Beloved57 are you sure you’re chosen?

Arial

Active member
Oh this ain't no "game". Your theology stinks. And you evade the fact.

You either can or you cannot change your eternal destiny. Your theology says No. It's wrong.
So you are another that puts himself on the throne of Christ as judge of who goes to hell and who goes to heaven. And your only reason for announcing that I am hell bound is because I have a different perspective than you do? Answer me this if you dare, and try and be honest. Do you as a Catholic still believe their ancient heresy that the RCC is the one true and real church and only Catholics get into heaven, and that not through Jesus but through the Church (RCC)? Personally I think that religion stinks of idolatry (you name yourself well), worshiping idols and saints. Calling a mortal man Holy Father!! Inventing purgatory and Mary, a perpetual virgin even though she had several children, the intercessor between us and Jesus. Reeking of works righteousness. But I fully believe there are saved catholics and far be it from me to condemn them to hell as though I were the King of kings.

I have evaded nothing except responding to a couple of well crafted to trap someone in an imaginary net that you think will vindicate all your foolishness. I have explained in great detail the lying lies that you give as the lying claim to know and understand Reformed theology, and I guess that is what so infuriates you. You have to pretend that I didn't say any of it. Perhaps you better head to confession post haste. Your morals are severely slipped.
 

Arial

Active member
Just between me and you, perfection starts with a real, true, permanent, turn from sin.
Then, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins.
Do these things and you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost...just as Peter said in Acts 2:38.
Those who really turn from sin are by definition non-sinners.
With the Holy Spirit's aid, we can endure faithfully until the Lord returns with His angels.
I am not completely sure of what you are saying. There are a couple of ways that I can take it, so if I am off base, forgive me, and clarify. In the meantime, though I do not disagree with you in one way, I will present my perspective on sin and the believer. Let me know what you think.

When we come to Christ, we are said to be in Him, and that that this union will automatically bring about repentance. We will see how we have sinned against God and it will cause us not an "I'm sorry." But real sorrow, and the beginnings of a desire to please and obey Him. But we will probably not repent all at once for everything, as we do not yet know in all the ways we fall short. A reading and study of the Bible will cause our knowledge in this to grow, and removing all the actual sin from our lives may take a lifetime. But if we are doing our "homework" (being in His word and prayer) sin in our life will be less and less. We are living in a world where we are surrounded by sin, its inticements and temptations, our old ways of being, and no matter how good our intentions, sometimes we will stumble a bit.

In this process, the sins cannot condemn us to hell or separation from God eternally. This is because we are sealed by the Holy Spirit in this relationship (a very personal one) with Jesus. He has paid for our sins with His life and blood, so they have no power over us, His righteousness is counted as ours. We will be convicted of sin when we commit it, and if we repent and confess this before God, He is faithful to forgive us.

So though we may commit a sin from time to time, we are not counted as sinners in our relationship with God.

However. A life style of continual, unrepentant sin is an indication that the union with Christ may have not taken place (but not that it never will.) And we have to be careful in making that judgment about people, because one who is really and truly in union with Christ through faith, can have a period of time where they are caught in a particular sin that was at one time part of their lifestyle. Addicts for example. Bit if they belong to God, do not despair, we can be assured that God is doing a work in them and bringing them through it, back to repentance. If you see someone like that, pray.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Original sin is an invention by one sect.
It is not true.
"Invention by one sect" might be an overstatement but you are quite correct about original sin being false.

One single reading of Ezekiel 18 puts the whole issue to bed.

Incidentally, if the doctrine of original sin is false, so is the Calvinist doctrine of total depravity.
 

Arial

Active member
But doesn't the majority of so called orthodoxy accept that we are sinners by osmosis from Adam???
No. That is not osmosis. It is by a decree of God, His design. Adam the federal head of all mankind. As he goes, so go we all. It is more inherited than anything, though that is just an allegory or metaphor. All allegories used to describe God or the things of God, if pushed too far fall apart. And the nature to sin is never described (that I can recall) as inherited in the biological sense.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
No. That is not osmosis. It is by a decree of God, His design. Adam the federal head of all mankind. As he goes, so go we all. It is more inherited than anything, though that is just an allegory or metaphor. All allegories used to describe God or the things of God, if pushed too far fall apart. And the nature to sin is never described (that I can recall) as inherited in the biological sense.
Okay, honest question here Arial. No hidden agenda, just a straight question....

How do you deal with Ezekiel 18 (the whole chapter)?
 

Arial

Active member
Sinners cannot choose righteousness without grace so they have no free will. But to become a sinner they had to have had a free will with the ability to choose evil or righteousness.
They didn't have to have a free will in order to choose between righteousness and evil----they only had to have a will---the ability to freely make choices according to whatever acts with the most pressure on the will. That is not the same thing as the will being free, as it cannot be both not free and free. And even though it may choose righteousness sometimes, it will also sometimes choose evil. So will always be found wanting in the perfect righteousness department.
 

Arial

Active member
I haven't seen you (or anyone) do it yet. I don't recall you making any effort to refute a word of what I've said with anything that looks like an actual argument. You're great at declaring your doctrine in opposition to what I say but that isn't what an actual argument looks like.


You see, this is the sort of "arguments" you make. Wow!

Groups act quite differently than individuals. Groups are very predictable, even by us mere humans. They are also quite easily manipulated if one has the proper means (the last two years is proof enough of that). Individuals however are notoriously difficult to predict except in broadly general terms. Men (i.e. human beings) are bent toward evil and this propencity is more evident in groups, the bigger the group to more likely it is to be evil. (This, among other reasons, is why justice by committee (i.e. Juries) is a really bad idea, by the way.) So, while groups are made up of individuals, their behavior patterns are not the same because any one person can choose to act apart from the mob around them.


You don't actually know that, Arial. This assertion assumes facts not in evidence. There may have been several people that God had to work around and in spite of in order to accomplish the work of Calvary. People like Peter, for example, who, if he had been permitted to continue his attack against the Roman guards, may have ended up having Jesus killed before the proper time. If there had been a guard who refused, for conscience sake, to act against Jesus, then it would not have been difficult for God to find a replacement and such an action would not have been known by anyone other than the righteous guard and God Himself, much less recorded in scripture.
The point here being that God DID NOT need to predestine every detail in order to accomplish His goal!


This isn't quite accurate either. Nearly all of the scriptures that were fulfilled at Calvary that you are no doubt thinking of, were not overt prophecies when they were written down and had things gone in an appreciably different manner then you'd not even recognized them as being prophesies, never mind failed prophesies.
That isn't to say that God didn't have them in mind as being prophetic. He clearly did but, again, the point is that it wasn't NECESSARY (i.e. in the logical sense of that word) for things to go precisely the way they went and, had they gone differently, then there'd be a whole different sent of passages that you'd have in your mind as fulfilled prophesies.


So says you. The bible tells us otherwise.


I didn't suggest that they would. It was a hypothetical.


No, He accomplished plan A! Calvinists always over react and start yammering on about nonsense that no one has said. It's just so much silliness.


No, He didn't.

(See! I can say things without supporting them too! Are you convinced when I do it cause I'm definitely not when you do!)

Double talking nonsense!

You literally do not even understand your own doctrine! Perhaps you'd reject it if you did understand it.

Calvinism teaches that whether or not you obey has been infallibly predestined by God before you ever existed.

“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)​

It also teaches that our obedience or lack thereof has NOTHING to do with being elected, either for salvation or damnation...

“God is moved to mercy for no other reason but that he wills to be merciful.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 8)​
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)​
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christia/n Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)​
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)​
These are not cherry picked quotes of Calvin that distort the normal teaching of Calvinist doctrine. I have never one time found a single Calvinist who denies belief in every single syllable of what I've quoted above. They all, to a person, also say the same sort of thing you've said above and they simply accept the contradiction and move on. Their willingness to accept the openly glaring contradiction is, in their view, a sign of their piety. Many, in fact, believe that accepting contradictions as truth is what faith is and have said as much to my face.


It does teach that, Arial. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, that is what it teaches. No one ever states it in those terms but sewage by any other name still stinks just as badly.

Again, I have quoted the following to dozens and dozens of Calvinist both in writing and in person and never have I ever come across a single one that disagrees with the following statements...

“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)​
“But since he foresees future events only by reason of the fact that he decreed that they take place, they vainly raise a quarrel over foreknowledge, when it is clear that all things take place rather by his determination and bidding.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​
“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​
"I admit that in this miserable condition wherein men are now bound, all of Adam's children have fallen by God's will...​
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)​
Now, to your point, Calvinists DO indeed believe that somehow, in spite of all of that being the absolute truth, we are not robots or puppets, as you put it. They believe both! They are also quite fully aware and accepting of the contradiction. They DO NOT CARE that their doctrine makes no sense. They, in fact, EXPECT for the things of God not to make sense to use poor stupid human beings!


It isn't hubris, it's experience. You are no different that the dozens of other Calvinists that have tried the same silly double talk.

Prove me wrong by telling me which of the quotes from Calvin are in contradiction to Reformed Theology.

You won't do it because there isn't one.


One topic at a time. If you'd like to learn what the bible teaches about what our responsibilities are in regard to judging others, I invite you to read the definitive treatment on the topic - HERE.


My alias?


That's my line!

Of the two sides on this debate, there is only one which cites original sources. There is only one who demonstrates the historical linkage between Aristotle, Plato, Augustine, Luther and Calvin. The side that does that also has to beg and plead with the other to even make actual arguments, which they flatly avoid doing like the plague because, as I've already pointed out more than once, Calvinists who know anything about what their doctrine actually teaches are quite fully aware that irreconcilable contradictions are plentiful throughout! The word, "antinomy" was surely coined by a Calvinist, or if it is wasn't it would have been (i.e. in the theological sense of the term)! It's their favorite theological term!


That statement of Christ's was said to hypocrites. Look it up. It's in Matthew chapter 7.


judge-matthew-7-crossed-out-kgov.jpg



This was either an intentional lie or you are as ignorant about Calvinism as it possible to be. (I strongly suspect the latter at this point!)

Perhaps you should ask your pastor. Maybe you'll find that you aren't as Calvinist as you like to think you are because I can guarantee you that Reformed theology DOES NOT teach that you have a will such that you can choose to do or to do otherwise. They do not teach that - period. So much so that if they discover that you believe it, you may well be excused from your church. Although, based on the complete ignorance you're displaying on what the bible teaches about judging, it is unlikely that your church would have the temerity to do such a thing.

Go ahead and try your best to get B57 to agree with you on this. He would die first!


I've quoted original sources the prove otherwise.


You not only digress but you do so into error. The difference between "Reformed Lutheran" and "Lutheran" has mainly to do with issues concerning baptisms and the Eucharist and other such ritualistic type issues. In so far as soteriology is concerned, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them.


None of this is relevant to the point, Arial! I don't even care whether he ever made a public confession of faith. I would like to give these churches the benefit of the doubt and presume that they don't make unbelievers the president of their elder board but maybe the do! Who cares! That IS NOT THE POINT!

The point is that YOU CANNOT TELL!!!

YOU cannot tell!

You, Arial, are incapable of knowing!

Get it?

Not only do you have no rational way of telling whether Rader is saved, you have exactly equal means of telling whether B57 is saved and ultimately you have the exact same means to tell whether YOU are saved yourself!

The point isn't about Rader or even B57, its about the Calvinist's inability to know whether they are one of the big cosmic lottery winners or not! What's more is that they will not ever know for sure until they are able to walk through the Pearly Gates!

Why?

Because your doctrine DOES NOT TEACH that it has anything to do with a person's fruit! It doesn't have anything to do with whether you've made a public profession of faith or even if you believe at all! According to your own doctrinal documents, your salvation is a result of NOTHING other than an ARBITRARY declaration of God! Here it is again, right from the horses mouth...

“God is moved to mercy for no other reason but that he wills to be merciful.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 8)​
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)​
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)​
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)​


Which of those statements do you disagree with, Arial? Because, whether you choose to believe it nor, that is what your Reformed doctrine teaches.


Actually, I do. There was a time when I did some considerable amount of study on the subject of serial killers. His own testimony is voluminous and they've done several interviews with members of his family, friends and fellow church members.


Perhaps, but none that have ever been recorded saying so. All those who knew him, including his own daughter, were all stunned to find out the truth of his depravity.


You're right about him being suspected as a serial killer not being the point but what you aren't getting is that your doctrine teaches that the only people that you spotted as wolves in sheep's clothing were the ones that God predestined you to spot as such and you have no rational means to tell whether or not your spotting scope is accurate because your doctrine doesn't just teach that you were predestined to spot them as wolves but the extent to which they actually are wolves was also predestined, even if that extent is none at all!

Do you follow the point there?

If you only think you've spotted wolves in sheep's clothing but are actually wrong about it, THAT TOO was predestined according to your doctrine!

The point being made here is that ANY claim you make concerning a person's salvation, including your own, is both unprovable AND unfalsifiable!


It isn't a mistake, Arial. And if you actually believe that, which I have no reason to doubt, then you are not Calvinist and do not adhere to Reformed doctrine.

Don't take my word for it! Go ahead and ask someone you trust. Someone you know for a fact is an actual Calvinist! B57 comes to mind but it doesn't have to be him. Chances are your own pastor would work. Ask them the same exact question and do so straight. Don't poison the well by implying an answer before you ask the question. Just ask them straight up and tell them that you want a straight answer to the following question...

"Did God predestine Dennis Rader to rape that eleven year old girl and hang her from a plumbing pipe in her basement?"

If he doesn't know who Rader is then ask him whether God predestine Jeffery Dahmer to rape, kill and eat all the young men and boys he could get a hold of.

Here's Calvin's answer to basically the same question...

"I admit that in this miserable condition wherein men are now bound, all of Adam's children have fallen by God's will...​
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)​
I don't read posts that are so proud of themselves and self absorbed that they go on, and on and on and on and on and on.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
...I have evaded nothing except responding to a couple of well crafted to trap someone ...
They were well crafted, but I'm no genius to do it. The trouble you have answering them is because of your rhetoric, it doesn't fit your Calvinist narrative and so you, as you now admit, evaded them.

The rest of your post only belies your radical misunderstanding of Catholicism. Par for the course for Calvinists. You have your narrative and you're just sticking to it.
 

Arial

Active member
Okay, honest question here Arial. No hidden agenda, just a straight question....

How do you deal with Ezekiel 18 (the whole chapter)?
There are a couple of ways to see it, none of which denies original sin, not if you consider the rest of the content of the Bible.
In a nutshell it is making the point that no one is being punished for someone else's sin, only for their own.
The "die" and "live" options given for sin or obedience may be temporal punishment for evil or righteous behavior. It is not dealing with eternal life, because no one ever kept themselves from all of the particular sins listed, let alone all the others that exist. So the idea is that if you sin, there is a penalty, if you do good and turn from the sin, God will return to you. And if you live in a good (righteous) way, there will be blessings and life, but if you turn from the righteousness and do evil, the former righteousness will not help your situation. And the father will not pay for the son's sins, nor the son for the father's. And the ultimate penalty for sin is death, though it may not be immediate.
 

Arial

Active member
They were well crafted, but I'm no genius to do it. The trouble you have answering them is because of your rhetoric, it doesn't fit your Calvinist narrative and so you, as you now admit, evaded them.
I will take it as a compliment that your borrow my words. The "trouble" with my answering them is because of the built in entrapment you put in order to achieve your ulterior purpose. They are unanswerable, as you well know. The core that they were getting at, is explained in all that I have said in response to your misstatements about Reformation teaching. I did not evade them. I told you flat out why I wasn't responding to them. What is my Calvinist narrative anyway? That doesn't make any sense.
The rest of your post only belies your radical misunderstanding of Catholicism
Then enlighten me! ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!! Talk about evading. I said some pretty radical things about your religion. If they are not true, clear it up. The same courtesy I showed you when you misstated the teachings of Reformed theology.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
There are a couple of ways to see it, none of which denies original sin, not if you consider the rest of the content of the Bible.
In a nutshell it is making the point that no one is being punished for someone else's sin, only for their own.
The "die" and "live" options given for sin or obedience may be temporal punishment for evil or righteous behavior. It is not dealing with eternal life, because no one ever kept themselves from all of the particular sins listed, let alone all the others that exist. So the idea is that if you sin, there is a penalty, if you do good and turn from the sin, God will return to you. And if you live in a good (righteous) way, there will be blessings and life, but if you turn from the righteousness and do evil, the former righteousness will not help your situation. And the father will not pay for the son's sins, nor the son for the father's. And the ultimate penalty for sin is death, though it may not be immediate.
I no longer care.

Go to Hell!
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I will take it as a compliment that your borrow my words.
Shrug. I don't know what you're talking about.
The "trouble" with my answering them is because of the built in entrapment you put in order to achieve your ulterior purpose.
They are very simple sentences. Let me show you again.

If you are elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
If you are not elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Now let me erase the antecedent from each sentence.

If you are elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
If you are not elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Equals:
, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Where's the trap Arial?

There's no trap. This is just Calvinism. You're in the trap.
They are unanswerable, as you well know.
I know no such thing, of course they're answerable. More evasion.
The core that they were getting at, is explained in all that I have said in response to your misstatements about Reformation teaching. I did not evade them. I told you flat out why I wasn't responding to them.
You . . . said you evaded them. I quoted you. " I have evaded ... responding to a couple of well crafted to trap someone"

[sic]
What is my Calvinist narrative anyway? That doesn't make any sense.
You said: " These two statements you make are rhetorical. That is they are statements used to attain a deliberate end, in this case so that you can go away having attained the "material "you need to support your false premise on which you base a bias, should I answer either yes or no to either one."

On the contrary, to my statements being rhetorical, which they are not, it's impossible, it is your own rhetoric (Calvinist narrative) that doesn't prevent you from answering them, but it makes you not want to answer them, because you know how it makes your Calvinism look, so your not answering me is actually rhetorical, you're accusing me of what you are in fact doing.
Then enlighten me! ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!! Talk about evading. I said some pretty radical things about your religion. If they are not true, clear it up. The same courtesy I showed you when you misstated the teachings of Reformed theology.
I never misstated anything about Calvinism, I'm apparently just more analytical than you are.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Shrug. I don't know what you're talking about.

They are very simple sentences. Let me show you again.

If you are elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
If you are not elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Now let me erase the antecedent from each sentence.

If you are elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
If you are not elect, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Equals:
, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.
, there is nothing you can do to alter your destiny.

Where's the trap Arial?

There's no trap. This is just Calvinism. You're in the trap.

I know no such thing, of course they're answerable. More evasion.

You . . . said you evaded them. I quoted you. " I have evaded ... responding to a couple of well crafted to trap someone"

[sic]

You said: " These two statements you make are rhetorical. That is they are statements used to attain a deliberate end, in this case so that you can go away having attained the "material "you need to support your false premise on which you base a bias, should I answer either yes or no to either one."

On the contrary, to my statements being rhetorical, which they are not, it's impossible, it is your own rhetoric (Calvinist narrative) that doesn't prevent you from answering them, but it makes you not want to answer them, because you know how it makes your Calvinism look, so your not answering me is actually rhetorical, you're accusing me of what you are in fact doing.

I never misstated anything about Calvinism, I'm apparently just more analytical than you are.
Just the right touch of salt there!

Col. 1:6 Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
They didn't have to have a free will in order to choose between righteousness and evil----they only had to have a will---the ability to freely make choices according to whatever acts with the most pressure on the will. That is not the same thing as the will being free, as it cannot be both not free and free. And even though it may choose righteousness sometimes, it will also sometimes choose evil. So will always be found wanting in the perfect righteousness department.
This has got to be the worst case of circular reasoning I've even seen, and I don't even know what circular reasoning is.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
I am not completely sure of what you are saying. There are a couple of ways that I can take it, so if I am off base, forgive me, and clarify. In the meantime, though I do not disagree with you in one way, I will present my perspective on sin and the believer. Let me know what you think.

When we come to Christ, we are said to be in Him,
We are not "in Him" until we are water baptized into Him.
Rom 6:3..."Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?"
and that that this union will automatically bring about repentance.
Repentance from sin comes first.
Acts 2:38..."Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
Repentance, baptism, and then the gift of the Holy Ghost.
We will see how we have sinned against God and it will cause us not an "I'm sorry." But real sorrow, and the beginnings of a desire to please and obey Him.
That is indeed a true "turn from" sin.
2 Cor 7:10..."For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death."
But we will probably not repent all at once for everything, as we do not yet know in all the ways we fall short.
If you don't "repent/turn from" all sin at once, your repentance is a lie to God.
You can't quit lying and still commit adultery, then say you are doing God's will.
Rom 2:3..."And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?"
How can you help anyone else come to God if you are showing disdain for Him?
A reading and study of the Bible will cause our knowledge in this to grow, and removing all the actual sin from our lives may take a lifetime.
You won't find that second part in the bible.
But if we are doing our "homework" (being in His word and prayer) sin in our life will be less and less.
John 9:31..."Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth."
1 Peter 3:12..."For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil."
Men in sin are not heard by God.
We are living in a world where we are surrounded by sin, its inticements and temptations, our old ways of being, and no matter how good our intentions, sometimes we will stumble a bit.
1 Cor 10:13..."There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it."
Don't doubt for a second that God is not "faithful" to this scripture.
The escapes from temptation are there, every time.
James 4:7..."Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you."
In this process, the sins cannot condemn us to hell or separation from God eternally.
Matt 6:24..."No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
John 8:34..."Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin."
Pick who you will serve, and thereby pick who you will hate.
This is because we are sealed by the Holy Spirit in this relationship (a very personal one) with Jesus.
Acts 2:38..."Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
The sealing of the Holy Ghost can come only after the turn from sin and washing away of past sins. (In every example but Cornelius'.)
God will not reside in an unclean temple.
He has paid for our sins with His life and blood, so they have no power over us,
Then there shouldn't be any more sin...right?
His righteousness is counted as ours. We will be convicted of sin when we commit it, and if we repent and confess this before God, He is faithful to forgive us.
Don't accommodate more sin.
Be single minded.
James 1:8..."A double minded man is unstable in all his ways."
So though we may commit a sin from time to time, we are not counted as sinners in our relationship with God.
Don't fool yourself.
Only sinners commit sin.
However. A life style of continual, unrepentant sin is an indication that the union with Christ may have not taken place (but not that it never will.) And we have to be careful in making that judgment about people, because one who is really and truly in union with Christ through faith, can have a period of time where they are caught in a particular sin that was at one time part of their lifestyle. Addicts for example. Bit if they belong to God, do not despair, we can be assured that God is doing a work in them and bringing them through it, back to repentance. If you see someone like that, pray.
God doesn't leave people in their addictions, or in their sin.
Gal 5:24..."And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts."
That crucifixion happens at our baptism into Christ and into His death and burial.
Rom 6:2-4..."God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
The old man must die before a new creature can be raised with Christ to walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:6-7..."Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin."
2 Cor 5:17..."Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
All things!
I hope that makes things clearer for you.
 
Last edited:
Top