Morality or Spirituality?

"Christianity is not a matter of external behavior; it's a matter of a changed heart. No amount of good behavior can accomplish that. It is a work which only God can accomplish in those who put their faith in Him.
Let's not make the mistake of confusing morality with spirituality. No matter how upright or moral a man may seem, he is lost if he hasn't put his complete trust in Christ as his Savior. " -Sozo

From the new Reasons Why blog.

Posted by TulipGirl | 06:30 AM| TrackBack (0) | Words

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.tulipgirl.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/167

Comments

Can you say "false dichotomoy", boys and girls?

The idea that there can be a changed heart that doesn't manifest itself in outward behaviour is contrary to scripture and the historic faith of the Church.

Of course, I may be being unfair to Sozo since I don't have the context. I affirm wholeheartedly that works cannot justify, but I affirm with equal vigour that any "faith" that doesn't show itself by works is no faith at all.
Posted by: Rob Huffstedtler at April 30, 2004 03:23 PM

TulipGirl,

Thanks for the mention. I'll get that check in the mail... ;-)

Rob,

Ummm, there is no false dichotomy. Unless you're saying that a person who is moral in his behavior must of necessity be acting that way out of a regenerate nature.

Should a Christian act in a moral fashion? Yes, of course. Is a person who acts in a moral fashion a 'Christian'. Maybe, maybe not. So let's stop tying the two together. Read my entire post on the subject. I think it will make more sense that way.
Posted by: Sozo at April 30, 2004 09:33 PM

Hi, Alexandra...I got your comment on my war blog. I never know if it's proper ettiquette (sp??) to respond to an interesting comment on your comments or mine, or "On the Blog". If this is the wrong place, forgive me??

I think that you are right in that my analogy breaks down equating Saddam with Infant Beater...after the Infant was saved, Mr. Hero's work would probably be done (Infant would probably go to the hospital!). That is not the case with our work there (setting up a stable government); I acknowledge that is what is happening, but it is a work I don't support...but that doesn't mean I shouldn't choose my analogies better!

Your comment about things *taking time* was very insightful, and correct. I have seen that "in action" in the church we attend, in regards to developing relationships, and our pastor frequently reminds us of this.

Thanks for you note! I love your blog and appreciate you reading mine.
Posted by: Samantha at May 1, 2004 02:41 PM

Hi, Samantha!

Thanks for understanding my comment as it was intended. *g*
Posted by: TulipGirl at May 1, 2004 09:14 PM

I've gone back and read the whole thing. In a limited sense I agree with you. Moral laws will not make a moral culture.

However, I maintain that you are still teaching a false dichotomy that replaces the true gospel with the sort of pietism favoured by theological liberalism. Sanctification is a necessary follow-on to true justification.
Posted by: Rob Huffstedtler at May 2, 2004 02:34 AM

Rob,

Thanks for taking the time to re-read. However, I still think we're missing each other since I never said "moral laws will not make a moral culture" and I pretty much agree with your comments on sanctification.

But, I think perhaps we should not hijack TulipGirl's blog talking about this. If you wish to talk about it further, please feel free to post a comment at my blog.

by His grace,
Sozo
Posted by: Sozo at May 2, 2004 04:44 AM

Isn't "external behavior" redundant?
Posted by: lenise at May 6, 2004 06:59 PM

Sorry, that was actually me.
Posted by: Paul Baxter at May 6, 2004 10:20 PM

RSS RSS2 Atom

Creative Commons License

In My Garden