Willful Sin is simply premeditated

[marks]

I agree with it. Wilfully sinning can no more trust in any sacrifice once had.

That's not what I said, however. Were you confused about what I had written? It seemed to me you have been understanding me. Or did you intentionally misrepresent me? You don't have to answer me, but I hope the answer carries some significance for you.

"no more sacrifice" means that though you had offered sacrifices before, that ends now, with Jesus' sacrifice. You persist in contradicting the definitions of the words and the grammar in that passage. Ir is simply not saying, The sacrifice once offered ceases to be effective for you.

I imagine that you lack the knowledge of the Greek text, and you are confident in your position. It's just not what the text says.

Much love!

 

[marks]

There was not 'series' to it, but only the one sacrifice once had.

That's exactly the heart of this discussion. Jesus' offering was once for all, there was no, "next offering". That was under the Levitical sacrificial offerings. They were repeated, not Jesus' offering of His body. It would be a tautology (though in poor form) to say there remains no more of Jesus one-time offering, being one time, that's all there is, of course.

In that it says, no more, this refers to the series of offerings, that is now ended. After you learn about Jesus, you can't go back to offering goats.

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

Both are fleshy, both are sin, and both are under your choosing. Cursing a driver is because you aren't already loving them, which is sin. All that is not of faith is sin, and we are commanded to be believing. Don't you see how deep this goes? We must not excuse some sins because they seem minor to us. Do you know that cursing a driver may be the greater sin than fornication, if in fact it shows someone's monstrous arrogance and malice towards others, compared to a sloppy lack of self control?

You've left the argument. It's not about excusing any sin, but about premeditated wilful sinning vs unexpectedly sinning, which is no more being blameless.

Not wilfully sinning is not walking after the flesh. Not sinning unexpectedly is being blameless.

Both are judged as sinning in need of repentance, but only one is judged as having no blood of Jesus for washing by confession.

The word of God is not just a spiritual doctrinal bunch of words strung together. The word of God is utterly practical, and makes perfect sense to any normal person, whether believer or not.

Scripture itself, as well as man, makes simple difference between premeditated murder and unplanned killing of another.

And this is the case of the slayer, which shall flee thither, that he may live: Whoso killeth his neighbour ignorantly, whom he hated not in time past.

Neither are excused, but one is not wilfully done with lust and evil intent.

You are trying to teach by the letter-only, and not rightly dividing the word of truth by the Spirit, and so teach sense to the hearers.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Wilful sinning is with planned intent. Ignorantly sinning is unexpected. The ignorance is not of it being sin to curse unexpectly, but it is not planned in advance.

One shows no more sacrifice for the sinning, the other shows not being blameless in our walk after the Spirit.

If you are blameless with neither wiful nor unexpected sinning, then you do well. We are the same by power of the Holy Ghost.

 

[marks]

You've left the argument.

You won't even look accurately at the passage we are discussing. So this goes no where.

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

That's exactly the heart of this discussion. Jesus' offering was once for all, there was no, "next offering". That was under the Levitical sacrificial offerings. They were repeated, not Jesus' offering of His body. It would be a tautology (though in poor form) to say there remains no more of Jesus one-time offering, being one time, that's all there is, of course.

Once again, you're leaving the argument.

It's not about Jesus no more being an Advocate for the world, but about not advocating by sacrifice for those wilfully sinning.

In that it says, no more, this refers to the series of offerings, that is now ended.

Paul is not referring to blood of bulls and goats. He's an apostle of the New Covenant,a dn is speaking of those who have tasted and seen the Light of Christ.

After you learn about Jesus, you can't go back to offering goats.

This is an obvious misreading to teach something else. Paul is speaking of those tasting of Christ, knowing forgiveness and washing of sins in His blood, and returning to willful sinning again.

It's not about Jews going back to the Old Covenant, and leaning on animal sacrifices to cover them while sinning.

Heb 6 follows the exhortation for babes in Christ to grow up, and quit playing games with repentance from dead works. Heb 10 is exhorting believers not to forsake the body of Christ for willfully sinning again.

 

[marks]

but about premeditated wilful sinning vs unexpectedly sinning, which is no more being blameless.

You've got these ways of parsing sins, and yet the fact remains that God has provided a way out of every temptation, and you have to choose to not use it. Or to abdicate that choice by not even considering it.

So if what you mean by "not wilfull sin" is that you close your eyes to your ability to not do it, pretend you have no control, then that would be accurate, but that's not Scriptural doctrine.

We are admonished, if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. If we walk in the Spirit, we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. That which you know to be good, if you don't do it, that is sin. Do you realize it is sin to not be walking in the Spirit?

This is what I mean when I talk about sin being so much more than some describe, and that any minimizing of sin is error.

Much love!

 

[marks]

It's not about Jesus no more being an Advocate for the world, but about not advocating by sacrifice for those wilfully sinning.

No, the phrase, "no more sacrifice" means that you cannot bring another one, the next in a series. That's just what it means. Look for yourself. Prove me wrong.

Much love!

 

[marks]

This is an obvious misreading to teach something else.

No, it's what the words say. Prove me wrong.

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak, this is how the Bible speaks.

Jesus is speaking of the bodily need for sleep.

Romans 6:19 KJV
I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh:

This speaking of the manner of all flesh to be mortally and naturally weak, always being in need of air, food, drink, rest, and sleep. And can be torn, borken, cut, feverish, exhausted etc...

That is why we are exhorted to endure hardness of this life and flesh and blood, like good soldiers of Jesus Christ.

Paul didn't even let getting stoned, stop him from getting back up for fight.

for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

The members of our body have nothing to say what we do with them, other than their natural needs to stay alive and functioning for the task at hand.

The lie of flesh having sin it, is for the childish excuse of blaming it on the body.

When you sin, whether premeditated or not, it isn't the devil's fault, nor your body.

It's you soul's fault for doing it with the flesh, which is why the soul does the sinning, and dies by sinning, while the body just does what we will do with it, and only dies by natural mortality.

Just like any other naturally created flesh and blood creature on earth, though they have no souls to sin or do righteousness with.

 

[robert derrick]

That's not what I said, however. Were you confused about what I had written? It seemed to me you have been understanding me. Or did you intentionally misrepresent me? You don't have to answer me, but I hope the answer carries some significance for you.

"no more sacrifice" means that though you had offered sacrifices before, that ends now, with Jesus' sacrifice. You persist in contradicting the definitions of the words and the grammar in that passage. Ir is simply not saying, The sacrifice once offered ceases to be effective for you.

Neither in Heb 6 nor 10, is Paul speaking of trusting in nor reverting to OT sacrifices, but only of reverting to wilfully sinning after having tasted of the one true Lamb of God.

I imagine that you lack the knowledge of the Greek text,

I lack the will to use Greek sophistically, in order to change the plain doctrinal teaching of the English words.

The argument of departing from the body of Christ, and becoming a castaway, is true, but secondary.

No one while willfully sinning, is washed in the blood of the Lamb.

No child of the devil by willing deed, is a born son of God, being justified by Jesus Christ in his sinful deed.

 

[marks]

Paul is not referring to blood of bulls and goats. He's an apostle of the New Covenant,a dn is speaking of those who have tasted and seen the Light of Christ.

Hebrews 10:25-29 KJV
25) Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26) For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27) But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28) He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29) Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Once you know . . . you can't offer more sheep.

The Jew's inadvertant, or ignorant, or unintentional sins were covered in the daily and yearly sacrifice. But intentional, voluntary sins required an offering be brought to the temple, at least, those that didn't get a death sentence. So your "unwilfull" sins were covered for you by the temple worship, and wilfull sins required your own offering.

Now, after you've learned about Jesus' offering, there is no more sacrifice for wilfull sins. It won't work any more, so all you can do is wait for judgment. UNLESS you are willing to receive Jesus.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I lack the will to use Greek sophistically, in order to change the plain doctrinal teaching of the English words.

And you apparently likewise lack the will to come to a more full knowledge of this passage. So this again goes nowhere.

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

No, the phrase, "no more sacrifice" means that you cannot bring another one, the next in a series.

No have another the same one in Christ, except repentance is renewed again unto washing of the blood of the Lamb.

Paul is speaking to NT believers not returning to their old life sinning.

Not Judaizing Jews returning to the OT.

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

The message to believers is of more NT sacrifice for sins. It is not to unbelievers of no more OT sacrifices.

 

[mailmandan]

And you apparently likewise lack the will to come to a more full knowledge of this passage. So this again goes nowhere.

Much love!

Some people you just can't reach.

 

[Behold]

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

Most if not all of the sins you have confessed, were willfully committed, Robert.
To deny this is to willfully sin, again.

There is someone else like you on this forum who teaches that He does not sin, but everyone else can commit this verse and willfully sin, and lose their salvation.
That's kinda crazy, but, thats how it goes.
So, its really quite the devil's trick to teach condemnation against Believers, .. using a verse that condemns you everytime you post it again.

IN fact, this verse is not aimed at the Born again, but it is used by deceived people who are always trying to work their way to heaven, while they obsess on "losing salvation".
Forms are filled with these people.

 

[robert derrick]

Hebrews 10:25-29 KJV
25) Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26) For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27) But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28) He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29) Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

I appreciate the effort, but since you are trying to argue returning to OT sacrifices, rather than returning to old sins in the NT, then we will have one of those endless arguments, always coming from opposing sides.

Paul is obviously showing how they were not excused in the OT for sins and transgressions, and how much less we are excused than they.

Why? because there is a greater One here, with a far greater sacrifice in the NT, than any in the OT.

Once you know . . . you can't offer more sheep.

The Jew's inadvertant, or ignorant, or unintentional sins were covered in the daily and yearly sacrifice. But intentional, voluntary sins required an offering be brought to the temple, at least, those that didn't get a death sentence.

Ok.

So your "unwilfull" sins were covered for you by the temple worship, and wilfull sins required your own offering.

No, they weren't. I was never an OT Jew.

Paul would never exhort me not to turn to them for covering of sins. It would never enter my mind.

Paul is speaking to Christian believers in the blood of the Lamb, that have nothing to do with OT blood of animals.

Now, after you've learned about Jesus' offering, there is no more sacrifice for wilfull sins.

1. Paul is not preaching to unbelieving Jews, urging them to cease sacrificing bulls and goats, and begin believing in the Lamb of God.

2. There is no comparison at all between the blood of bulls and goats, and the blood of the Lamb of God. No more than there is between the Son of God and angels, which begins Hebrews.

Paul is not trying to make such a comparison, as though His blood only covers some sins, like a bull and goat.

That is OSAS heresy, not NT gospel of washing all sins away, whether willful or imperfect.

It won't work any more, so all you can do is wait for judgment. UNLESS you are willing to receive Jesus.

They already had. Paul is not preaching to the unbelieving, that have not heard, but exhorting them that have heard and believed.

Heb 6 follows exhortation to babes in Christ to grow up,a nd stop laying games with repentance of dead works.

Heb 10 is exhorting believers not to depart the body of Christ by returning to old sinning.

Paul is not exhorting Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, to not go back to OT or pagan sacrifices.

Heb 10 is all about the one time cleansing of all past sins, and not returning to them, so that there remains no cleansing for them becoming wilfully present again.

 

[marks]

but since you are trying to argue returning to OT sacrifices,

I don't believe you understand what I'm saying. It's the opposite.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Heb 10 is all about the one time cleansing of all past sins, and not returning to them, so that there remains no cleansing for them becoming wilfully present again.

Have you in fact looked at the words there like I've recommended?

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

Most if not all of the sins you have confessed, were willfully committed, Robert.

Since you say most, then point stands. Not all sins are wilfully premeditated.

The last time I stubbed a toe, or a dangerous event took place, and I cursed, was as much a surprise to me as to others.

It simply showed my sanctification in the Spirit was not complete. I was lacking in adding virtue to my faith, and built up in prayer, so that I would continue in fellowship of the Spirit, rather than react like a sinner.

 

[robert derrick]

There is someone else like you on this forum who teaches that He does not sin,

Still waiting for your answer:

Do you believe we can live righteously to walk as Jesus walked, or not?