The False Doctrines with OTHER key words

[bbyrd009]

You are suggesting I offer myself as my own sacrifice for my own sins? That this is better than Jesus' offering?

well, i would put it more like we are taught that Jesus died for our sins, as a get out of jail free card, when that cannot be Quoted, and is misunderstood; Christ died for our sins, which is not the same thing, at least im pretty sure.

But am I hearing you rightly? That you denigrate the death of Jesus as a sacrifice for our sins, the offering of His body on the cross, to die and live again, that in Him, we might die and live again, in new life?

i am merely suggesting that there was a reason Jesus claimed "God-forsaken," and it is not the one that the Cult of Sol teaches us

Because, you see, this is how I see it. So maybe you can imagine how your words come across to me. Perhaps to others also, this being a Christian forum, where by and large we see Jesus' death and resurrection as, well, shall I say, crucial.

i totally understand, ok; i believed that my whole life, was in the Cult of Sol and believed in Death More Abundantly virtually my whole life, too

my point there was mainly to illustrate that when one makes a statement of Absolute Truth, they are never really 100% right; i mean, i could have as easily Quoted No son of man may die for another's sins or several other vv. Unfort we are speaking much at odds right now, as you seek to go to a place called "heaven" after you have died; and i only mean to suggest a possible better understanding

Not knowing what you were taught, I couldn't say. And I'm not sure you really know what I say it means, I don't know how much you actually pay attention to what I write.

So I'm not sure how I'd answer whether it does or not, just the same,

What does it mean to you?

Much love!

well, it used to mean to me that Yah could not look upon sin, and all the other stuff we get in church 101, ok. A great place to start imo. But then i read my Bible
by myself

Who told you that you were naked?

doesnt mean that you would come to the same conclusions, i guess
no judgement for beliefs that i can find anyway, bam believe what seems best to you

 

[CharismaticLady]

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding concerning "grieving the Spirit".

29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

You are connecting "grieving the Spirit" with the next part, putting away bitterness and malice and wrath.

The conjoining words show it is actually connected to the previous thought.

This forms a couplet:
31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

Vs. 31, don't do these, Vs. 32 do these.

These likewise have a flow of thought:
29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Don't say corrupt things, only say those things that build up, so that you are giving other grace, and don't make God's Holy Spirit saddened, whereby you are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Give grace through your words. The Holy Spirit is our seal of ownership, and you will make God sad if in your words you take that confidence from others.

Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby you are sealed unto the day of redemption. This is a statement of ownership, and this seal is there until our day of redemption. Saying otherwise tears down. We are to not do that.

Much love!

What do you think I believe regarding "grieving" the Holy Spirit?

 

[CharismaticLady]

No, the question has been directed to you, but you seem allergic to it.

You obviously don't wish to respond.

No worries!

Much love!

If I would respond again, I would only be repeating myself. I made myself clear the first time.

 

[CharismaticLady]

even things that @CharismaticLady would not apparently call sin.

You silly man. You already know that I believe all sin to be sin, but not all sin is unto death.

 

[justbyfaith]

If I would respond again, I would only be repeating myself. I made myself clear the first time.

Sometimes it bears repeating because people often don't get it the first time.

The third time, the sword of the Spirit shall do double damage (Ezekiel 21:14).

 

[marks]

as you seek to go to a place called "heaven" after you have died;

I think you've been making some assumptions about me that aren't correct.

As if this is all I have in mind?

 

[CharismaticLady]

Sometimes it bears repeating because people often don't get it the first time.

The third time, the sword of the Spirit shall do double damage (Ezekiel 21:14).

He already knows what I believe, and is just twisting my words to get my goat. I'm not going to play that hand.

 

[marks]

well, i would put it more like we are taught that Jesus died for our sins, as a get out of jail free card,

OK, but that's what I said, nor is it what I meant.

i am merely suggesting that there was a reason Jesus claimed "God-forsaken," and it is not the one that the Cult of Sol teaches us

I'd hardly know. This "cult of sol" seems to be something that means something to you, but has nothing to do with my beliefs. This comes across to me as merely an ongoing denigration.

i could have as easily Quoted No son of man may die for another's sins

I don't think you can, not from the Bible. I imagine you are thinking of Ezekiel 18, or 30. But that's not what it says.

Unfort we are speaking much at odds right now, as you seek to go to a place called "heaven" after you have died

This is a rather misleading oversimplification that leads me to think you have little idea what I think and believe.

well, it used to mean to me that Yah could not look upon sin, and all the other stuff we get in church 101, ok. A great place to start imo. But then i read my Bible
by myself

Who told you that you were naked?

doesnt mean that you would come to the same conclusions, i guess
no judgement for beliefs that i can find anyway, bam believe what seems best to you

Yeah, obviously there's a lot of bad teaching around! And yes, it seems we do not reach the same conclusions. Are you thinking that I'm just repeated things I've been told or read in commentaries or something?

Much love!

 

[marks]

well, i would put it more like we are taught that Jesus died for our sins, as a get out of jail free card,

OK, but that's what I said, nor is it what I meant.

i am merely suggesting that there was a reason Jesus claimed "God-forsaken," and it is not the one that the Cult of Sol teaches us

I'd hardly know. This "cult of sol" seems to be something that means something to you, but has nothing to do with my beliefs. This comes across to me as merely an ongoing denigration.

i could have as easily Quoted No son of man may die for another's sins

I don't think you can, not from the Bible. I imagine you are thinking of Ezekiel 18, or 30. But that's not what it says.

Unfort we are speaking much at odds right now, as you seek to go to a place called "heaven" after you have died

This is a rather misleading oversimplification that leads me to think you have little idea what I think and believe.

well, it used to mean to me that Yah could not look upon sin, and all the other stuff we get in church 101, ok. A great place to start imo. But then i read my Bible
by myself

Who told you that you were naked?

doesnt mean that you would come to the same conclusions, i guess
no judgement for beliefs that i can find anyway, bam believe what seems best to you

Yeah, obviously there's a lot of bad teaching around!

Much love!

 

[marks]

marks, Of course they were justified; how else could they have "escaped the pollutions of the world." Believe it or not, that means they were born again. They were dead to sin, but so are those in Romans 6:15-16. They still can succumb to temptations and not resist the devil.

It is like the previous chapter:

2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, 3 as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, 4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

You cannot live your Christian life ignoring all the warnings of the apostles, and just believe what feels good.

It seems to me there is a real inconsistency with your thinking here. IF these were born again, and being born again, you have no more desire to sin, then how are they described as . . .

13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:

These are the born again, who no longer have any desires for sin?

How do you reconcile this?

Much love!

How is it that someone - born again - could ever lose their salvation if being born again means we no longer commit "intentional sins", such as not forgiving?

How is it that someone who had been born again could "return to their vomit"?

How is it that someone who was born from above would EVER look at a stop sign and roll right through it?

If I would respond again, I would only be repeating myself. I made myself clear the first time.

Except that you haven't responded. Only deflected.

Much love!

 

[marks]

He already knows what I believe, and is just twisting my words to get my goat. I'm not going to play that hand.

I know what you've said. But it doesn't make sense to me.

So I'm pointing to what I see as the inconsistency, hoping you will see it too.

You've expressed your opinion of my motives, that I merely want to provoke you.

Things that make you go, Hmmmm.

 

[CharismaticLady]

How is it that someone - born again - could ever lose their salvation if being born again means we no longer commit "intentional sins", such as not forgiving?

How is it that someone who had been born again could "return to their vomit"?

How is it that someone who was born from above would EVER look at a stop sign and roll right through it?



Except that you haven't responded. Only deflected.

Much love!

You would know how if you ever read the warnings...

 

[marks]

You silly man. You already know that I believe all sin to be sin, but not all sin is unto death.

Well, all silliness aside . . . You've many times expressed that the Christian cannot commit willful sin. I am of the opinion that deliberately not stopping for a stop sign (@Nancy I've done it too!) is not of faith, and is therefore sin, and that by nature of what it is, this is indeed deliberate- you are operating a vehicle, you see a stop sign, you do not stop - you seem to give a pass on this one.

You separate sins according as "sin unto death" = "deliberate sin", so, isn't purposefully running a stop sign a sin unto death under your teaching?

Much love!

 

[marks]

marks said: ↑
How is it that someone - born again - could ever lose their salvation if being born again means we no longer commit "intentional sins", such as not forgiving?

How is it that someone who had been born again could "return to their vomit"?

How is it that someone who was born from above would EVER look at a stop sign and roll right through it?

Except that you haven't responded. Only deflected.

Much love!

You would know how if you ever read the warnings...

If in fact a Christian never committed intentional sin . . . there would never be unforgiveness . . . and there would never be "returning to your vomit", as if these were born again.

If your teaching were correct.

Much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

I know what you've said. But it doesn't make sense to me.

So I'm pointing to what I see as the inconsistency, hoping you will see it too.

You've expressed your opinion of my motives, that I merely want to provoke you.

Things that make you go, Hmmmm.

The reason why you don't understand is because you've never taken what you've been taught and compared them with scripture. You are disregarding all the warnings as if they don't apply to someone who was born again. Itching ears say that just can't happen.

 

[marks]

The reason why you don't understand is because you've never taken what you've been taught and compared them with scripture. You are disregarding all the warnings as if they don't apply to someone who was born again. Itching ears say that just can't happen.

Utter nonsense and Ad Hominem.

It's OK. I'm going away now.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Well, all silliness aside . . . You've many times expressed that the Christian cannot commit willful sin. I am of the opinion that deliberately not stopping for a stop sign (@Nancy I've done it too!) is not of faith, and is therefore sin, and that by nature of what it is, this is indeed deliberate- you are operating a vehicle, you see a stop sign, you do not stop - you seem to give a pass on this one.

You separate sins according as "sin unto death" = "deliberate sin", so, isn't purposefully running a stop sign a sin unto death under your teaching?

Much love!

Again, I'm talking about what John is talking about in 1 John 3:4 - sins of LAWLESSNESS. Focus on Law!

 

[CharismaticLady]

Utter nonsense and Ad Hominem.

It's OK. I'm going away now.

Bye.

 

[marks]

I think what this discussion serves to illustrate is the difference between theory and application.

You cannot accurately say that someone who is born again will never have the inclination to commit intentional sin, and then say, with that same accuracy, that they might commit intentional sin, and will be condemned because of it. Either you can or you can't.

If you claim that "unintentional sins" will be forgiven IF you forgive others, well, forgiving or not forgiving is a choice, so not forgiving isn't something the born again person would do, if they didn't ever commit intentional sin. So this is moot. You will always be forgiving.

 

[justbyfaith]

You cannot accurately say that someone who is born again will never have the inclination to commit intentional sin, and then say, with that same accuracy, that they might commit intentional sin, and will be condemned because of it. Either you can or you can't.

It seems to me that if someone who is born of God cannot commit intentional sin, it might follow that if you commit intentional sin, that is evidence that you are not born of God; and thus condemned.