You'll do better without your head.
Mysterious Smiley Face Appears in Hawaiian Volcano During Eruption
ECT There is only one Gospel
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Mysterious Smiley Face Appears in Hawaiian Volcano During Eruption
It's a good thing I was reconciled while dead in my trespasses and sin.
You throw the baby out with the bathwater because of your myopic, negative, immature experience (you were the problem, not traditional, church supported Christianity, or else it was your fringe vs biblical easy believism that was the problem). Exegesis of Scripture (which you are not doing) still trumps your subjective, imperfect, anecdotal experience.... so don't pat yourself on the back... Cults like JWs also wrongly quote your proof text to justify their minority wrong views. It is a logical fallacy to think majority is always right, but it is also not always wrong.
What is your shoe size?
etc.
I leave the details to the Judge (Gen. 18:25), but if someone rejects and renounces Christ and is no different than their former state of godless unbelief, they are not a believer by definition (unbelieving believer is a contradiction in terms, oxymoron).
You divorce salvation from ongoing relationship and being in Christ, the condition for eternal life (since it is in Him alone, not apart from Him I Jn. 5:11-13 present, continuous tenses). You seem to reduce it to an irreversible metaphysical change parallel to physical birth. In reality, it is a reciprocal love relationship, not an unconditional zapping. Past sins can be dealt with, but this does not preclude the possibility of heinous future sins, including blasphemy, that cannot be swept under the carpet by a holy God (judgment starts with the house of God; Ananias and Sapp were struck down; I Cor. and I Jn. has temporal judgment of believer's sin by death).
Unbelief puts one outside of Christ and is the antithesis of saving faith, so the new reality of apostasy brings in new contingencies if persisted in.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
How does your sin keep coming back alive on a daily basis if you've reckoned it as dead?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Nang
TOL Subscriber
"Dead" is not defined as non-existent.
"Dead" is defined as non-functional.
Justification is divine pardon from the guilt of sin; not an erasure or elimination of sin. Sin remains part of the Adamic human nature, but faith and repentance in the last Adam, Jesus Christ, can limit its control over a soul. Faith and repentance only come as granted gifts from God the Holy Spirit.
II Timothy 2:25; Acts 3:26, 5:31, 11:18; Ephesians 2:8-10; Galatians 3:14,26, 6:3
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
If you have reckoned it dead, why do you ever unreckon it dead?
Do you have a bee in your bonnet? You are out of step with mainline, orthodox prooftexting, in the context of sound, Biblical hermeneutics. You are muddying the waters, and your exegesis/eisegesis is based on faulty constructs, and your cult is a modern sect, not accepted by most credible biblical scholars, and has been rejected by most credible biblical commentaries.Zeal without knowledge is not good. Sincerity does not create truth. Are you sure you are not a closet Calvinist? Your traditions of men has blinded you to balanced truth, as you cannot see the baby through the trees. You should not throw out the trees with the bath water.Within the evangelical, biblical tradition are a variety of non-essential views that can cause division, but few are as presumptious as you to attack our exegesis over controversial issues or nuances of articulation/understanding. Not uncritically accepting your personal, subjective views of some proof texts is indefensible, and does not shed light on your proof texts, as you filter it through your preconceived MAD presuppositions, which is inconsistent with orthodox Christianity, and is problematic. I will continue to clarify my beliefs in the face of Ad Hominem attacks, misrepresentation , and sweeping/hasty/broad generalizations(even as Paul and the Jesus Christ did), in the broader context of other relevant passages. Rejecting your proof texting out of context is not the same thing as rejecting the truth of the Lord Jesus' words in light of the rest of the word of God, as that is substantial, not presumption.A wrong assumption leads to wrong conclusions. It is a challenge to not retain preconceived ideas that cloud our understanding of all the relevant verses, not just proof texts.Doctrinal truths are often couched in historical settings. We need to find out what the passage means to the original audience, in light of church history, and mainline, orthodox theology. In sum, we should not allow cultural biases, preconceived notions,and figures of speech/wooden theological literalisms,subjective opinions, etc., blind us to diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive views, and morsels of balanced Bible truth, as the challenge is to not let our preconceived eisegeses distort our exegesis.
Genesis-Revelation, etc.
[What sin :freak: Johnny] Sit.
1 Jn 1:8
Johnny? That's Mr. Johnny to you,San Fran Brucie. Sodomy is a sin.
[What sin, :freak: Johnny.] Sodomy is a sin.
:yawn: It is (Eph 4:14). :idea:
The wickedness of Sodom ([Ex 20:14]
See:
1 Jn 3:8-10 MacArthur
Johnny? That's Mr. Johnny to you,San Fran Brucie. Sodomy is a sin.:yawn: It is (Eph 4:14). :idea:
The wickedness of Sodom ([Ex 20:14]heterosexual [Lev. 20:10–12] or homosexual [Lev. 20:10,13]) was notorious (Gen. 13:13).
See:
1 Jn 3:8-10 MacArthur
[What sin, :freak: Johnny] Sodomy is a sin.
:yawn: It is (Eph 4:14). :idea:
2 Cor. 5:15
Last edited:
I placed SD on ignore a while back and I'm happy I did.