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.
Translation of all of the above spam, disjointed redefining words, spin?:
Perverter Nag, and pudge: What sins, pudge? That is your/her "argument. You/Nag deny that the Lord Jesus Christ died for them, every last one of them, and one of the reasons, is because neither you, or anyone, can repent of all your sins, which is the minimum standard required. You are clueless, as to what happened, 2000+ years ago, and why. And your are going to explain, "the Gospel," "that simple Gospel?"
"Dou do realize those who believe the Gospel of Grace are a new creation and are not sinners, right? So What's your beef?"-pudge
Slower, Gomer-
Read it, perverter. She/you, assert that those who:
-live their life wrongly, whatever the heck that is=subjectivity
-do not repent of their sins/failings/wrong practices/foul behavior=the Lord Jesus Christ did not die for our sins..
-will be held responsible and judged for breaking God's laws and are reprobates justly consigned to death and hell, do not belong to God, but manifests he is reprobate and remains dead in his sins.
=not talking about saved individuals, but anyone who does not comply with the requirements above.
That's my "beef," pudge-her/
your perversion of the gospel of Christ.
Living your life "rightly, in contrast to living you "life wrongly," and repenting of sins/failings/wrong practices/foul behavior, is service, sanctification, our "walk," after being saved, the result of being saved, not the basis/cause of being saved. Nag/you pervert it, asserting that you must live your life "rightly, in contrast to living you "life wrongly," and repent of sins/failings/wrong practices/foul behavior, and, if you do not, you are reprobate, consigned to deat, and hell.That is a perversion of the gospel of Christ, wolfie.
__________________________________________________ _____
This is Nag's on record assertion-sins, you spineless punk.
"Any sinner
who lives his life wrongly and does not repent of his sins, will be held responsible and judged for breaking God's laws and are reprobates justly consigned to death and hell. Sinners only receive what they have earned. Men reap what they sow.......
A sinner who does not repent of his failings, wrong practices, and foul behavior proves to not belong to God, but manifests he is reprobate and remains dead in his sins."-Nag
___________________________
"Do you think those who have not repented of their sin are somehow saved?"-Pneumonia
That is not what you/Nag only "argue," you wicked pervert.
Slower, Gome-What
sins, pudge? That is your/her "argument." The Lord Jesus Christ died for them, every last one of them, and one of the reasons, is because neither you, or anyone, can repent of all your sins, which is the minimum standard required. You are clueless, as to what happened, 2000+ years ago, and why. And your are going to explain, "the Gospel," "that simple Gospel?"
Now, for over the 10th time, pudge-Did Judas preach this 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV "that simple 'the' Gospel?"
Yes or no?
