You aren't fully trusting in Jesus for your salvation, if you're also trusting in your works in addition to your faith.
Absolutely correct (that is, someone who trusts in works and faith for salvation, not saying that I do this).
Quote:
Good fruits are what true believers wil produce if given the time and opportunity, but it is not what saves them.
Man walks the aisle, prays the sinners prayer, and goes on to live a secular life. Not an overtly evil one, just a secular one. Doesn't pray, doesn't fast, doesn't go to church or goes occasionally at best. He says he is Christian, but in fact his practiced religion is moralistic, therapeutic, deism.
Is such a person saved because he walked the aisle, prayed a prayer, and believes he is saved? He sincerely believes he is saved because a preacher told him Romans 10:9 once.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
So be clear - are you saying that salvation is solely determined by how a person treats the "least of these" and has nothing to do with their belief/faith in Jesus? Because that parable you're referencing does not even mention it. Who are the "least of these", btw?
I'm saying that salvation or the lack thereof is not something we as humans determine. It is something that God pronounces on the day we pass from this world and stand in front of him. So for me to "claim" salvation and OSAS in the middle of my life on earth is every bit as arrogant as it is for Joel Osteen to claim a Gulfstream.
I trust Christ for my salvation, and that his judgements are just, and that is enough. I understand that having done so, it is also an imperative that I "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" (Matthew 3:8) and that if I fail to do so insofar as I am capable of doing it, I may be dismissed from His presence as an unprofitable servant.
"If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved" - Romans 10:9. Why complicate such a simple Gospel by adding your own performance into it?
Good question. Why do you think Paul wrote over 400 other verses in the letter besides that one?
lol. That one got me. I've been to rock bamd protestan churches etc. they seem to spend a lot of time talking about other things than what we are being told here is "all you need to do".
Why are they complicating and wasting the time and trying to sell me books and classes etc? Seems they are confused. They really only need one, maybe 2 verses of the 30,000+ in the Bible or so they say
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
You aren't fully trusting in Jesus for your salvation, if you're also trusting in your works in addition to your faith.
Absolutely correct.
Quote:
Good fruits are what true believers wil produce if given the time and opportunity, but it is not what saves them.
Man walks the aisle, prays the sinners prayer, and goes on to live a secular life. Not an overtly evil one, just a secular one. Doesn't pray, doesn't fast, doesn't go to church or goes occasionally at best. He says he is Christian, but in fact his practiced religion is moralistic, therapeutic, deism.
Is such a person saved because he walked the aisle, prayed a prayer, and believes he is saved? He sincerely believes he is saved because a preacher told him Romans 10:9 once.
If he truly believes in his heart, he is saved. If he only said he believed, but really didn't and never did, he is not. I don't know why this is so difficult.
Works will determine a true believer's reward, not their salvation. A person who truly believes but lives a "secular life" and has no fruit, will be the person described in 1 Corinthians 13: "their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work...If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be savedeven though only as one escaping through the flames."
So be clear - are you saying that salvation is solely determined by how a person treats the "least of these" and has nothing to do with their belief/faith in Jesus? Because that parable you're referencing does not even mention it. Who are the "least of these", btw?
I'm saying that salvation or the lack thereof is not something we as humans determine. It is something that God pronounces on the day we pass from this world and stand in front of him. So for me to "claim" salvation and OSAS in the middle of my life on earth is every bit as arrogant as it is for Joel Osteen to claim a Gulfstream.
I trust Christ for my salvation, and that his judgements are just, and that is enough. I understand that having done so, it is also an imperative that I "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" (Matthew 3:8) and that if I fail to do so insofar as I am capable of doing it, I may be dismissed from His presence as an unprofitable servant.
"If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved" - Romans 10:9. Why complicate such a simple Gospel by adding your own performance into it?
Good question. Why do you think Paul wrote over 400 other verses in the letter besides that one?
lol. That one got me. I've been to rock bamd protestan churches etc. they seem to spend a lot of time talking about other things than what we are being told here is "all you need to do".
Why are they complicating and wasting the time and trying to sell me books and classes etc? Seems they are confused. They really only need one, maybe 2 verses of the 30,000+ in the Bible or so they say
I think the more remarkable thing is how you spend a lot of time here talking about other things, while that one verse completely trips you up.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
According to God, or man?
I think it's pretty clear in all my comments I care not of the opinion of man.
Why the dodge? All sins equal or not? and please back up your position with Bible verses.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
Why the dodge? All sins equal or not? and please back up your position with Bible verses.
Aside from blasphemy against the Holy Spirit which is singled out by Jesus as the one unforgiveable sin, all sins are equal and separate us from God.
From an earthly perspective, sins have wildly different effects both on others, and on oneself. Take suicide for instance. It is a murder that, if successful, leaves the murderer no opportunity to repent. Child abuse can have generational effects, as can adultry that leads to divorce. Habitually refusing to live a disciplined Christian life with prayer, fasting, scripture reading, and going to church can result in people putting down their cross and as John 6:66 describes going "back and walked with Him no more" (interesting chapter and verse number for that one).
You aren't fully trusting in Jesus for your salvation, if you're also trusting in your works in addition to your faith.
Absolutely correct.
Quote:
Good fruits are what true believers wil produce if given the time and opportunity, but it is not what saves them.
Man walks the aisle, prays the sinners prayer, and goes on to live a secular life. Not an overtly evil one, just a secular one. Doesn't pray, doesn't fast, doesn't go to church or goes occasionally at best. He says he is Christian, but in fact his practiced religion is moralistic, therapeutic, deism.
Is such a person saved because he walked the aisle, prayed a prayer, and believes he is saved? He sincerely believes he is saved because a preacher told him Romans 10:9 once.
If he truly believes in his heart, he is saved. If he only said he believed, but really didn't and never did, he is not. I don't know why this is so difficult.
Works will determine a true believer's reward, not their salvation. A person who truly believes but lives a "secular life" and has no fruit, will be the person described in 1 Corinthians 13: "their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work...If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be savedeven though only as one escaping through the flames."
You are talking about two builders.
I'm talking about a person who never tried to build anything.
So is someone with a fruitless faith saved because he believes Romans 10:9?
The article is correct. It says "The Masoretic scribes purposely and willfully rearranged the original chapter order in the prophetic Book of Daniel, so that the chapters make no sense chronologically."
Daniel opens with the words "There was a man living in Babylon, and his name was Jehoiakim." In a modern Bible it is completely different.
This isn't just an issue for academia, particularly if your faith is anchored in sola scriptura. That scriptura can't be the work of Jewish scribes in 700 AD who rejected the messiah.
And there's no wiggle room here. Either God did not preserve his word and it had to be corrected by Christian academics relying on Jews who expressly rejected Him...or the Masoretic shortening of God's word is heretical.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
I'll stick with what the Bible says and what Christians have historically believed.
So, you've changed your position to ours, and now subscribe to scripture's multiple verses on this topic, instead of your own mistaken assumptions? Glad to hear it!
In all seriousness, Christians haven't historically believed what you are espousing. The Catholic Church has, but not Christians in general.
To be Catholic or Orthodox has been synonymous with being Christian through most of church history. I don't know whether you consider the Church Fathers to have been Catholic, but either way, they were clear on the subject of confession, just as they were on baptism and communion. See also Didache 4:14, 14:1, written in the late 1st century. "Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure."
It depends on who you are referencing. If we are talking about the apostles, no they were not Catholic or Orthodox. Moreover, many of what are considered the early church fathers were likewise not Catholic or Orthodox. As discussed previously, the current iteration of Catholicism was foreign to the apostles and early church fathers.
That said, even if we have to look at extra-biblical sources for the belief you are espousing (which is in and of itself quite telling), not even your quote above suggests that Christians, saved by Christ's blood, will lose their salvation if they do not continuously confess sins.
I think the challenge Protestants run into with the line of thinking on the lineage of the Church from the Rock is similar to the concepts of the verse "many parts / one body".
Where that argument of "those people werent Catholics" (which of course they didnt use that term in that moment) is that the direct line of Pope to Pope to Pope and what was built from those that walked with Jesus and then the Apostles all ties directly back to them.
It's not like say Martin Luther who 45 generations later decided "look, immma add a word here, potentially lead billions of people to hell (God will sort that out) by softening up the meaning of some things etc by completely deviating from what had been written and part of the liturgy of the Catholic church for 1500 years cuz i sat down and pondered it and have some new ideas".
Therein lies the danger if I were to be a Protestant, I would think. It's like is Olympus Mons a face carved on Mars or simply a mountain that looks that way from millions of miles away perspective etc. Can lead to some very flawed conclusions.
However, it is all indisputable the origins of the things that are done in the Catholic mass and the foundational beliefs of the church that now have existed for millennia and much of which we are discussing and debating in this here thread.
As an example, since you say those guys arent Catholic, when did they start being Catholic?
I would submit none of them were Catholic. I would also submit that there was never an idea for a pope position expressed in scripture.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.
There's even people who's opinion is OSAS and no works required is a thing too. That is their opinion. In the end, they will find out if correct or not. Just a question of time.
No works required for salvation is not an opinion, but a clear and concise statement repeated often in scripture. One has to misconstrue the verses in question to arrive at a different conclusion.
That's entirely incorrect as has been demonstrated but we can continue to go through it.
Just saying unh uh no or I don't agree with verse 1-20 of examples provided won'tlikely square with the big man upstairs but as you know, He will let you know eventually.
I don't want on my soul telling and teaching people "bro, all you gotta do is have faith and OSAS…you good!"
But is is appealing as an easy way in I guess. It simply ignores all the verses I've already posted and explained that stand in the way of say some here who've said "look, I just do Hohn 3:16….im good" when even from Jesus' own mouth; as I've posted many times in many answers that y'all simply just don't like, said, there is more.
You have failed to provide a single verse - and I mean not even one - that say or suggest works are required for salvation. Sure, you've cited a lot of irrelevant verses that you claim say that, but the plain language of the text says nothing of the sort.
Whereas I've give you approximately 20 verses that say exactly what I just stated. Ephesians 2:8-9.
My friend, the only person in danger of hell is the individual that subscribes to a false gospel. Your works are filthy rags to the Lord. Isaiah 64:6. You need to get right with God, and try to understand what he says about grace.
You aren't fully trusting in Jesus for your salvation, if you're also trusting in your works in addition to your faith.
Absolutely correct.
Quote:
Good fruits are what true believers wil produce if given the time and opportunity, but it is not what saves them.
Man walks the aisle, prays the sinners prayer, and goes on to live a secular life. Not an overtly evil one, just a secular one. Doesn't pray, doesn't fast, doesn't go to church or goes occasionally at best. He says he is Christian, but in fact his practiced religion is moralistic, therapeutic, deism.
Is such a person saved because he walked the aisle, prayed a prayer, and believes he is saved? He sincerely believes he is saved because a preacher told him Romans 10:9 once.
If he truly believes in his heart, he is saved. If he only said he believed, but really didn't and never did, he is not. I don't know why this is so difficult.
Works will determine a true believer's reward, not their salvation. A person who truly believes but lives a "secular life" and has no fruit, will be the person described in 1 Corinthians 13: "their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work...If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be savedeven though only as one escaping through the flames."
You are talking about two builders.
I'm talking about a person who never tried to build anything.
So is someone with a fruitless faith saved because he believes Romans 10:9?
I'm talking about a true believer, who Romans 10:9 is talking about.
Do you believe Romans 10:9 is true? If so, then you believe that works has nothing to do with it, and you believe what Protestantism teaches, which is what the Bible teaches. If not, then that's a whole other problem.
Why the dodge? All sins equal or not? and please back up your position with Bible verses.
Aside from blasphemy against the Holy Spirit which is singled out by Jesus as the one unforgiveable sin, all sins are equal and separate us from God.
From an earthly perspective, sins have wildly different effects both on others, and on oneself. Take suicide for instance. It is a murder that, if successful, leaves the murderer no opportunity to repent. Child abuse can have generational effects, as can adultry that leads to divorce. Habitually refusing to live a disciplined Christian life with prayer, fasting, scripture reading, and going to church can result in people putting down their cross and as John 6:66 describes going "back and walked with Him no more" (interesting chapter and verse number for that one).
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
I'll stick with what the Bible says and what Christians have historically believed.
So, you've changed your position to ours, and now subscribe to scripture's multiple verses on this topic, instead of your own mistaken assumptions? Glad to hear it!
In all seriousness, Christians haven't historically believed what you are espousing. The Catholic Church has, but not Christians in general.
To be Catholic or Orthodox has been synonymous with being Christian through most of church history. I don't know whether you consider the Church Fathers to have been Catholic, but either way, they were clear on the subject of confession, just as they were on baptism and communion. See also Didache 4:14, 14:1, written in the late 1st century. "Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure."
It depends on who you are referencing. If we are talking about the apostles, no they were not Catholic or Orthodox. Moreover, many of what are considered the early church fathers were likewise not Catholic or Orthodox. As discussed previously, the current iteration of Catholicism was foreign to the apostles and early church fathers.
That said, even if we have to look at extra-biblical sources for the belief you are espousing (which is in and of itself quite telling), not even your quote above suggests that Christians, saved by Christ's blood, will lose their salvation if they do not continuously confess sins.
I think the challenge Protestants run into with the line of thinking on the lineage of the Church from the Rock is similar to the concepts of the verse "many parts / one body".
Where that argument of "those people werent Catholics" (which of course they didnt use that term in that moment) is that the direct line of Pope to Pope to Pope and what was built from those that walked with Jesus and then the Apostles all ties directly back to them.
It's not like say Martin Luther who 45 generations later decided "look, immma add a word here, potentially lead billions of people to hell (God will sort that out) by softening up the meaning of some things etc by completely deviating from what had been written and part of the liturgy of the Catholic church for 1500 years cuz i sat down and pondered it and have some new ideas".
Therein lies the danger if I were to be a Protestant, I would think. It's like is Olympus Mons a face carved on Mars or simply a mountain that looks that way from millions of miles away perspective etc. Can lead to some very flawed conclusions.
However, it is all indisputable the origins of the things that are done in the Catholic mass and the foundational beliefs of the church that now have existed for millennia and much of which we are discussing and debating in this here thread.
As an example, since you say those guys arent Catholic, when did they start being Catholic?
I would submit none of them were Catholic. I would also submit that there was never an idea for a pope position expressed in scripture.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.
There's even people who's opinion is OSAS and no works required is a thing too. That is their opinion. In the end, they will find out if correct or not. Just a question of time.
No works required for salvation is not an opinion, but a clear and concise statement repeated often in scripture. One has to misconstrue the verses in question to arrive at a different conclusion.
That's entirely incorrect as has been demonstrated but we can continue to go through it.
Just saying unh uh no or I don't agree with verse 1-20 of examples provided won'tlikely square with the big man upstairs but as you know, He will let you know eventually.
I don't want on my soul telling and teaching people "bro, all you gotta do is have faith and OSAS…you good!"
But is is appealing as an easy way in I guess. It simply ignores all the verses I've already posted and explained that stand in the way of say some here who've said "look, I just do Hohn 3:16….im good" when even from Jesus' own mouth; as I've posted many times in many answers that y'all simply just don't like, said, there is more.
You have failed to provide a single verse - and I mean not even one - that say or suggest works are required for salvation. Sure, you've cited a lot of irrelevant verses that you claim say that, but the plain language of the text says nothing of the sort.
Whereas I've give you approximately 20 verses that say exactly what I just stated. Ephesians 2:8-9.
My friend, the only person in danger of hell is the individual that subscribes to a false gospel. Your works are filthy rags to the Lord. Isaiah 64:6. You need to get right with God, and try to understand what he says about grace.
I'll stick with what the Bible says and what Christians have historically believed.
So, you've changed your position to ours, and now subscribe to scripture's multiple verses on this topic, instead of your own mistaken assumptions? Glad to hear it!
In all seriousness, Christians haven't historically believed what you are espousing. The Catholic Church has, but not Christians in general.
To be Catholic or Orthodox has been synonymous with being Christian through most of church history. I don't know whether you consider the Church Fathers to have been Catholic, but either way, they were clear on the subject of confession, just as they were on baptism and communion. See also Didache 4:14, 14:1, written in the late 1st century. "Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure."
It depends on who you are referencing. If we are talking about the apostles, no they were not Catholic or Orthodox. Moreover, many of what are considered the early church fathers were likewise not Catholic or Orthodox. As discussed previously, the current iteration of Catholicism was foreign to the apostles and early church fathers.
That said, even if we have to look at extra-biblical sources for the belief you are espousing (which is in and of itself quite telling), not even your quote above suggests that Christians, saved by Christ's blood, will lose their salvation if they do not continuously confess sins.
I think the challenge Protestants run into with the line of thinking on the lineage of the Church from the Rock is similar to the concepts of the verse "many parts / one body".
Where that argument of "those people werent Catholics" (which of course they didnt use that term in that moment) is that the direct line of Pope to Pope to Pope and what was built from those that walked with Jesus and then the Apostles all ties directly back to them.
It's not like say Martin Luther who 45 generations later decided "look, immma add a word here, potentially lead billions of people to hell (God will sort that out) by softening up the meaning of some things etc by completely deviating from what had been written and part of the liturgy of the Catholic church for 1500 years cuz i sat down and pondered it and have some new ideas".
Therein lies the danger if I were to be a Protestant, I would think. It's like is Olympus Mons a face carved on Mars or simply a mountain that looks that way from millions of miles away perspective etc. Can lead to some very flawed conclusions.
However, it is all indisputable the origins of the things that are done in the Catholic mass and the foundational beliefs of the church that now have existed for millennia and much of which we are discussing and debating in this here thread.
As an example, since you say those guys arent Catholic, when did they start being Catholic?
I would submit none of them were Catholic. I would also submit that there was never an idea for a pope position expressed in scripture.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.
There's even people who's opinion is OSAS and no works required is a thing too. That is their opinion. In the end, they will find out if correct or not. Just a question of time.
No works required for salvation is not an opinion, but a clear and concise statement repeated often in scripture. One has to misconstrue the verses in question to arrive at a different conclusion.
That's entirely incorrect as has been demonstrated but we can continue to go through it.
Just saying unh uh no or I don't agree with verse 1-20 of examples provided won'tlikely square with the big man upstairs but as you know, He will let you know eventually.
I don't want on my soul telling and teaching people "bro, all you gotta do is have faith and OSAS…you good!"
But is is appealing as an easy way in I guess. It simply ignores all the verses I've already posted and explained that stand in the way of say some here who've said "look, I just do Hohn 3:16….im good" when even from Jesus' own mouth; as I've posted many times in many answers that y'all simply just don't like, said, there is more.
You have failed to provide a single verse - and I mean not even one - that say or suggest works are required for salvation. Sure, you've cited a lot of irrelevant verses that you claim say that, but the plain language of the text says nothing of the sort.
Whereas I've give you approximately 20 verses that say exactly what I just stated. Ephesians 2:8-9.
My friend, the only person in danger of hell is the individual that subscribes to a false gospel. Your works are filthy rags to the Lord. Isaiah 64:6. You need to get right with God, and try to understand what he says about grace.
Grace is the entire foundation of the Catholic faith. I'm 1 trillion % good on that.
You even say in your own post "sure you've provided a lot of irrelevant verses that claim that" and then you or the devil makes you ignore exactly what the words say.
I'll gladly err on the side I and the 2,000 years of Catholic teaching and Catholics are correct. What is the downside if those billions of Catholics are wrong? That the erred in teaching those around them that "God's graces saves us and yes you can never earn your way into Heaven (but can certainly commit works or actions that earn your way out), but God expects you to perform the works that demonstrate that faith to the best of their ability and here's 20ish verses that attest to it explicitly"
Only a fool would say yeah but you don't have to cuz….grace…so live your life as a temporal person doing as you please and performing no works cuz bro you goooooood, you gots the grace
Now traditional tells us every apostle was killed for their belief. I know y'all don't do tradition but assuming that's correct, if the people walking right next to Jesus and heard his own voice in their ears understood all you had to do was "get sprinkled" as you say and "believe in your heart and you'll have eternal life" why would they possibly have done that? They could have disbanded and just awaited for God to call them to eternity in Heaven with him. What fools they were to endure all that pain and be murdered for it. If only they hadn't misunderstood. Tsk tsk
Wow what a scary gamble. Not even Pascal was willing to take that gamble.
Here's a great video from a former Protestant that saw the light who maybe can better explain it in a way you can understand
He also provides great context to the verses you're misunderstanding either through stubbornness or whatever it may be which even as the Bible explicitly says, goes against sola scriptura and is why Pastor Robert can't just have a desire to read the words of the Bible in English and make as much money as possible peddling his opinions to people that will show up and line his pockets buying his books etc.
Also fascinating that we've been discussing this for weeks and this video was posted 3 days ago and you're seeing it on the 3rd day. Fascinating
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I'll stick with what the Bible says and what Christians have historically believed.
So, you've changed your position to ours, and now subscribe to scripture's multiple verses on this topic, instead of your own mistaken assumptions? Glad to hear it!
In all seriousness, Christians haven't historically believed what you are espousing. The Catholic Church has, but not Christians in general.
To be Catholic or Orthodox has been synonymous with being Christian through most of church history. I don't know whether you consider the Church Fathers to have been Catholic, but either way, they were clear on the subject of confession, just as they were on baptism and communion. See also Didache 4:14, 14:1, written in the late 1st century. "Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure."
It depends on who you are referencing. If we are talking about the apostles, no they were not Catholic or Orthodox. Moreover, many of what are considered the early church fathers were likewise not Catholic or Orthodox. As discussed previously, the current iteration of Catholicism was foreign to the apostles and early church fathers.
That said, even if we have to look at extra-biblical sources for the belief you are espousing (which is in and of itself quite telling), not even your quote above suggests that Christians, saved by Christ's blood, will lose their salvation if they do not continuously confess sins.
I think the challenge Protestants run into with the line of thinking on the lineage of the Church from the Rock is similar to the concepts of the verse "many parts / one body".
Where that argument of "those people werent Catholics" (which of course they didnt use that term in that moment) is that the direct line of Pope to Pope to Pope and what was built from those that walked with Jesus and then the Apostles all ties directly back to them.
It's not like say Martin Luther who 45 generations later decided "look, immma add a word here, potentially lead billions of people to hell (God will sort that out) by softening up the meaning of some things etc by completely deviating from what had been written and part of the liturgy of the Catholic church for 1500 years cuz i sat down and pondered it and have some new ideas".
Therein lies the danger if I were to be a Protestant, I would think. It's like is Olympus Mons a face carved on Mars or simply a mountain that looks that way from millions of miles away perspective etc. Can lead to some very flawed conclusions.
However, it is all indisputable the origins of the things that are done in the Catholic mass and the foundational beliefs of the church that now have existed for millennia and much of which we are discussing and debating in this here thread.
As an example, since you say those guys arent Catholic, when did they start being Catholic?
I would submit none of them were Catholic. I would also submit that there was never an idea for a pope position expressed in scripture.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.
There's even people who's opinion is OSAS and no works required is a thing too. That is their opinion. In the end, they will find out if correct or not. Just a question of time.
No works required for salvation is not an opinion, but a clear and concise statement repeated often in scripture. One has to misconstrue the verses in question to arrive at a different conclusion.
That's entirely incorrect as has been demonstrated but we can continue to go through it.
Just saying unh uh no or I don't agree with verse 1-20 of examples provided won'tlikely square with the big man upstairs but as you know, He will let you know eventually.
I don't want on my soul telling and teaching people "bro, all you gotta do is have faith and OSAS…you good!"
But is is appealing as an easy way in I guess. It simply ignores all the verses I've already posted and explained that stand in the way of say some here who've said "look, I just do Hohn 3:16….im good" when even from Jesus' own mouth; as I've posted many times in many answers that y'all simply just don't like, said, there is more.
You have failed to provide a single verse - and I mean not even one - that say or suggest works are required for salvation. Sure, you've cited a lot of irrelevant verses that you claim say that, but the plain language of the text says nothing of the sort.
Whereas I've give you approximately 20 verses that say exactly what I just stated. Ephesians 2:8-9.
My friend, the only person in danger of hell is the individual that subscribes to a false gospel. Your works are filthy rags to the Lord. Isaiah 64:6. You need to get right with God, and try to understand what he says about grace.
Grace is the entire foundation of the Catholic faith. I'm 1 trillion % good on that.
You even say in your own post "sure you've provided a lot of irrelevant verses that claim that" and then you or the devil makes you ignore exactly what the words say.
I'll gladly err on the side I and the 2,000 years of Catholic teaching and Catholics are correct. What is the downside if those billions of Catholics are wrong? That the erred in teaching those around them that "God's graces saves us and yes you can never earn your way into Heaven (but can certainly commit works or actions that earn your way out), but God expects you to perform the works that demonstrate that faith to the best of their ability and here's 20ish verses that attest to it explicitly"
Only a fool would say yeah but you don't have to cuz….grace…so live your life as a temporal person doing as you please and performing no works cuz bro you goooooood, you gots the grace
Now traditional tells us every apostle was killed for their belief. I know y'all don't do tradition but assuming that's correct, if the people walking right next to Jesus and heard his own voice in their ears understood all you had to do was "get sprinkled" as you say and "believe in your heart and you'll have eternal life" why would they possibly have done that? They could have disbanded and just awaited for God to call them to eternity in Heaven with him. What fools they were to endure all that pain and be murdered for it. If only they hadn't misunderstood. Tsk tsk
Wow what a scary gamble. Not even Pascal was willing to take that gamble.
Here's a great video from a former Protestant that saw the light who maybe can better explain it in a way you can understand
He also provides great context to the verses you're misunderstanding either through stubbornness or whatever it may be which even as the Bible explicitly says, goes against sola scriptura and is why Pastor Robert can't just have a desire to read the words of the Bible in English and make as much money as possible peddling his opinions to people that will show up and line his pockets buying his books etc.
Exactly zero people on this thread are making the claim bolded in your post above.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
I'll stick with what the Bible says and what Christians have historically believed.
So, you've changed your position to ours, and now subscribe to scripture's multiple verses on this topic, instead of your own mistaken assumptions? Glad to hear it!
In all seriousness, Christians haven't historically believed what you are espousing. The Catholic Church has, but not Christians in general.
To be Catholic or Orthodox has been synonymous with being Christian through most of church history. I don't know whether you consider the Church Fathers to have been Catholic, but either way, they were clear on the subject of confession, just as they were on baptism and communion. See also Didache 4:14, 14:1, written in the late 1st century. "Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure."
It depends on who you are referencing. If we are talking about the apostles, no they were not Catholic or Orthodox. Moreover, many of what are considered the early church fathers were likewise not Catholic or Orthodox. As discussed previously, the current iteration of Catholicism was foreign to the apostles and early church fathers.
That said, even if we have to look at extra-biblical sources for the belief you are espousing (which is in and of itself quite telling), not even your quote above suggests that Christians, saved by Christ's blood, will lose their salvation if they do not continuously confess sins.
I think the challenge Protestants run into with the line of thinking on the lineage of the Church from the Rock is similar to the concepts of the verse "many parts / one body".
Where that argument of "those people werent Catholics" (which of course they didnt use that term in that moment) is that the direct line of Pope to Pope to Pope and what was built from those that walked with Jesus and then the Apostles all ties directly back to them.
It's not like say Martin Luther who 45 generations later decided "look, immma add a word here, potentially lead billions of people to hell (God will sort that out) by softening up the meaning of some things etc by completely deviating from what had been written and part of the liturgy of the Catholic church for 1500 years cuz i sat down and pondered it and have some new ideas".
Therein lies the danger if I were to be a Protestant, I would think. It's like is Olympus Mons a face carved on Mars or simply a mountain that looks that way from millions of miles away perspective etc. Can lead to some very flawed conclusions.
However, it is all indisputable the origins of the things that are done in the Catholic mass and the foundational beliefs of the church that now have existed for millennia and much of which we are discussing and debating in this here thread.
As an example, since you say those guys arent Catholic, when did they start being Catholic?
I would submit none of them were Catholic. I would also submit that there was never an idea for a pope position expressed in scripture.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.
There's even people who's opinion is OSAS and no works required is a thing too. That is their opinion. In the end, they will find out if correct or not. Just a question of time.
No works required for salvation is not an opinion, but a clear and concise statement repeated often in scripture. One has to misconstrue the verses in question to arrive at a different conclusion.
That's entirely incorrect as has been demonstrated but we can continue to go through it.
Just saying unh uh no or I don't agree with verse 1-20 of examples provided won'tlikely square with the big man upstairs but as you know, He will let you know eventually.
I don't want on my soul telling and teaching people "bro, all you gotta do is have faith and OSAS…you good!"
But is is appealing as an easy way in I guess. It simply ignores all the verses I've already posted and explained that stand in the way of say some here who've said "look, I just do Hohn 3:16….im good" when even from Jesus' own mouth; as I've posted many times in many answers that y'all simply just don't like, said, there is more.
You have failed to provide a single verse - and I mean not even one - that say or suggest works are required for salvation. Sure, you've cited a lot of irrelevant verses that you claim say that, but the plain language of the text says nothing of the sort.
Whereas I've give you approximately 20 verses that say exactly what I just stated. Ephesians 2:8-9.
My friend, the only person in danger of hell is the individual that subscribes to a false gospel. Your works are filthy rags to the Lord. Isaiah 64:6. You need to get right with God, and try to understand what he says about grace.
Grace is the entire foundation of the Catholic faith. I'm 1 trillion % good on that.
You even say in your own post "sure you've provided a lot of irrelevant verses that claim that" and then you or the devil makes you ignore exactly what the words say.
I'll gladly err on the side I and the 2,000 years of Catholic teaching and Catholics are correct. What is the downside if those billions of Catholics are wrong? That the erred in teaching those around them that "God's graces saves us and yes you can never earn your way into Heaven (but can certainly commit works or actions that earn your way out), but God expects you to perform the works that demonstrate that faith to the best of their ability and here's 20ish verses that attest to it explicitly"
Only a fool would say yeah but you don't have to cuz….grace…so live your life as a temporal person doing as you please and performing no works cuz bro you goooooood, you gots the grace
Now traditional tells us every apostle was killed for their belief. I know y'all don't do tradition but assuming that's correct, if the people walking right next to Jesus and heard his own voice in their ears understood all you had to do was "get sprinkled" as you say and "believe in your heart and you'll have eternal life" why would they possibly have done that? They could have disbanded and just awaited for God to call them to eternity in Heaven with him. What fools they were to endure all that pain and be murdered for it. If only they hadn't misunderstood. Tsk tsk
Wow what a scary gamble. Not even Pascal was willing to take that gamble.
Here's a great video from a former Protestant that saw the light who maybe can better explain it in a way you can understand
He also provides great context to the verses you're misunderstanding either through stubbornness or whatever it may be which even as the Bible explicitly says, goes against sola scriptura and is why Pastor Robert can't just have a desire to read the words of the Bible in English and make as much money as possible peddling his opinions to people that will show up and line his pockets buying his books etc.
Exactly zero people on this thread are making the claim bolded in your post above.
Actually yes. Anyone that has disagreed with me on works continues to make this claim because they've and you apparently have said all you need is "sprinkling" and "believe in God" a la john 3:16.
Are you now denying this? We have a schism amongst the Protestants?
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
According to God, or man?
I think it's pretty clear in all my comments I care not of the opinion of man.
Why the dodge? All sins equal or not? and please back up your position with Bible verses.
Asking the essential question is never a dodge, deflection, or distraction. And said question went unanswered.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not aware of any video game discussion. I've not discussed as a commencing topic plenary indulgences. That seems to be your or someone else's topic that you have a passion for. We can do it of course but there's plenty of other chicken on the bone for what we are healthily discussing thus far. And then you also seem to be saying all sins are equal. So I said:
Defend your position
You started (or someone not me) that topic so I said, ok sure, defend it even with sola scriptura and I'll entertain the discussion so…
Ball in your court. Your 2 topics seem to be plenary indulgences and all sins are created equal.
Lay out a defense and I'll respond. But don't ask I defend "against" your opinion while you haven't defended your assertion you want me to discuss that I'm not even really discussing as a commencing topic.
We can get to it eventually later if you refuse to defend your opinion. Could be weeks or months. Matters not.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not aware of any video game discussion. I've not discussed as a commencing topic plenary indulgences. That seems to be your or someone else's topic that you have a passion for. We can do it of course but there's plenty of other chicken on the bone for what we are healthily discussing thus far. And then you also seem to be saying all sins are equal. So I said:
Defend your position
You started (or someone not me) that topic so I said, ok sure, defend it even with sola scriptura and I'll entertain the discussion so…
Ball in your court. Your 2 topics seem to be plenary indulgences and all sins are created equal.
Lay out a defense and I'll respond. But don't ask I defend "against" your opinion while you haven't defended your assertion you want me to discuss that I'm not even really discussing as a commencing topic.
We can get to it eventually later if you refuse to defend your opinion. Could be weeks or months. Matters not.
The video games are one of the current (or recent) plenary indulgences. So, if you abstain from video games for a while, then you can get punished less for your sins after you die. I would like for you to provide actual scriptural support for that concept.
All sin is the same because all sin, and any sin, is sufficient to separate us from God. No one can say "my sin is not as bad as someone else's sin." I cannot say, for example, that my sin is less sinful than the sin of a murderer, even though I have never murdered someone. There is only one ultimate consequence of sin, and that is death. This certainly does not seem fair or just, for wouldn't the sins of a murder or a rapist or a child molester, or a terrorist seem greater than my sin of bitterness or envy or lust? Nevertheless, the same sacrifice was required for my sins as was required for the sins of a murder. God's grace is not "fair" from a human perspective, and that is what makes it grace.
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not aware of any video game discussion. I've not discussed as a commencing topic plenary indulgences. That seems to be your or someone else's topic that you have a passion for. We can do it of course but there's plenty of other chicken on the bone for what we are healthily discussing thus far. And then you also seem to be saying all sins are equal. So I said:
Defend your position
You started (or someone not me) that topic so I said, ok sure, defend it even with sola scriptura and I'll entertain the discussion so…
Ball in your court. Your 2 topics seem to be plenary indulgences and all sins are created equal.
Lay out a defense and I'll respond. But don't ask I defend "against" your opinion while you haven't defended your assertion you want me to discuss that I'm not even really discussing as a commencing topic.
We can get to it eventually later if you refuse to defend your opinion. Could be weeks or months. Matters not.
The video games are one of the current (or recent) plenary indulgences. So, if you abstain from video games for a while, then you can get punished less for your sins after you die. I would like for you to provide actual scriptural support for that concept.
All sin is the same because all sin, and any sin, is sufficient to separate us from God. No one can say "my sin is not as bad as someone else's sin." I cannot say, for example, that my sin is less sinful than the sin of a murderer, even though I have never murdered someone. There is only one ultimate consequence of sin, and that is death. This certainly does not seem fair or just, for wouldn't the sins of a murder or a rapist or a child molester, or a terrorist seem greater than my sin of bitterness or envy or lust? Nevertheless, the same sacrifice was required for my sins as was required for the sins of a murder. God's grace is not "fair" from a human perspective, and that is what makes it grace.
I don't know anything about video games so have no desire to engage that topic.
Read my last post on the topic and then decide how you want to proceed. 5th attempt. Still no verses. That is the key to get engagement from me. Appreciate your opinion on it though. Seems you spent some time developing it in your mind
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not aware of any video game discussion. I've not discussed as a commencing topic plenary indulgences. That seems to be your or someone else's topic that you have a passion for. We can do it of course but there's plenty of other chicken on the bone for what we are healthily discussing thus far. And then you also seem to be saying all sins are equal. So I said:
Defend your position
You started (or someone not me) that topic so I said, ok sure, defend it even with sola scriptura and I'll entertain the discussion so…
Ball in your court. Your 2 topics seem to be plenary indulgences and all sins are created equal.
Lay out a defense and I'll respond. But don't ask I defend "against" your opinion while you haven't defended your assertion you want me to discuss that I'm not even really discussing as a commencing topic.
We can get to it eventually later if you refuse to defend your opinion. Could be weeks or months. Matters not.
The video games are one of the current (or recent) plenary indulgences. So, if you abstain from video games for a while, then you can get punished less for your sins after you die. I would like for you to provide actual scriptural support for that concept.
All sin is the same because all sin, and any sin, is sufficient to separate us from God. No one can say "my sin is not as bad as someone else's sin." I cannot say, for example, that my sin is less sinful than the sin of a murderer, even though I have never murdered someone. There is only one ultimate consequence of sin, and that is death. This certainly does not seem fair or just, for wouldn't the sins of a murder or a rapist or a child molester, or a terrorist seem greater than my sin of bitterness or envy or lust? Nevertheless, the same sacrifice was required for my sins as was required for the sins of a murder. God's grace is not "fair" from a human perspective, and that is what makes it grace.
I don't know anything about video games so have no desire to engage that topic.
Read my last post on the topic and then decide how you want to proceed. 5th attempt. Still no verses. That is the key to get engagement from me. Appreciate your opinion on it though. Seems you spent some time developing it in your mind
I have paraphrased the relevant verses in my post above. You did not recognize them?
Video games are just a concrete example, but you can provide scriptural support for the concept of Christians getting punished for their sins less after they die by doing something before they die. Jesus didn't tell the thief on the cross, "Truly I say to you, today you will be in purgatory and at some point after that you will be in paradise with me. This whole indulgences concept seems to be an affront to Christ's sacrifice.
This is why there’s been a tremendous loss of public respect for mainstream evangelical institutions. Wheaton shows once again that evangelicals are a day late and a dollar short, still acting like it’s 2022 when the rest of the world has moved on. pic.twitter.com/FmSFeT9TNM
"If we confess, he will forgive." It's hard not to see the suggestion that if we don't, he won't.
Sure there is, especially when read in context with the other verses pointed out on this thread. You're making an assumption that is unwarranted instead of trying to understand what the plain language of the text says.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9
The plainest reading is that this is a conditional statement. You'd really have to stretch to make it mean anything else.
The stretch is suggesting that continual confession is required of the Christian to avoid Hell - a position not stated anywhere in scripture.
Confession and repentance at the moment of salvation are indeed required. But there simply is no support that the Christian saved by Christ's grace must continually confess to avoid Hell. This is you once again making unwarranted assumptions not included in the text.
True. It is also true that a Christian will continue to confess sins because he or she will continue to sin. A retired pastor in our church characterized it by saying that he didn't sin any less than he did when he was younger, but he confessed his sins faster. What a distorted view of the love of God to think that if you, as a follower of Jesus, die without having confessed a particular sin you are condemned to separation from God. What a weak Gospel that would be.
Some of the hubris of some of these posts from allegedly knowledgeable people amazes me.
As has been clear in all my posts, my preference is to educate myself on what the Bible says, the traditions we are called explicitly in the Bible to follow and what was written, taught and explained by those that walked with Jesus and the generations immediately thereafter.
Then you have someone with so much pride say essentially "if that's what God means, wow that's super weak!"
And imagine that being your opinion and then you come to find out at your judgement, 1) you are wrong and 2) that is what God meant. Yikes!
Wow. What a scary prideful position to put oneself in.
Thus far in my engagement of this thread I've mainly seen Catholics, or people in a Way being Catholic apologists and orthodox-type thought people saying here here here and here Jesus says you must do these things and then you see the Protestants / Baptist's saying, nah all you have to do is have an event, confess Jesus is Lord and trust me…you good. You're OSAS. Hitler was baptized as we understand it. Likely confessed Jesus is Lord in his childhood.
That is one frightful view of one's and one's family's potential eternal salvation. One could say it may even be inspired by the devil "hey there Protestant, the stuff the Catholics point you to in the Bible and written by learned scholars of the faith 1500 years before blessed Luther say you have to do this but don't worry, you really don't, Jesus lied or it's not what he meant when you read it plainly, just John 3:16it and you good man"
Man that would scare me to hope I could ignore all those verses just because I found one that, if I ignore the rest of the New Testament, I guess I'm good. I don't even have to work at it.Heaven is so easy to attain. Most people make it to heaven (despite, again, what Jesus said explicitly) Just say I believe and truly believe in your heart and you get Heaven. It's so simple. Yet completely anathema to so many verses in the Bible that I've already posted as nauseum
I wish one well, but when ones moment comes, can't imagine one wouldn't think, "wow I hope ignoring all those other things was the way. Please be the way"
Maybe they'll think about Ol freedombeer and some considerations he suggested from my many many hours studying and reading and learning before it's too late.
It is not hubris, but humility, to admit that one continues to sin and to observe that one confesses those sins more quickly than he has in the past.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
So you're saying all sins are equal? None worse than the other?
Of course. Sin is not a continuous variable, it is a binary variable.
1) Rape = lie?
2) still no scripture to back up your opinion? Teach me.
You first.
Find me something in the New Testament that says you can avoid punishment for sins by making a cash payment, or, in lieu of cash, avoiding video games.
Find me something in the New Testament that says a Christian must confess sins to a priest who serves as an intermediary between God and Christians in order to be forgiven.
Find me something in the New Testament that distinguishes between mortal sins and venial sins.
Attempt 3, Still no verse backing up your position.
Ok this topic is closed. You're, as always, entitled to your opinion.
Nope, I have sufficient scriptural support for my position, and will be glad to provide it in response to your scriptural support for the positions of the Vatican describes above.
I've provided countless verses at this point on many topics . Defend your position. You've provided none. Now people can disagree with my defense on other topics as Mothra and some others are trying to do. But if you want to enter the discourse, you gotta ante up.
Your move. Or I'm happy to continue entertaining the other discussions we're having.
You have not given one verse that says it is a thing if I don't play video games for a while that I will be punished for my sins less after I die.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not aware of any video game discussion. I've not discussed as a commencing topic plenary indulgences. That seems to be your or someone else's topic that you have a passion for. We can do it of course but there's plenty of other chicken on the bone for what we are healthily discussing thus far. And then you also seem to be saying all sins are equal. So I said:
Defend your position
You started (or someone not me) that topic so I said, ok sure, defend it even with sola scriptura and I'll entertain the discussion so…
Ball in your court. Your 2 topics seem to be plenary indulgences and all sins are created equal.
Lay out a defense and I'll respond. But don't ask I defend "against" your opinion while you haven't defended your assertion you want me to discuss that I'm not even really discussing as a commencing topic.
We can get to it eventually later if you refuse to defend your opinion. Could be weeks or months. Matters not.
The video games are one of the current (or recent) plenary indulgences. So, if you abstain from video games for a while, then you can get punished less for your sins after you die. I would like for you to provide actual scriptural support for that concept.
All sin is the same because all sin, and any sin, is sufficient to separate us from God. No one can say "my sin is not as bad as someone else's sin." I cannot say, for example, that my sin is less sinful than the sin of a murderer, even though I have never murdered someone. There is only one ultimate consequence of sin, and that is death. This certainly does not seem fair or just, for wouldn't the sins of a murder or a rapist or a child molester, or a terrorist seem greater than my sin of bitterness or envy or lust? Nevertheless, the same sacrifice was required for my sins as was required for the sins of a murder. God's grace is not "fair" from a human perspective, and that is what makes it grace.
I don't know anything about video games so have no desire to engage that topic.
Read my last post on the topic and then decide how you want to proceed. 5th attempt. Still no verses. That is the key to get engagement from me. Appreciate your opinion on it though. Seems you spent some time developing it in your mind
I have paraphrased the relevant verses in my post above. You did not recognize them?
Video games are just a concrete example, but you can provide scriptural support for the concept of Christians getting punished for their sins less after they die by doing something before they die. Jesus didn't tell the thief on the cross, "Truly I say to you, today you will be in purgatory and at some point after that you will be in paradise with me. This whole indulgences concept seems to be an affront to Christ's sacrifice.
lol. Bruh. Book chapter and verse. Lay it on me. Defend your position. You can't do it?
This is why there’s been a tremendous loss of public respect for mainstream evangelical institutions. Wheaton shows once again that evangelicals are a day late and a dollar short, still acting like it’s 2022 when the rest of the world has moved on. pic.twitter.com/FmSFeT9TNM
