On being a Saint

  • 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!

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mark, you asked: A more stringent law? That's what we've been brought into?

Which is less stringent - do not physically take a man's life OR do not be angry at a man in your heart?

Which is more stringent - do not sleep with someone other than your spouse OR do not even have a lustful thought about someone other than your spouse?

Your righteousness must EXCEED the righteousness of the Pharisees.

Does this mean a man can do it without being given the power TO do it? No. But Jesus was very clear that a thought is adultery and an emotional anger in your heart is to murder. He raised the bar. In fact, the more stringent instruction He gave concerning divorce, once caused the disciples to say: but if this is true, then it's best to never marry!

So...can you see that what He taught was MORE exacting than the letter of the law?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1stCenturyLady

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On this part . . . I'm not into playing "Bible Quiz" for the sake of proving myself. But more to the point, I don't want to swerve from the "sin unto death" discussion until that's settled.

Much love!

What don't you still understand about the sin unto death? What do you see as the sin NOT unto death? I've shown you what the Word says, can you top it? If not, let's go on to what is the sign of the New Covenant? You've got the subject way off topic and onto the Sabbath.
 
Last edited:

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Did you know it is more stressful to be idle than working? They need a sabbath rest also.;)

It should not be an either/or proposition.

You say it shouldn't be an either/or proposition. By this, I understand you to be saying a man should be careful to keep the law both outwardly AND inwardly, that a man should keep the letter of the law AND the spirit of the law.

This sounds right. And if I strive to do this, I would have your approval and Gods approval. It sounds right. But is it?

Why didn't Paul just do and teach this? Why did he vociferously oppose another apostle to his face for doing this very thing?

We know that not one jot of the law is done away with and that anyone who teaches others to break even the least or less weighty of the law will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. So why didn't Paul teach men to be circumcised but instead seems to have taught a breaking of the law (of which not a jot is done away with?) And David, who ate and had his men eat what it was not lawful for them to eat - will David be called least in the kingdom of heaven?

Can these things be tied in together to make any sort of sense:

1. Jesus did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law, and if any man teaches others to break even the least/less weighty of the laws of God, he will be called least in the kingdom.

2. True circumcision is of the heart.

3. There is no law against the spirit.

4. The letter kills, but the spirit gives life.

5. If the inside of the cup is clean, the outside will be as well.

6. It is possible to whitewash a tomb while inside is dead and rotting filthy things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Episkopos

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Of course, but only if you lived under the Old Covenant. Do you understand covenant rules? Maybe not. Or maybe you do, and are just trying to trap me like the Pharisees. ROFL Watch it, your heart is showing. And you can say your sarcasm doesn't stink, but we all know better.

Well, not sure what you wanted to accomplish with this, perhaps to just make me lose interest in responding?

But you are not responding to me.

I asked @Episkopos about sin. You chimed in with the question back to me, do I sin? And brought into the mix "sins not unto death" and "sins unto death". You've defined the "sins unto death" as breaking the 10 commandments, or committing sins which carried the capital punishment under the sacrificial system, that is, no sacrificial remedy. A sin unto death.

To which I replied that yes I have, and do commit "sin unto death" according to your definition.

Yes, I understand some things about covenants, and that has a lot to do with why I oppose certain doctrines.

I wasn't asking you a question, but I don't mind addressing you as you wish to be in the conversation. Are you now changing your definition of "sin unto death" to not include Sabbath breaking, both one of the 10 commandments, and a capital offense?

For some reason now you want to exclude Sabbath breaking from your list of sins unto death. But also for some reason you seem to have to also both judge and insult me.

You need not convince me that no one can judge us concerning sabbaths, I do agree with you about that. You were the one who brought this up, and defined the terms, no need to, well, we can have a friendly conversation if you wish.

Much love!
Mark
 
Last edited:

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What don't you still understand about the sin unto death? What do you see as the sin NOT unto death? I've shown you what the Word says, can you top it? If not, let's go on to what is the sign of the New Covenant? You've got the subject way off topic and onto the Sabbath.

You're the one who brought up Sin Unto Death. I asked you to define it.

For some reason, my answering you that I've in fact broken one of the 10 Commandments, and have commited that which the OT condemns to death, that is, breaking the sabbath, and suddenly this turns into a train wreck?

?
 

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, not sure what you wanted to accomplish with this, perhaps to just make me lose interest in responding?

But you are not responding to me.

I asked @Episkopos about sin. You chimed in with the question back to me, do I sin? And brought into the mix "sins not unto death" and "sins unto death". You've defined the "sins unto death" as breaking the 10 commandments, or committing sins which carried the capital punishment under the sacrificial system, that is, no sacrificial remedy. A sin unto death.

To which I replied that yes I have, and do commit "sin unto death" according to your definition.

Yes, I understand some things about covenants, and that has a lot to do with why I oppose certain doctrines.

I wasn't asking you a question, but I don't mind addressing you as you wish to be in the conversation. Are you now changing your definition of "sin unto death" to not include Sabbath breaking, both one of the 10 commandments, and a capital offense?

For some reason now you want to exclude Sabbath breaking from your list of sins unto death. But also for some reason you seem to have to also both judge and insult me.

You need not convince me that no one can judge us concerning sabbaths, I do agree with you about that. You were the one who brought this up, and defined the terms, no need to, well, we can have a friendly conversation if you wish.

Much love!
Mark

It doesn't seem you wanted to accept my explanation about the Sabbath included in the law as just its sign. So if you do not want learn what lawlessness is, fine. Have a great day.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It doesn't seem you wanted to accept my explanation about the Sabbath included in the law as just its sign. So if you do not want learn what lawlessness is, fine. Have a great day.

No . . . I understand that . . . I've been trying to show the problem with your definition of sin, and "sin unto death" in particular.

And the biggest problem seems to be that even though you define sin unto death in a way that I would have to confess to committing, and I do make that confession, then you seem to insist on defending me, de facto declaring your definition incorrect, but not wanting to so so outright.

So if you do not want learn what lawlessness is, fine.

This is non-sequitor, and if I responded, it would take the conversation away from the part you seemingly do not wish to respond to.

It sounds to me that you don't ever plan to respond. No worries! Much love!

Mark
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't even understand what you guys are going on about...:p

There is only one sin that I've ever read of that leads to death, I.e., will not ever be forgiven in this world or the next, and it is to claim the work of the Holy Spirit is the working of Satan...this is my understanding of the matter anyway.
 

Berserk

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2019
878
670
93
76
Colville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Here is a summary of the process by which Catholics with a reputation for the highest level of holy living get canonized as saints:

The Process of Canonization for Catholic Saints

The decision to label super-spiritual believers as unique "saints" bothers me for 4 reasons:
(1) In my view the use of "saint" as a badge of unique spirituality is valid for most Catholic "saints" so labelled. But this elevated status slights the quiet holiness of the most virtuous of unknown simple believers who have absolutely pure hearts of loving devotion to God and those in need. It strikes me as important to recognize that some of our greatest "saints" go unnoticed.
(2) In the NT the term "saints" (Greek: "hagioi") is typically another term for ordinary believers.
(3) Yet the thread's purpose strikes me as legitimate: some people live lives of unique holiness which deserve recognition and emulation. But it strikes me as difficult to identify the term which best labels such "saints."
(4) One label candidate is the term "mature" (Greek: "teleios"). But even Paul does not consider himself "mature" (Philippians 3:12) and he speaks sarcastically of those who do (3:15). Paul's restraint and humility in assessing his own spiritual status is motivated by his awareness of the difficult problem of discerning the hidden motivations and purposes of the heart (1 Corinthians 4:3-5). We should follow Paul's example and consider ourselves spiritual works in progress. At best, we can identify others as super-spiritual, but to so label oneself that way inevitably leads to pride and undermines what may once have been a legitimately unique spirituality.
 

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No . . . I understand that . . . I've been trying to show the problem with your definition of sin, and "sin unto death" in particular.

And the biggest problem seems to be that even though you define sin unto death in a way that I would have to confess to committing, and I do make that confession, then you seem to insist on defending me, de facto declaring your definition incorrect, but not wanting to so so outright.



This is non-sequitor, and if I responded, it would take the conversation away from the part you seemingly do not wish to respond to.

It sounds to me that you don't ever plan to respond. No worries! Much love!

Mark

My definition of lawlessness being against God's laws is not incorrect. What sins you like to commit besides the Sabbath which no longer applies, is up to you. And I'm through with you.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't even understand what you guys are going on about...:p

There is only one sin that I've ever read of that leads to death, I.e., will not ever be forgiven in this world or the next, and it is to claim the work of the Holy Spirit is the working of Satan...this is my understanding of the matter anyway.

Hi stunnedbygrace,

That's how I see it too. And it may even be that this only applied when witnessing Jesus' miracles in the days of His flesh, and ascribing them to evil spirits.

But I wouldn't want to be the one to push my luck on that one!

Sometimes the best way to show an error is to follow the reasoning through to it's conclusion. @1stCenturyLady apparently declined to participate in the exercise, perhaps seeing where it was leading.

Much love!
Mark
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Something I came across in my reading . . .

Romans 1 YLT
1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, having been separated to the good news of God --
2 which He announced before through His prophets in holy writings --
3 concerning His Son, (who is come of the seed of David according to the flesh,

4 who is marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of sanctification, by the rising again from the dead,) Jesus Christ our Lord;
5 through whom we did receive grace and apostleship, for obedience of faith among all the nations, in behalf of his name;
6 among whom are also ye, the called of Jesus Christ;
7 to all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called saints; Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father, and [from] the Lord Jesus Christ!


Interestingly, in verse 7, God addresses this letter to the saints in Rome. Not the faithful, but the saints only.

So under the assertion posed in this thread, this letter only applies to you once you've reach "saint" status. Once you've purged your life of all that gets in your way so you can now run the race in the heavenlies, not only Christ in you, but you now also in Christ, free from sin, understanding mysteries, one of the oh so few, the holy, the elite.

OK. We can put that to the test.

1:11 "for I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift, that ye may be established;"

The saints need to be established. But this would make sense considering:

6:3 "are ye ignorant that we, as many as were baptized to Christ Jesus, to his death were baptized?"

There's a question of how much they really know, it would seem.

They are urged to:

6:11 so also ye, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to the sin, and living to God in Jesus Christ our Lord.
12 Let not then the sin reign in your mortal body, to obey it in its desires;
13 neither present ye your members instruments of unrighteousness to the sin, but present yourselves to God as living out of the dead, and your members instruments of righteousness to God;


Again that possible confusion:

6:15 What then? shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? let it not be!
16 have ye not known that to whom ye present yourselves servants for obedience, servants ye are to him to whom ye obey, whether of sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness?


But that's understandable . . .

6:19 In the manner of men I speak, because of the weakness of your flesh, for even as ye did present your members servants to the uncleanness and to the lawlessness -- to the lawlessness, so now present your members servants to the righteousness -- to sanctification,

I suppose I could continue. The entire letter is filled with everything from the deepest of doctrine to the plainest appeal to let go of sin.

Some of it seems rather remedial for the elite Saints, the Holy Seers of Mysteries.

Something I realized some time ago . . . If we compare ourselves by ourselves, by our perceptions of other people, we can reach some very misleading conclusions.

What may seem to one to be very enlightened, so very advanced, may be completely remedial in another's life.

And we really have no idea about what another person's relationship with our Heavenly Father truly is.

I am of course completely supportive for all to live holy lives. I believe we were redeemed to do that, and we are reborn to do that. And in the course of coming to do that, God first and foremost commits Himself to us in eternal and intimate relationship, and promises that nothing will ever change that, all of our shortcomings aside, while equally promising that He will erase those shortcomings. He is faithful, and He will do it!

Much love!
Mark
 

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi stunnedbygrace,

That's how I see it too. And it may even be that this only applied when witnessing Jesus' miracles in the days of His flesh, and ascribing them to evil spirits.

But I wouldn't want to be the one to push my luck on that one!

Sometimes the best way to show an error is to follow the reasoning through to it's conclusion. @1stCenturyLady apparently declined to participate in the exercise, perhaps seeing where it was leading.

Much love!
Mark

Not true, you just wanted to argue, rather than discuss. And as far as leading somewhere, you were going around in circles, never wanting to leave an old ritual we are no longer under, so is no longer LAW.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Not true, you just wanted to argue, rather than discuss. And as far as leading somewhere, you were going around in circles, never wanting to leave an old ritual we are no longer under, so is no longer LAW.

1stCenturyLady,

Why are you so reluctant to look at this?

Your definition . . . my answer . . . it's all there. No need to repeat. It's OK. You are allowed to change your definition and we proceed, if you want, otherwise, we simply disagree on some things.

You were the one who said we're on the hook for these things, including the Sabbath. I selected that one as a discussion point.

Round and round we go . . .
 

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
1stCenturyLady,

Why are you so reluctant to look at this?

Your definition . . . my answer . . . it's all there. No need to repeat. It's OK. You are allowed to change your definition and we proceed, if you want, otherwise, we simply disagree on some things.

You were the one who said we're on the hook for these things, including the Sabbath. I selected that one as a discussion point.

Round and round we go . . .

Your answer to my definition that repeats the Word of God is that you commit sins of lawlessness. It sounds like you are proud of the fact. Nothing more to discuss. What I believe would just be foolishness to a carnal mind.
 
Last edited:

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,541
21,652
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your answer to my definition that repeats the Word of God is that you commit sins of lawlessness. It sounds like you are proud of the fact. Nothing more to discuss. What I believe would just be foolishness to a carnal mind.

You have me completely wrong if this is what you think.

Just the same, I don't see this edifying.


Much love!
 

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,326
2,162
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You have me completely wrong if this is what you think.

Just the same, I don't see this edifying.


Much love!

No, I think I've got you pegged just fine, and am not interested in continuing discussing anything with you. Nothing you have said on this subject has been edifying.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
There is only one sin that I've ever read of that leads to death, I.e., will not ever be forgiven in this world or the next, and it is to claim the work of the Holy Spirit is the working of Satan...this is my understanding of the matter anyway.
"The sin unto death" has absolutely nothing to do with the unpardonable sin (which you have brought up). The context makes it perfectly clear that this is a sin committed by a Christian -- a brother -- who persists in wilfully sinning.

The sin unto death is a sin which leads to premature physical death for a believer, a Christian, a brother -- not unbelievers who blaspheme the Holy Spirit.


Paul tells Christians to examine themselves before partaking of the Lord's Supper, since if they do not deal with their present sins, it could lead to either (a) physical weakness, (b) sickness, or (c) premature death (for which he applies the metaphor "sleep").

1 CORINTHIANS 11
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation [condemnation] to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1stCenturyLady