I replied to Anthony's post, if you care to see my perspective on it....2 Timothy 1:9 is crystal clear in its revelation. Good passage choice. No offence but you need to rethink this @DNB.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I replied to Anthony's post, if you care to see my perspective on it....2 Timothy 1:9 is crystal clear in its revelation. Good passage choice. No offence but you need to rethink this @DNB.
Very well said, I would entirely agree!Yes, DNB. This is not just speculation but observation. Apostasy is the falling away from a previously maintained position. God is able to keep us from falling away, but only does so if it is the desire of our heart to remain faithful to Him.
Jud 1:24-25
(24) Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
(25) To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
Once again this reveals your improper understanding of the Gospel, the power of the Holy Spirit, of conversion, repentance, remission of sins, justification, salvation, and eternal security.If salvation comes through hearing the Word of God, and hearing implies comprehension, for one cannot be convicted of something that they don't understand, then, the level of one's conviction is commensurate to their understanding.
And since, one's understanding is contingent upon, first of all, the competency of the one who preached the Word to them, and then to their own maturity and wisdom, we expect that in the same manner that they accepted the Word, they can renounce it.
That is, if someone comes along with more intellect, eloquence and confidence preaching either another, 'gospel', atheism, buddhism, islam, etc... then what is stopping the once converted, to re-assessing his initial conviction, if reasoning was the main grounds that convinced him towards Christianity in the first place?
no....it is a holy saving grace...not a principle, but a power.Well, in regard to 2 Timothy 1:9, i would simply say that it is the principle of grace that he is referring to, that was granted from eternity. Not the Elect. Now, of course, as far as this particular verse goes, I personally think that both comprehensions are viable, mine & yours. And, of course, i trust that this is obviously not the only proof-text that you believe supports a Reformed perspective on Scripture.
The reason that I initially contended your statement about 'All of the sins of the Elect are forgiven', is because the OP was basically about the need for repentance, or, at least the extent of it. I felt that your comment didn't quite address his point (the need to continuously repent, or not), and that it just jumped into a Reformed stance, with all its implications. Thus, if such a principle as the Elect is true (and all its predicates), the whole OP becomes a moot point? Which may very well be the case, but since repentance is a paramount principle in Christian theology, it seemed that you overlooked its necessity in one extent, or another?
Your last paragraph has almost no punctuation, that was a difficult read (I couldn't do it)?
The unforgivable sin is not disbelief, it is a sentiment that will disqualify you from ever having the option to repent, while on this earth.
Yes, only on your death bed, or unless Christ returns first, will we have the option to Salvation or Condemnation, irrespective of one's prior convictions. So, I'm not sure where your contention lies?
You seem to be ignoring the context of the verses which speak about the unforgivable sin. Where do you get "unbelief" from what Jesus tells the pharisees who account his works as those of beelzebub?
You sound simple Enoch111, verging on ignorant!Once again this reveals your improper understanding of the Gospel, the power of the Holy Spirit, of conversion, repentance, remission of sins, justification, salvation, and eternal security.
Believing the Gospel is NOT merely an intellectual exercise.
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (Acts 8:37, omitted from all modern versions).
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (Rom 10:9,10)
The whole being is involved in conversion. And it does result in genuine repentance, which then rejects everything other than Christ and the Word of God. So all your hypothetical scenarios are just that -- pure fantasy.
You sound flaky and mystical. Start being reasonable, and knock off your ethereal delusion, as if you actually have a grounded comprehension of these things.no....it is a holy saving grace...not a principle, but a power.
You seem to describe a natural understanding that is not consistent with Spiritual life.
I don't know Enow (rhymes), that seems a bit too obvious, in the sense that Christ appeared to say something outside of what he already had taught extensively, i.e. faith in him as the Messiah.A saved believer cannot commit the unforgivable sin.
A sinner that has been rejecting Jesus and blaspheming the Holy Ghost can still believe in Him to be saved even before he or she dies because by believing in Him is by repenting of unbelief which is the only real unforgivable sin there is that is the real blaspheme against the Holy Ghost.
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
This verse declares we have forgiveness for ALL sin, not as some say, only for sins we confess, and repent of.
Anyway, I understand why many thinks it is about speaking against the Holy Ghost in Mark's account but what was said was to scatter believers from Jesus as explained further in Matthew's account and how one can become clean by confessing Him before men as Luke's account confirms.
I do not see any judgment in the Bible, neither in the great white throne judgment event of anyone being judged by speaking against the Holy Ghost when the only one that sends a sinner in is the sin of unbelief of resisting the testimony of the Holy Ghost in Jesus's ministry to believe in Him to be saved.
I don't know Enow (rhymes), that seems a bit too obvious, in the sense that Christ appeared to say something outside of what he already had taught extensively, i.e. faith in him as the Messiah.
Obviously, he was preaching salvation through faith throughout his ministry, but this particular injunction, appears to be a stipulation over and above all his previous precepts. In that it was in direct context to these Pharisees committing the crime, claiming the power of the Holy Ghost, was actually that of Satan (a divided kingdom cannot stand). This principle appears have a very strict and exceptional context to it, not the general concept of Faith over works.
And this exception becomes very clear in Luke's account. Notice how he differentiates between speaking against Christ, which appears to be forgivable, and blasphemy against the spirit, which is not. ...we assume that ' ...a word against the Son of Man...', is a sentiment against his Messiahship or Lordship, for nothing else would have any pertinence to the Gospel?
Luke 12:10
12:10. "And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.
To be clear
Ascribing the works of the devil to God is not the unforgivable sin. It's ascribing the works of Christ to the devil.
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
This verse declares we have forgiveness for ALL sin, not as some say, only for sins we confess, and repent of.
But, we do. He juxtaposed a remark against Jesus, and blasphemy against the Spirit. I will venture to say that '...speaking a word against the Son of man..' is unbelief. And he demarcated the distinction between unbelief, and blasphemy.To say it is about speaking against the Holy Ghost when the said act was done in unbelief about Jesus and yet Luke's account has nothing to do with the accusation incident by how one confess or deny Jesus before men... then we are not getting a clear picture in Mark's account of what Jesus meant.
Notice that - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (vs. 9) is IN CONTRAST TO - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (vs. 8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (vs. 10).Doug,
This is what happens when you cherry pick one verse that is not in harmony with the rest of Scripture. What does 1 John 1:9 (NIV) state: 'If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness'.
Therefore, it is necessary to confess our sins to receive God's forgiveness.
The Book of Proverbs agrees: 'Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper, but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy' (Prov 28:13 NIV).
Oz
But, we do. He juxtaposed a remark against Jesus, and blasphemy against the Spirit. I will venture to say that '...speaking a word against the Son of man..' is unbelief. And he demarcated the distinction between unbelief, and blasphemy.
You are not giving blasphemy against the Holy Spirit the distinction that it requires, the exceptional offense that Jesus gave it.
For, one can denounce Christ at some point, and recover. But Jesus is making this one specific injunction, i.e. speaking against the Holy Ghost, as irrecoverable.
You have not recognized or addressed, the two different dispositions that Jesus delineated in Luke 12:10.
Would that part of that verse signifying us to be dead in our sins suggests no longer living in them for how we have been forgiven our trespasses?
Doesn't walking in the light in fellowship with the Father & the Son is how His blood cleanses us from all sins?
1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full. 5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1 John 2:1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
And if we do sin, we can confess our sins and Jesus is faithful to forgive us of our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Interesting, ...but, I can't see John speaking at a corporate level at that point of history, i.e. dispensation of grace to all nations.