Nang
TOL Subscriber
No?
No, you are not an honest person, but intent on bearing false witness against me?
Yes!
:down::madmad::comeout:
Spammers wasteland
- Thread starter Delmar
- Start date
- Status
No?
No, you are not an honest person, but intent on bearing false witness against me?
Yes!
:down::madmad::comeout:
AMR, you have asked for my assurance that I accept you as a "Brother in Christ." The more I understand the outlandish false beliefs, the false gospel and different God that you see in the Scriptures, I begin to wonder about you Calvinists. I leave your position between you and God. I don't see the same God that you see in the Bible.
I seriously don't believe, PPS is a member of the Body of Christ. I really don't.
I certainly have my doubts that even John Calvin was a member of the Body of Christ. A murderous dictator type of person, yes he was.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
You are not the judge of such to begin with, plus you have a wrong conception of the church of Jesus Christ altogether.
You're welcome to your opinion. Unfortunately for you, I am too. And, I disagree with you.
I believe it's best to post as if you're speaking to someone face to face. It's better to speak to them and not at them. There are posters here who wish to act as if they're a Professor at an esteemed University teaching a classroom. That way, they can be in control, and at the same time seem better than all others. They use fancy words/phrases that denote a person of higher education, therefore, superior. Do you folks that practice such, speak with your family and friends this way? Must your family/friends carry a dictionary on their person in order to have a conversation with you?
You mean "connote," possibly, but more likely you mean "suggest" or "signal."
No. I meant Sfogliatelle.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
You'll try.
No. It was a setup, because I know you don't understand Hamartiology (Sin-ology). You don't know what sin is. Most don't.
Nope. That would be you, and because you don't know any better. But ignorance is no excuse.
I didn't say sins (hamartemata). I said sin (singular articular hamartia). That's the article added to an anarthrous noun. It nominalizes the noun. Singular articular hamartia is the condition of sin.
You're referrring to stand-alone individual resulting acts from the verb (hamartano) and their weight of consequence. That is only referenced four times in all of the NT; and there's always a particular application for clarity.
You don't have a clue what the distinctions are between singular/plural articular/anarthrous hamartia as a NOUN, or how those differ from the verb and the forms of hamartema/ta.
Since Jesus Christ was made (poieo) sin (singular anarthrous hamartia), then all the plural anarthrous hamartiai (sins) are accounted for when one is granted repenatance (the NOUN) for singular articular hamartia (sin).
This noun of repentance has within it the functional activity of the verb, repent; and it's a qualitative part of the renewed mind God gives to free our will from its enslavement to sin.
Since you and the MAD heretics think sins are all actions (though they're nouns), then you have ignored what repentance (the noun) accually is.
And it's this repentance (the noun) that is the changed condition of the inner man to be able to confess sins (plural articular hamartiai) as a new creation when the old man brings forth activity.
Confess and profess are translated from the same word (homoleggeo); so as one confesses (speaks the same thing as God) from one's new condition of repentance (instead of as a sinner), it's at the same time a profession that Christ was made every possible inward or outward quality of the sin condition.
The laundry list of doing/done has nothing to do with this, so you're misapplying a concept of sin that isn't according to the meanings of the forms of the word. It's the most common fallacy of English false understanding about sin.
You think it's about the doing and the done of sinning and resulting sins as individual acts. Scritpure hardly even speaks of that. Scripture addresses the other forms of the word that you can't know because you've only read an English gloss of everything in scripture.
We are not to lay again the foundation of repentance of dead works. Once one has been granted repentance (the noun), then one has remission of the sin condition and everything that comes forth inwardly and outwardly. By that repentant condition, one is then able to confess/profess all future sins (plural articular hamartiai, which are NOT the individual stand-alone resulting acts of the verb of sinning).
Past, present, and future sins (hamartemata), as you perceive them, are not forgiven. The sin condition is remitted (caused to stand away; so that one is free to apply one's will apart from enslavement to that condition of lack), empowering one to be able to confess all that ever comes forth from the old man (crucified with Christ) and be cleansed of all unrighteousness.
Confessions of sins isn't about the resulting outward acts. They all begin in the heart, and as a new creature we can continually profess that anything inward or outward that comes forth from that old man is not the new creature we are in Christ. And that confession of sins (which is not the acting and actions) is because one has a repentant condition rather than a sin condition.
The problem is that you are still a Judaizer, counting sins as acts of violating the Law.
The Mosaic Law was a COVENANT, not legislative codification. And it ceased in Christ who personified it. To be Antinomian is to be Antichrist, for Christ is the Law. Law is nomos, which is distribution. Christ is the final personified distribution of God's righteousness, which is His standard for inner character and outer conduct.
You have NO idea whatsoever what you're talking about when you say anything whatsoever about sin or repentance or law or grace or faith or love or mercy, or much of anything else. You're talking out of your behind based on false conceptualized over-simplified ignorant applications of scripture.
The Lord Jesus Christ was made singular anarthrous hamartia. SIN. Anarthrous. You insist He died for hamartemata. The individual resulting stand-alone acts from the verb of sinning. Scripture doesn't even use that word. But you don't know the difference because it reads as the same English word.
No. He died for much more than that. He died for the sin condition from which all inner and outer character and conduct come forth, by being made (poieo) every facet OF the sin condition for all mankind without exception.
And that's why repentance is for the sin condition. It's also why we then are able to confess according to the noun of repentance.
You've made EVERYTHING into verbs that are nouns. You've made salvation WORKS. You've made repenting and believing into WORKS. And then you've insisted you don't need to apply repentance in confession for whatever comes forth from the old man while being a new creation.
You have no idea how big a heretic you are because you don't know what scripture actually says and substitute general concepts to turn nouns into verbs.
Exactly. That's why one is granted repentance (the noun) from which to apply it as a verb in confession from now on in this life.
You have NO idea what sin is or what sins are. In any form of the words.
Being granted repentance (the noun) for SIN (the condition).
No, that would be you and your deluded MAD peers, who have no clue what sin is and sins are.
Simple is haplotes. It doesn't mean non-complex. It means without duplicity, and with singularity and sincerity. Again, you have no idea what words mean in translation.
The "simple" Gospel is not what you represent. All you ever yack about is the actions that you insist are sins.
I've never said any of it. Liar.
That's the problem. You can't understand what anyone else is saying because you don't know what anything means or how it all functions for salvation. So you quote someone else and attempt to apply it to me, and you don't even know what they've said by what you quote.
I've said none of that. And it's her attempts at explaining what I've outlined above.
I don't say any of that. And Nang doesn't mean what you infer based on your horrific abuse of what the words sin/sins mean. You're the one making it works, and you don't even know it.
We are empowered to live a life of faith. Faith cannot help but come forth in works. It's not possible for faith to exclude an economy of action in one's life. It has nothing to do with whatever you project upon it.
And Antinomianism is antichrist. Christ is the final distribution (Law) of God's righteous. Personified. But you don't know what Law is, either. Just like you don't know what grace and faith are.
We have access BY faith INTO the grace wherein we stand. It is OF faith that it might be BY grace. It's all faith. But you think faith is believing. Faith is a NOUN. Believing is a verb. Your believing didn't save you. That would have been a work, just like repenting would have been a work.
Those are sinners. Unregenerate. Unsaved. Never translated into Christ.
Believers aren't sinners. They're a new creation.
Yep. SIN. Singular articular hamartia. Because Jesus was made singular anarthrous hamartia. Not "sins", hamartemata.
You are clueless.
That's not what repentance is. First, it's a noun granted by God. Second, it isn't about individual stand-alone acts and the consequences for them.
You're blinder than blind. Nothing about salvation has anything to do with "sins" in the manner that you falsely comprehend. You're under the Law, and it doesn't even exist any longer apart from Christ alone being that distribution of God's righteousness.
This is just stupid misplaced understanding. You're still a Law-monger claiming to be an Antinomian.
You're the one with Little Red Riding Hood in your mouf. You have conceptualized sin into being merely works, and insisted that repenting (the verb) of actions is the Gospel.
You need help. You can't even represent the Christian faith.
Like I said. You MAD infants need to be burped to spit up all that false doctrine.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Yep. SIN. Singular articular hamartia. Not SINS, plural hamartemata (as YOU insist for your false Gospel).
He didn't die for acting and resulting acts. He died for the source of them. You need to spend YEARS unlearning all your crap garbage false doctrine and go learn the truth.
I did. See above. I owned your sorry behind. You have no clue what sin is in any form of the word.
What does that even have to do with anything? You're the one preaching a Gosepl about acting and resulting actions. Scripture doesn't do that, but you don't know anything but a shallow English skim with false presuppositions.
You're not an authentic Trinitarian. You have faulty Christology. You have horrifically jacked up pseudo-Hamartiology. You throw all the incommunicable attributes of God under the bus, including His sovereignty. You're an Arminian Hyper-Dispensational cultist. And you're an Open Theist (as I understand it).
You have as much wrong as JWs and LDSers. It would be a long shot if all the sludge you "believe" is salvific.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Antinomianism is Antichrist. Law is nomos. Distribution, allocation, alotment, apportionment. It's the distribution of God's righteousness. The Law ceased in Christ. He fulfilled it. He is the final personified distribution of God's righteousness.
It is of faith that it might be by grace. Faith without works is dead. One cannot have grace unto salvation apart from faith.
These meatheads have no clue. And it's not just a void, there's something in the place of the void that isn't scriptural truth.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
You shoulda left it at the bolded. You seriously don't believe. Period.
Your assessment of false faith about others are less that irrelevant.
It would be best for you to learn how to use "Spell check."
And, you are one lost Lutheran.
The problem with Lutherans, Methodists, Catholics and other mainstream denominations is, they don't preach the Grace Gospel (Paul's Gospel) by which we are saved. They don't hear the message that they NEED to hear. I highly doubt PPS could even explain what the Grace Gospel preaches? He both can't and won't be able to articulate what it all means.
Romans 10:17 states: "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." If one is to find "true faith" it can ONLY be found in the written word of God. (The Holy Bible)
Romans 10:17 states: "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." If one is to find "true faith" it can ONLY be found in the written word of God. (The Holy Bible)
Most denominations add works, water baptism, and other non-essential rules and laws.
Paul stated in 2 Corinthians 11:3 "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
The Apostle Paul desired to have the Gospel kept pure and not have things added to it or taken from it. After all, it was the message (Gospel) that Paul received directly from the Ascended Lord Jesus Christ. Today we see, not only is Paul's Gospel not being preached, we also see female Pastors, water baptism non-existent signs and wonders and tongues being added. Also, homosexual churches and Pastors. The "purity" of the Gospel has been contaminated/corrupted by false doctrine and "other gospels." (small g)
If not for the presence of the Holy Spirit (The Comforter) in the world today, the true Gospel would be difficult to find. It's so important that people concentrate on Paul's writings. (Romans through Philemon.)
According to the Apostle Paul, we're living in the "Dispensation of Grace." God's gift of forgiveness of ALL sin and His guarantee of eternal life through faith in Christ is open to ALL, both Jew and Gentile alike.
According to the Apostle Paul, we're living in the "Dispensation of Grace." God's gift of forgiveness of ALL sin and His guarantee of eternal life through faith in Christ is open to ALL, both Jew and Gentile alike.
- Status