text than you are!

quote:

---

Cop out, sorry. The average Christian is required to do what Christ did.

---

Your comment was: Your comment that Jesus did not say "I will try to follow you" is what sparked my comment. If you believe the nativity stories, then Jesus was conceived for the coming purpose. IOW, he was predisposed to doing God's will and supposedly had a direct connection. It's like comparing a natural athlete to someone who has to work to reach the same goal.In Matthew 21 Jesus shared this example. We are allowed to falter.I've already agreed that we are asked to submit (which is not giving up control) to God's will, but if you look closely at what Jesus supposedly prayed at Gethsemane, he is speaking of the future which he does not have control over anyway. Which goes back to the article I linked to in Message 188 and brings us to what are we supposedly giving up control of?To my question (So the question is what are we supposedly giving up (surrendering) control of?) you responded: We need self-control to be able to do what we should be doing and not do what we shouldn't be doing. So your response doesn't really answer the question of what we are giving up (surrendering) control of.No one (that I have noticed) in this thread has advocated that Christians are not to follow God's will/commands.
So can we get past that and to the point of the discussion?
Message 1: It is a discussion on what is written in the Bible that does or does not support that Jesus or God requires us to give up control of our lives. Surrendering control!

quote:

---

Paul is spaeking from no less a position regarding plain text than you are!

---

Exactly!But is Paul addressing plain text meanings or is he combining text to create a third meaning, IOW, sermonizing? This would make an excellent new topic, since answering this question would take this topic off course.Bottom line: Paul is not God or Jesus.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Lets use the dance analogy. One partner leads, the other follows. The one following does not surrender their mental activity nor their muscle control to the other leading partner. They merely submit to the direction that the leader wishes to take them, still actively moving and actively thinking.I prefer the word submit rather than the word surrender as submit implies that I am choosing my obedience rather than being dangled in life as a puppet on a string.Edited by Phat, : clarification