Lot's Revelation of Grace - Page 9

Baron1710 · #81 10-31-2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

Lot chose to live in a wicked place.
Lot's wife didn't want to leave it.
Lot's daughters were influenced by their environment.
Lot's wife was lost because the escape that grace provided was not rewarded with obedience on her part.
Lot got drunk.
Lot slept with both of his daughters.
Lot impregnated both of his daughters.

"Lot chose to live in a wicked place" If he hadn't then Abraham would have. There is no indication that Lot was wrong for living there.

"Lot's wife..." She looked back, but we don't know why.

"Lots daughters..." maybe or maybe not pure conjecture.

"Lot got drunk" actually his daughters orchestrated that, so did Noah but I don't see anyone jumping on that.

"Lot slept with both of his daughters" As sick as that sounds to us apparently Cain and Seth married their sisters, sounds kinda sick too and up to that point it had not been prohibited. There was a lot that happened in the OT that I wonder how much of it God approved of and how much of it he simply allowed. I don't have an answer for that. I can't comprehend allowing your mistress to be gang raped, or killing children in war, or a lot of other things including sleeping with your daughters.

rrford · #82 10-31-2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

Making poor decisions does not make us unrighteous, but anyone can see that poor choices can affect future behaviors. Lot DID eventually enter into disobedience because of his poor decisions.

And I would go so far as to say he became unrighteous. Would you agree?

Baron1710 · #83 10-31-2009, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrford

Evidently, irregardless of what Lot did, he remained righteous. Sorry, can't reconcile that one. Unrighteuous acts makes one unrighteous.

Further, Peter stating "righteous Lot" should not at all be read to say that the entirety of Lot's life was righteousl I have always read it to mean that as a righteous man when he first entered Sodom, Lot vexed his soul by being in an ungodly environment. I have never read it to me he was considered righteous irregardless of his actions as some here are intimating.

There was a time Samson was righteous; Judas was righteous; Korah was righteous. That in no wise means they remained righteous.

You do have a problem with God declaring Lot righteous. Amazing. Righteousness is not determined by my actions. I am righteous because HE is righteous.

rrford · #84 10-31-2009, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron1710

You do have a problem with God declaring Lot righteous. Amazing. Righteousness is not determined by my actions. I am righteous because HE is righteous.

No. You have a problem with thinking that a declaration does not mean he remained righteous. Sounds as if you actuallly believe Calvanism to me.

Baron1710 · #85 10-31-2009, 08:30 PM

Lot was long since dead when Peter called him righteous. You like Peter in Acts but not so much when he declares someone righteous that you can't seem to agree with.

rrford · #86 10-31-2009, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Lot was long since dead when Peter called him righteous. You like Peter in Acts but not so much when he declares someone righteous that you can't seem to agree with.

Wow. So one can commit incest and still be righteous? Amazing. Are you really going to keep contending that one cannot lose righteousness because of their sinful acts? Still sounds Calvinistic to me and I though this was supposed to be an Apostolic Pentecostal forum.

Baron1710 · #87 10-31-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrford

Wow. So one can commit incest and still be righteous? Amazing. Are you really going to keep contending that one cannot lose righteousness because of their sinful acts? Still sounds Calvinistic to me and I though this was supposed to be an Apostolic Pentecostal forum.

Again Lot was dead. He no longer could commit any acts. You don't scream incest when it was Seth.

Oh here we go. Your not Apostolic...typical. If your attitude defines what is Apostolic I will take it as a compliment.

jfrog · #88 10-31-2009, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrford

Again, I stand by the original post. IMO, you were looking for something to disagree with and read into it.

Lot was righteous in the eyes of God. That in no wise made him exempt from making the costly mistake of thinking mercy was grace. Nor did it exempt him from making other mistakes that cost him dearly.

It doesn't take much looking to find stuff to disagree with in it. Or maybe my mind automatically targets in on the stuff I disagree with. Either way I seen a bunch that didn't sit well with me in it.

The grace of God is this, that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. The grace of God is not about what we do but about what God has done. The grace of God reveals God's goodness to us. The grace of God inspires us to do good. The grace of God does not condemn us for falling short, but it lifts us up and dusts us off when we fall. The grace of God was given freely. It is not something we must work to maintain. With that said, you are right that holy living is good and acceptable to God. But it is not from works to maintain grace that this should be done. For if salvation is by works then it is no longer by grace through faith. It's not that we should not do good works, but that our good works ought to come as a result of our salvation and not to maintain it.

rrford · #89 10-31-2009, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Again Lot was dead. He no longer could commit any acts. You don't scream incest when it was Seth.

Oh here we go. Your not Apostolic...typical. If your attitude defines what is Apostolic I will take it as a compliment.

Now it is about my attitude? Sorry, I was referring to your beliefs not your attitude. It seems you are bent on making this argumentative.

Is it so hard to believe that Lot was at one point righteous and then fell from righteousness? If you can't see that then your view is Calvinistic. Has nothing to do with attitude.

Like I said, I have never had a thread more misinterpreted. Andyes, Lot received mercy and called it grace. Of course, for the sake of your argument I don't expect you to read the passsage that way.

rrford · #90 10-31-2009, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfrog

It doesn't take much looking to find stuff to disagree with in it. Or maybe my mind automatically targets in on the stuff I disagree with. Either way I seen a bunch that didn't sit well with me in it.

The grace of God is this, that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. The grace of God is not about what we do but about what God has done. The grace of God reveals God's goodness to us. The grace of God inspires us to do good. The grace of God does not condemn us for falling short, but it lifts us up and dusts us off when we fall. The grace of God was given freely. It is not something we must work to maintain. With that said, you are right that holy living is good and acceptable to God. But it is not from works to maintain grace that this should be done. For if salvation is by works then it is no longer by grace through faith. It's not that we should not do good works, but that our good works ought to come as a result of our salvation and not to maintain it.

I never said any different than what you have just stated. In fact, if you only knew what I actually teach we would be in close accord I assure you.

My point was that Lot mistook mercy for grace. That can be dangerous. Sorry so many missed the point.