Like Button

Thursday, May 31, 2012

A Short Post

People tell me I use too many words when I write. Enjoy this brief entry. Hopefully it will spawn a lot of thought.

Have you ever noticed how different Satan's approach is from God's approach? God asks you to surrender all and Satan encourages you to surrender nothing. In return, God promises all of Himself and Satan promises you nothing. (Don't misunderstand. I don't mean that Satan makes no promises. I mean that the return on surrendering nothing is truly nothing.)

We are told to die to self, to surrender to Christ, to count as loss everything we thought was gain in order to know Christ. The outcome is salvation, a living, breathing relationship with Christ, the abundant life, peace that passes understanding, love, joy ... the list goes on. Or we could cling to our money and our rights, our possessions and our impulses, our momentary desires and ongoing rebellion. In return we get dissatisfaction, discontent, no love, no joy, and, ultimately, no God. And still we tend to cling to the latter and even ridicule those who suggest we shouldn't.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great point but one quibble , we always have our god. Granted it is sometimes our belly, but it is no less a god when it comes to our life's devotion and purpose.

Dan D

Stan said...

The difference, of course, is if this is "god" or "God". That is, "our god" is not the same thing as the God, and "a god" is not necessarily the true God. If, then, our "god" is not "God", we will, as I indicated, be pursuing nothing and obtaining nothing.

Naum said...

Beautiful. :)

Stan said...

A post we can live with? :)

Anonymous said...

What's beautiful about agreement via redefined words? The beauty is just as faux as the agreement and succeeds only in causing confusion.

Dan D.

Stan said...

Dan D., I don't see the redefinitions to which you are referring in the post in question. This post was about the difference between Satan and God in their approaches to us. I understand your consternation over redefined words in the previous post, but I don't see it here.

Dan said...

My complaint is not with you but with Naum. The only way he can say that this post is beautiful is to redefine the Christ of which you speak. Naum serves a different Lord than do you and I. Final judgement will determine which of us serves the true good Lord, but for Naum to now pretend that we now serve the same lord by calling your post "beautiful" is an exercise in ridiculousness, is it not?

Dan said...

Oh BTW, the Dan D. was a fluke on my I Phone. It is very difficult to post something on Google from there from my google account, so I chose the easier option of just making it anonymous. I'm not sure how Dan. W. ended up Dan D., but I just stuck with it since I had already posted once that way. I posted earlier as "dan" but then realized you probably had no idea who that was.

Dan said...

This proving you're a robot is becoming to burdensome to bear.

Stan said...

I was guessing that "Dan D" was "Dan W", but didn't quite know why "W" was coming across as "D".

I didn't think that you had a complaint against me. I understand now that it was based on the previous conversation carried over to this one. Thanks for clearing that up.