TOL is for Dialogue!!!

[Gurucam]

Bless you, brother.

Who blesses a sinner but Satan?

Would God or Jesus bless a sinner?

Romans 9:13


13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

How can it be sincerely taught that scripture teaches that God loves all men without exception, when it specifically says of Esau, God Hated ?

Did God hate Esau because his was a sinner?

Why would Meshak bless a self confessed sinner?

Unless, she is recruiting for Satan as a spy while simply pretending to be Christian.

All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirit might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus.

She must explain.

 

[chrysostom]

Who blesses a sinner but Satan?

Would God or Jesus bless a sinner?

we are all sinners

 

[Gurucam]

we are all sinners

No.

However by your confession and Meshak's response you are both sinners.

Do you know that All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus? (re. 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5)

Therefore both you guys are recruiting for Satan.

Romans 9:13


13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

How can it be sincerely taught that scripture teaches that God loves all men without exception, when it specifically says of Esau, God Hated ?

Did God hate Esau because his was a sinner? Why else would God hate anyone?

Why would Meshak bless a self confessed sinner?

Unless, she is recruiting for Satan as a spy while simply pretending to be Christian.

All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirit might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus.

Is she not recruiting people for Satan where their flesh might be destroyed so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus?

She must explain.

 

[chrysostom]

No.

are you a sinner?

 

[chrysostom]

Gurucam

are you a sinner?

 

[Gurucam]

are you a sinner?

No. I am not a sinner.

 

[chrysostom]

No. I am not a sinner.

it is a tough question

you should think about it before you answer it

did you ever sin?
and
when did you stop?

 

[Gurucam]

it is a tough question

you should think about it before you answer it

did you ever sin?
and
when did you stop?

I have answered you, already. My answer (re. post 326) was truthful, proper, firm and final.

Now you answer the following, which I asked previously (re. post 323):

Do you know that All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus? (re. 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5)

1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5, KJV N.T. confirms that people are sent to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus.

My question is do you know that those people who are sent to Satan according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T. are all humans who are sinners (i.e. like you and Meshak etc.)?

 

[chrysostom]

I have answered you.

Now you answer the following, which I asked previously:

Do you know that All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus? (re. 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5)

I do know that all sinners must repent to avoid the second death

so you never sinned?
is that what you are saying?

 

[Gurucam]

I do know that all sinners must repent to avoid the second death

This post is done in the spirit of this thread, which states, "TOL is for Dialogue!!". This post is also according to your 'free willed' participation in this thread.

You asked me a question which I answered directly and truthfully, with clarity, forthrightness and finality (re. post # 326). (and I will answer all your further questions, in like fashion.)

However it is now your turn to answer my previous question. I expect the same honesty.

You are avoiding that simple and straightforward question which I will repeat:

Do you know that All sinners go to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus? (re. 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5)

1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5, KJV N.T. confirms that certain people are sent to Satan for the destruction of their flesh so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus.

(I discern no grounds under which you can deny the above literal revelation from the KJV N.T.)

Therefore my question is, do you know that those people who are sent to Satan according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T. are all humans who are sinners?

(It seems that Satan can fix them so that their spirits might be saved in the day of the lord Jesus. However, in my turn, I ask you only this one simple question, are these people sinners?)

I did note what you have posted above and I will willingly answer another of your question if you answer my question.

Let us exemplify how Dialogue is done, forthrightly and fairly. It is your turn to answer my simple question. Are these sinners or not? You are free to offer explanations if you wish.

Thanks to TOL and freedom of expression and speech, you cannot be and are not a voice crying in the wilderness (not in this age of the internet). Here you have a chance for your voice to be heard, loud and clear, in the spirit of forthright and fair Dialogue. You will not be chastised, banished and/or punished for your words . . . . . however, if you are 'selling sour lemons by promoting them as sweet oranges', you will be exposed.

 

[resodko]

Hey! :sibbie:


what's going on in here! :sibbie::sibbie:

 

[chrysostom]

You asked me a question which I answered directly, with clarity, forthrightness and finality.

no you didn't

I still don't know
if
you ever sinned

 

[chrysostom]

Hey! :sibbie:


what's going on in here! :sibbie::sibbie:

just a couple of sinners having a dialogue

 

[freelight]

missing the mark.......

missing the mark.......

just a couple of sinners having a dialogue

'Sin' is over-rated.






pj

 

[freelight]

Lost in space.............

Lost in space.............

So dialogue, darn it!

A 'dialogue' is usually begun upon an already agreed upon or common subject being a platform upon which to build. Have you provided a specific subject to offer up for 'discussion', or is this more or less a 'spoof' thread?

The challenge for you is 'creative dialogue' (a concept I usually try to espouse), but for that you must engage a subject (anything),....isn't that fair? Or should we stick our hand in a hat and see what we pull up?







pj

 

[chrysostom]

'Sin' is over-rated.

do you believe these people when they say

they don't sin?

 

[freelight]

Samsara..............

Samsara..............

do you believe these people when they say

they don't sin?

Not at all, since unless they are wholly perfect, purified, evolved to the highest state of incorruption or immortality,....they cannot ever claim to be 'sinless'. To claim such by some way of 'doctrinal formulation or assumption' is folly, unless they are merely postulating a 'presumed' state of perfection 'in Christ' which is 'assumed' by a gesture of 'faith', beyond it being a theoretical 'position' held in their own mind.

On the absolute level of 'God-presence' and 'God-perfection',...if we are one with that divine nature NOW, we can hold to being already always 'whole' or 'perfect' in God....since the divine nature has no lack, imperfection, space or time in it...it is totally whole, incorrupt, immortal, eternal, infinite. On the philosophical premise of 'non-duality',....we can accept this proposition on its own basis, assuming our definition of 'God' is authentic, and we are in our essential deepest nature, of the pure Spirit-essence of 'God', there being no difference or separation, because God is One; God is All. Again, this is the view from 'God' Himself, who is already always timelessly PERFECT. My true individual essence (atman) is already One with 'Brahman' (the Universal Spirit).

However...if we're relating to this experience in 'duality' (the entire realm of space-time creation, where there is difference and the perception of separation/multiplicity)....we are involved in the phenomena of insufficiency, lack, sin, suffering, death,...the whole drama of 'time'. So in this world,...if one is claiming to not be affected by 'sin', then they would have to be 'other-worldly' having no part in this material existence, not sharing any trace of carnal nature or attachment to matter. While we are in this mortal body,...there is the 'karma' inherent in it, which is undergoing its play of cause/effect, actions/consequences,...where the lower nature and mind(ego) are ever 'engrossed' in this physical existence with all its suffering. If one wants to 'tout' some passages to support being 'sinless', there are just as many that say otherwise.

The issue of 'sin' is a bit different in an eastern philosophical perspective, but the western 'Church' has sure made a monopoly on it



pj

 

[chrysostom]

..they cannot ever claim to be 'sinless'. To claim such by some way of 'doctrinal formulation or assumption' is folly,

thank you for that
but
the rest of your post is incoherent

 

[freelight]

Questioning the concept of 'sin'........

Questioning the concept of 'sin'........

thank you for that
but
the rest of your post is incoherent

You know I can sometimes take liberties expounding on other concepts, especially within the context of 'non-dualism', so for those not very familiar with such terms, meanings and context, it can be hard to follow.

Otherwise, as we've noted,...the whole 'sin' thing must become so much an 'item' as to make any concept of 'salvation' necessary, assuming that any so called 'sinner' has to be 'saved' in some fashion by a transcendental God-figure becoming human or some other condenscension of the divine in matter.

Any claiming to be 'sinless' or 'perfect' is as great a feat as to claim that another person did some 'act' or work of 'mediation' to make them 'sinless' or 'perfect',.....but isn't this still a 'belief' one chooses to accept, even if the believer still finds himself subject to human imperfection and the temptations of the flesh? While one thru purification, surrender and religious practice CAN discipline themselves to a certain extent by walking in the Spirit,....the flesh is still there with its propensities and desires, so that the struggle between the two continue as long as one has a physical body. Paul devotes a good portion of his writings speaking of this personl conflict of his between the two principles. So if those who emulate Paul's letters to the status of 'scripture' claim 'sinlessness', they hold for themselves a condition even more pure than Paul, unless they can intellectualize some concept of 'sinlessness' cherry-picked from some other passages, as 'suiting' the occasion

'He who says he has no sin, deceives himself and the truth is not in him',......I guess John had another 'spin' on it. If you shuffle thru a list of writers, you get different perspectives, so on another level 'It depends on who you ask'.



pj

 

[chrysostom]

even if the believer still finds himself subject to human imperfection and the temptations of the flesh?

the flesh brings out the best and the worst in us
that makes it a real good test
getting rid of the flesh does not necessarily get rid of the worst in us
and
that is why we are being tested