10 things I'm right about, whether you agree or not.

Mystery

New member
Amen, brother.
If you believe that garbage, then there is no doubt you are not saved, whether Lighthouse or anyone else on this site thinks differently.

No one can believe those lies and be a Christian. It is impossible. They are the complete opposites of the gospel.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Learn to exegete the passages before you attempt to teach them.
You are in error! Been there, done that. You just won't accept it. You stand in the minority against the church masters throughout history on the interpretation of Romans 7:14-25. But, then again, the minority is where you seem to want to be most of the time. Beware of its seduction.

Let me save everyone some time with the forthcoming rants and raves about how you are right and I am wrong, hell bound, etc. Nothing you will say can change my and a thousand others' proper interpretation of the passage. The fact that you hold on to this single passage as you do is evidence of the tenuous nature of your overall theology regarding justification/sanctification. For if this passage is interpreted in any other manner than you have interpreted it would mean most of your positions on justification/sanctification would crumble like a house of cards. Some advice for you: if your doctrine stands or falls on a single passage, change your doctrine.

If you disagree, tell me what, if anything, would change in what you believe, should my interpretation be correct. If nothing would change, then your rhetoric about the salvific nature of the verse is nonsense. If something changes, then we are back to what I just cautioned you about immediately above: change your doctrine. Which horn of the dilemma feels less painful to you, for you must land on one of them?
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Sounds like grace as license to sin. Sounds like you have failed with a struggle with sin, so you rationalize or euphemize it away, instead of responding to the Spirit's conviction with repentance and renewed obedience (Heb. 12). There is a difference with struggling with temptation and giving into it and saying all is well because you do not think you are condemned or are forgiven in advance regardless whether you persist in fleshly sin or not. To be set free from it means not being a slave to it, not just searing one's conscience and denying that it matters anymore. Paul clearly dealt with sin, but it was not by repeating a mantra of que sera sera, we are all forgiven no matter how much we sin.
Can you even read? Freedom from sin means not wanting to sin.

Do or do not! There is no try! (something like that said by Jedi Master Yoda in Star Wars when Luke was trying to lift a ship out of the swamp). Winkie Pratney used to use it when talking about sin and salvation issues.

You often walk away, but not always? Do also implies choice and obedience. Are you coming over to my dark side (which is actually light)?
You're an idiot.

I....volition...obedience/disobedience...your reality illustrates my beliefs. Watch out lest mystery says you are going to hell.
Moron.

You have always had freedom, but you did not always walk in it. You may be free most of the time, but you could have a lapse and fall into temptation. More godly men than us have fallen (Lucifer and Adam had big falls). Job made a covenant with his eyes to not look lustfully at a woman. This involved a choice. There are practical things one can do to avoid temptation. Jesus said to pluck out an eye if it causes lust or cut off a hand. You can know and read about and walk in freedom, but this does not preclude the possibility of falling. If a naked model walked in my room, I would have a hard time to staring. I would run and flee because I know I could not handle it. God promises a way of escape. David did not have to look, lust, sleep, and kill. These were all volitional things. He caved, but other men of God did not, yet they read the same truths from Scripture.

Rom. 6-8 does not divorce walking in the Spirit vs flesh from obedience or yielding to temptation. We overcome based on Christ's work and the indwelling Spirit, but our mind and will as some role. This is why we are blameworthy and responsible if we sin. It is why the Spirit comes with conviction, not a pious platitude that gives us license to keep sinning while chanting, "I'm forgiven whether I stop sinning or not'.

There you go mystery, practical principles from Scripture that will further convince you I am going to hell....with LH apparently.
Twit.

I thought you used to say you do not sin because you are spirit and in Christ and Christ does not sin. It is actually your flesh that sins, whatever that means (making you not responsible, so might as well let the flesh have fun Friday, but stay in the background on Sunday?).
Imbecile.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I didn't understand this one. Could you elaborate? Thanks. :)
What's there to elaborate on? I am free from sin. I no longer desire to sin, as I once did. And though there are times my flesh does desire it, I can resist it without struggle.

As a blood-bought child of the Living God, I am saved from the PENALTY of sin.
God is working in my life to free me from the POWER of sin,
and one day, when I am finally home in Glory, I will be free from the PRESENCE of sin!
Wrong!

We are now free from the power of sin.

But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.
-Romans 6:17-18
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
If you believe that garbage, then there is no doubt you are not saved, whether Lighthouse or anyone else on this site thinks differently.

No one can believe those lies and be a Christian. It is impossible. They are the complete opposites of the gospel.
I don't believe he's saved.
 

jafowler1

New member
Sorry if this offends you, but you are NOT always right, no matter why you believe it to be true. People disagree with your "10 things" for very good, logical reasons and your summary dismissal of anything that doesn't fit into your little box only hurts you and those you have influence over. Your attitude is why so many are dismissing or leaving the christian faith. The bible demands humility from it's followers and posts such as this shows arrogance, NOT humility. But it is great proof of the difference between christian FAITH and christian RELIGION! Your post is an example of the latter.
 

Mystery

New member
Sorry if this offends you, but you are NOT always right, no matter why you believe it to be true. People disagree with your "10 things" for very good, logical reasons and your summary dismissal of anything that doesn't fit into your little box only hurts you and those you have influence over. Your attitude is why so many are dismissing or leaving the christian faith. The bible demands humility from it's followers and posts such as this shows arrogance, NOT humility. But it is great proof of the difference between christian FAITH and christian RELIGION! Your post is an example of the latter.
All you've proven is that you have a big mouth with nothing to back it up.

There is nothing in that list that anyone has come remotely close to proving wrong, and they never will.
 

thecortexrules

BANNED
Banned
Who cares what you think?

Isn't who's "saved" supposed to be up to God, not those who play him on TV? I mean, I'm agnostic, but if he exists, don't y'all think he might get a little peeved by those who think they know better than he does?

Katherine
 

Mystery

New member
Isn't who's "saved" supposed to be up to God, not those who play him on TV? I mean, I'm agnostic, but if he exists, don't y'all think he might get a little peeved by those who think they know better than he does?

Katherine
Without judging what someone says they believe as false, how will you know whom to share the message with so that they might believe what is true?
 

noguru

Well-known member
Isn't who's "saved" supposed to be up to God, not those who play him on TV? I mean, I'm agnostic, but if he exists, don't y'all think he might get a little peeved by those who think they know better than he does?

Katherine

I almost certain this is correct. Some Jews use to try and possess the law. This is the point being made in Genesis in regard to Adam and Eve and eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Then Jesus came down and stressed grace from atonement. Now there are some Christians who want to possess the source of this as well.
 

noguru

Well-known member
Of course not. Do you seriously not know why it isn't?

You used the term. I was just making sure you didn't think it was some sort of illness.

In what category do you put insanity? And which definition of insanity do you use? :think:
 

noguru

Well-known member
An unsound mind. So void of the truth, that their thoughts are without reason..

So anyone who is not aware of their own self-deception is insane? Does the unsound mind come first or does the void of reason come first? Would you agree that it is a disorder?
 

Mystery

New member
So anyone who is not aware of their own self-deception is insane? Does the unsound mind come first or does the void of reason come first? Would you agree that it is a disorder?
Yes, I believe in disorders, but they are not causitive. They are symptomatic of improper thinking. Not a disease or illness.
 
Top