Are You Feeling Guilty?
Ok, so I swiped this from another blog that I read. Thank you Nate over at Presbyterian Thoughts for typing it all up!
What I found so interesting is that my hubby was talking to me about this very issue just last night! He was sharing about what he is reading, listening to, and learning in his Nouthetic Counseling studies. It is a definitely something to Ponder.
JG Vos, in the 1940s, asked the question, “What mistaken idea about guilt is common today? I believe that his answer is just as relevant 50 years later:“Today it is very common to confuse the feeling of guilt with the fact of guilt. Popular notions of psychiatry have led many people to suppose that there is nothing to guilt beyond the feeling of guilt, and that if they can manage somehow to get rid of that troublesome feeling of guilt, that they will have nothing to fear.
The legitimate practice of psychiatry deals with neurotic or mentally abnormal individuals only. Such persons may have an abnormal feeling or complex of guilt which destroys their happiness and usefulness, and which is entirely different from their real guilt before God. It may be possible to relieve such an abnormal feeling of guilt by psychiatric methods. But real guilt before God cannot be affected one whit by psychiatry. Guilt remains guilt, regardless of whether we are obsessed by it or unconscious of it.
Real guilt is not a mere subjective feeling, but an objective fact concerning a person’s relation to God. A person may be so hardened in sin that he is entirely unconscious of his guilt, and vainly imagines himself to be a righteous person on the road to heaven. By the special work of the Holy Spirit a sinner is brought under conviction of sin and then realizes himself to be guilty before God and deserving of eternal punishment in hell. Imaginary guilt or the mere feeling of guilt may be removed by psychiatry, but real guilt can only be removed by the blood of Jesus Christ, the sinner’s substitute.”So feeling guilty? If you are then Jesus is the real answer. He taught us to pray, “forgive us our debts”. So many in our culture attempt to medicate away what only the blood of Christ can heal.
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Tags: biblical counseling, Christianity, counseling, culture, guilt, Nouthetic Counseling, Pondering, quote Posted in Christianity, Forgiveness, Pondering, Quotes
November 6th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Amen! I’m reading “Christless Christianity” by Horton right now and he touches on this quite a bit. Great book, btw, if you haven’t yet read it.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
While I agree in principle with the idea that feeling guilty and actually being guilty are two very different things, from there you points are quite contradictory.
First, where is the objective evidence that anyone has ever done anything to deserve eternal torture as a punishment? Of course, this is assuming that hurting people in return for whatever hurts they have done is a good idea in the first place, regardless of how long they are made to feel pain.
Then you allude to Jesus’ blood “paying” for our sins, in the same sentence, with the notion of forgiveness. Well, you can’t have it both ways! If God demanded full payment for all sins, then you’re really saying he is incapable of forgiving! Forgiveness is, by definition, an act which says, “no repayment is necessary.”
I’ve actually written an entire book on this topic–”Hell? No! Why You Can Be Certain There’s No Such Place As Hell,” (for anyone interested, you can get a free Ecopy of my book at my website: http://www.ricklannoye.com), but if I may, let me share one of the many points I make in it.
If you’ll re-read the words of Jesus in the gospels, and look for where HE said his purpose for coming was to die as a blood sacrifice to PAY for our sins, guess what? YOU WON’T FIND IT. In fact, the one place where he does talk about sacrifice is where he says God doesn’t want it! He quotes Hosea, saying that God desire MERCY instead.
Look in the book of Acts, at all those first Christian sermons. One would think that would be a real good time to explain what was Jesus’ main reason for coming, right? But in none of those sermons, do any of the apostles say Jesus was a blood sacrifice to pay for our sins!
No, all these stuff about blood sacrifice was superimposed later on. Jesus actually said that God just forgives when we own up to our sins and repent. That’s it!
If not, then Jesus/God asks us to do something he, himself, cannot do, to forgive others without demanding any sort of payment or to suffer some painful punishment.
November 7th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
“First, where is the objective evidence that anyone has ever done anything to deserve eternal torture as a punishment? Of course, this is assuming that hurting people in return for whatever hurts they have done is a good idea in the first place, regardless of how long they are made to feel pain.”
So very simply answered by Paul in Romans, “Who are you, O man, to answer back to God?”, and by the Psalmist in Psalms, “Who is Man, that God would esteem him?”. Your question assumes that God is somehow accountable to you to explain why such a thing is deserved. He isn’t. If you’re assuming God for the sake of argument, and you are, then He is the Creator, you the creature. He’s not required to answer you, and its quite presumptuous and arrogant to assume that He does.
You said, “Then you allude to Jesus’ blood “paying” for our sins, in the same sentence, with the notion of forgiveness. Well, you can’t have it both ways! If God demanded full payment for all sins, then you’re really saying he is incapable of forgiving! Forgiveness is, by definition, an act which says, “no repayment is necessary.””
You’re ad hoc defining terms. Forgiveness- “to give up all claim on account of.” If God forgives on the basis of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, then he is giving up His claim for justice because of our sins on account of Christ’s sacrifice. You’re conflating “forgiveness” and “mercy” for the purpose of advancing your argument.
“If you’ll re-read the words of Jesus in the gospels, and look for where HE said his purpose for coming was to die as a blood sacrifice to PAY for our sins, guess what? YOU WON’T FIND IT. In fact, the one place where he does talk about sacrifice is where he says God doesn’t want it! He quotes Hosea, saying that God desire MERCY instead.”
You seem to think that because God didn’t tailor the authorship of the Bible to what you narrowly define, you’re free to fill in. You’re poisoning the well.
“Look in the book of Acts, at all those first Christian sermons. One would think that would be a real good time to explain what was Jesus’ main reason for coming, right? But in none of those sermons, do any of the apostles say Jesus was a blood sacrifice to pay for our sins!”
You’re assuming that your own purpose or reasoning must be effected in the text for it to be valid. Since God didn’t tell us Christ was coming in Genesis, and that would have been a good time, I bet that’s a good argument against the reality of Christ’s advent, right? Wrong. That’s not the purpose of Genesis nor the place God determined that information to both be revealed, and recorded.
“No, all these stuff about blood sacrifice was superimposed later on. Jesus actually said that God just forgives when we own up to our sins and repent. That’s it!”
Really? News to the Jews. Solomon burnt a lot of money building a Temple for sacrifices that God didn’t want. This assumption about God flies in the face of the Bible. I don’t just mean a passage or two, I mean the entire book.
“If not, then Jesus/God asks us to do something he, himself, cannot do, to forgive others without demanding any sort of payment or to suffer some painful punishment.”
He doesn’t ask us that. We are to forgive others, but the requirement of payment stems form Him, not us. When I forgive someone else, their accountability for their sins is to God, not me. Accordingly, God has either demanded payment from His Son, or will punish them for their own sins. Your conclusion is false because it’s based on false premises. Since you present this as a disjunctive argument in support of the point immediately above, this also reduces the support for that argument.
Peddle your universalism elsewhere.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Mr Lannoye makes several brash assumptions. He assumes that there is an eternity. Where is his objective evidence?
He assumes that there exists a crime which would warrant eternal torture. Where is his objective evidence?
He assumes that whatever might constitute a crime worthy of eternal punishment no person has ever committed it. Where is his objective evidence?
While Mr. Lannoye spends an eternity scraping the vast chasms of his intellect searching for some semblance of universally valid evidence let us remind him that One greater than himself who inhabits eternity has graciously condescended to reveal such essentials pertaining to life and life-to-come. He has even caused this Revealed Data to be translated into the common languages of mankind that we might know His will.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
“No, all these stuff about blood sacrifice was superimposed later on. Jesus actually said that God just forgives when we own up to our sins and repent. That’s it!”
Jesus actually did talk about his blood being shed for the forgiveness of sins: “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:28)
November 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
“He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.” – 1 Peter 2:24
November 7th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
The idea that forgiveness absolves the payment due is false. If someone comes to my house and knocks over a lamp I have two choices; I can forgive them or I can ask they replace the lamp. Now it would seem that this proves Lannoye’s point above. The issue is this, if I choose to forgive them I am obligated to pay the cost of the lamp. See I already paid, money, the price for the lamp has already been paid. If I choose to forgive my friend then they are free from having to pay for it but I eat the cost. I either buy a new one or lose the money for the one that was knocked over but either way my forgiveness came with a price that I had to pay.
It is no different with God. He forgave His children but there is still a price to be paid. No human would have been able to pay for it. So God paid the price by dying on the cross Himself for us. The talk about the blood of Christ not being necessary seems strange because the book of Hebrews talks about shed blood all over the place.