Are there Christians today who minimize the consequences of sin and ignore morality on some level?

[Bible Highlighter]

Are there Christians today who minimize the consequences of sin and ignore morality on some level?

You know, are there believers today who treat serious sins (like murder, hate, adultery, theft, etc.) as if it was like we spilled a glass of milk before God?

I would have to answer both of these questions with a "yes."

Why? Well,, when I hear certain believers speak about sin: It makes it sound like God is saying this to them when they sin:

GOD:

"Aw, that's okay, my child. You just spilled a little milk. I can clean that up. It is not that big of a deal."​

To me, that is what it sounds like whenever hear certain Christians say that a believer can abide in unrepentant sin like (lusting after a woman or lying) and still be saved (as long as they have a belief on Jesus).

They say a believer will be chastised. But is that really a form of punishment? Do not even unbelievers go thru the same challenges as unbelievers?

Is not a "Sin and still be saved" type of belief minimizing sin and ignoring morality on some level?

Is not God good?

Why would God allow His people to get away with doing evil?

Does the work of Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and ascension really undo a person's current rebellion against God?

Why would God allow evil and rebellious people into God's Kingdom?
Why doesn't God just save everyone then?

Anyways, please answer the main question of the thread and cast your vote in the poll.

Thank you for reading.
And may God's love shine upon you.

...

 

[bcbsr]

Are there Christians today who minimize the consequences of sin and ignore morality on some level?

You know, are there believers today who treat serious sins (like murder, hate, adultery, theft, etc.) as if it was like we spilled a glass of milk before God?

I would have to answer both of these questions with a "yes."

Why? Well,, when I hear certain believers speak about sin: It makes it sound like God is saying this to them when they sin:

GOD:

"Aw, that's okay, my child. You just spilled a little milk. I can clean that up. It is not that big of a deal."​

To me, that is what it sounds like whenever hear certain Christians say that a believer can abide in unrepentant sin like (lusting after a woman or lying) and still be saved (as long as they have a belief on Jesus).

They say a believer will be chastised. But is that really a form of punishment? Do not even unbelievers go thru the same challenges as unbelievers?

Is not a "Sin and still be saved" type of belief minimizing sin and ignoring morality on some level?

Is not God good?

Why would God allow His people to get away with doing evil?

Does the work of Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and ascension really undo a person's current rebellion against God?

Why would God allow evil and rebellious people into God's Kingdom?
Why doesn't God just save everyone then?

Anyways, please answer the main question of the thread and cast your vote in the poll.

Thank you for reading.
And may God's love shine upon you.

...

Elsewhere you yourself have indicated that a person can sin and still be saved. You yourself have elsewhere made a distinction between "venial" sins and "mortal" sins.

So let me ask you -
Have you ever sinned?
If yes, then after you sinned did you lose your salvation?
Is your answer consistent with what you have said previously?
If you feel free to do so, let us know how frequently you sin.

With such a scenario (unless you're into perfect sinlessness), what is the basis of your hope of getting to heaven?

Isn't it based upon your ongoing behavior, and thus uncertain and so no hope or joy that you'll make it in the end?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Elsewhere you yourself have indicated that a person can sin and still be saved. You yourself have elsewhere made a distinction between "venial" sins and "mortal" sins.

So let me ask you -
Have you ever sinned?
If yes, then after you sinned did you lose your salvation?
Is your answer consistent with what you have said previously?
If you feel free to do so, let us know how frequently you sin.

With such a scenario (unless you're into perfect sinlessness), what is the basis of your hope of getting to heaven?

Isn't it based upon your ongoing behavior, and thus uncertain and so no hope or joy that you'll make it in the end?

So that just gets you off the hook, right? You can do evil and be in God's good graces? A play on words of what I said can now allow you to do evil in God's good name? Surely not.

In fact, if one believes that they are a sinner, will they not act like a sinner and have the attitude of a sinner? However, if one believes they are a saint, will they not be more partial to act like a saint? Granted, I am not saying one can be a saint or live holy without the transforming regenerative power of God. But if one thinks they are a sinner by saying that their fellow brother is one (with no real evidence), then that means they are saying they are a sinner, too. This is a big problem because saints are to live righteously and not sinfully. Yes, a believer may commit hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12), but this is not the same as committing willful grevious sin (like lying, murder, and theft) whereby there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 10:26).

First, nowhere in Scripture does it say that faithful believers in Jesus Christ are called sinners in the present tense. Sure, I know of a few verses that you can no doubt misinterpret (or misread) whereby you might think it says that, but it would not be supported by the context and the rest of Scripture. Second, when a person is born again they are a new creature in Christ and the old man and the old things of their life have passed away (2 Corinthians 5:17) (Ephesians 2:2-3). This old life that has past away would include one living in a life style of sin. Jesus says be ye perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48). How can you be a sinner and also perfect? Doesn't make any sense. Also, Jesus told the man (he healed) to sin no more. In fact, Jesus said if he were to sin again, a worse thing were to come upon him (John 5:14). Now, if Jesus believed that this man could not stop sinning as you propose (because nobody can stop sinning - hence in your view everyone is a sinner), then Jesus would have in effect be lying to this man or He would have been playing a cruel joke on him. Also, the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5).

But to answer your question: Am I a sinner?

The Bible says that I am righteous if I live righteously (See 1 John 3:7). The Bible tells me to walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh (Romans 8:1). Seeing I do these things, I am not a sinner day in and day out. Sin does not control my life. God and His good things control my life. I focus on the good things of God and not sin (like I used to). Also, God's grace is there for us to be cleansed, too. Not as a license for us to sin, but His grace is there for us to overcome sin and or to be cleansed if we may stumble on occasion. Oh, and when I mean stumble, it is not an ongoing state of stumbling.

For example: Is an ex alcoholic who stumbled (on rare occasions) on his road to recovery in being sober mean he is still an alcoholic? Surely not. If one has been reformed, their past does not determine their future. Especially if God forgives our past sins that we confess and forsake.

Now, you are probably thinking,

"Ah ha, I got you!
You said that you do not commit sins unto death but you said nothing about sins that do not lead unto death." ​

That is because the type of sin that does not lead unto death is NOT in view when Jesus, Paul, and others are talking about "sinners." Also, 1 John 5:16-18 is ultimately talking about confessed sin and not hidden or secret faults (Although it can be expanded to include them - But in this case, they are minor faults and not "grevious sin" (like murder, etc.) that would define a person as a "sinner." However, if you are a stickler for words, you have to realize that the Bible also does have homonyms within it; In other words, just because there are words that have the same name does not mean they are talking about the same exact thing; For example: The name or words "sons of God" can refer to both angels and believers).

In any event, I hope this helps.
May God's love shine upon you.
And please be well.


....

 

[alexandriaisburning]

Why would God allow evil and rebellious people into God's Kingdom?

Aren't we all evil and rebellious?

Why doesn't God just save everyone then?

I happen to think that God's love will ultimately result in the reconciliation of all. This doesn't have to do with how "moral" people are or have been, but with how loving God is, and how adamant that God's good purposes in creation are finally realized.

 

[bcbsr]

So that just gets you off the hook, right? You can do evil and be in God's good graces? A play on words of what I said can now allow you to do evil in God's good name? Surely not.

In fact, if one believes that they are a sinner, will they not act like a sinner and have the attitude of a sinner? However, if one believes they are a saint, will they not be more partial to act like a saint? Granted, I am not saying one can be a saint or live holy without the transforming regenerative power of God. But if one thinks they are a sinner by saying that their fellow brother is one (with no real evidence), then that means they are saying they are a sinner, too. This is a big problem because saints are to live righteously and not sinfully. Yes, a believer may commit hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12), but this is not the same as committing willful grevious sin (like lying, murder, and theft) whereby there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 10:26).

First, nowhere in Scripture does it say that faithful believers in Jesus Christ are called sinners in the present tense. Sure, I know of a few verses that you can no doubt misinterpret (or misread) whereby you might think it says that, but it would not be supported by the context and the rest of Scripture. Second, when a person is born again they are a new creature in Christ and the old man and the old things of their life have passed away (2 Corinthians 5:17) (Ephesians 2:2-3). This old life that has past away would include one living in a life style of sin. Jesus says be ye perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48). How can you be a sinner and also perfect? Doesn't make any sense. Also, Jesus told the man (he healed) to sin no more. In fact, Jesus said if he were to sin again, a worse thing were to come upon him (John 5:14). Now, if Jesus believed that this man could not stop sinning as you propose (because nobody can stop sinning - hence in your view everyone is a sinner), then Jesus would have in effect be lying to this man or He would have been playing a cruel joke on him. Also, the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5).

But to answer your question: Am I a sinner?

The Bible says that I am righteous if I live righteously (See 1 John 3:7). The Bible tells me to walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh (Romans 8:1). Seeing I do these things, I am not a sinner day in and day out. Sin does not control my life. God and His good things control my life. I focus on the good things of God and not sin (like I used to). Also, God's grace is there for us to be cleansed, too. Not as a license for us to sin, but His grace is there for us to overcome sin and or to be cleansed if we may stumble on occasion. Oh, and when I mean stumble, it is not an ongoing state of stumbling.

For example: Is an ex alcoholic who stumbled (on rare occasions) on his road to recovery in being sober mean he is still an alcoholic? Surely not. If one has been reformed, their past does not determine their future. Especially if God forgives our past sins that we confess and forsake.

Now, you are probably thinking,

"Ah ha, I got you!
You said that you do not commit sins unto death but you said nothing about sins that do not lead unto death." ​

That is because the type of sin that does not lead unto death is NOT in view when Jesus, Paul, and others are talking about "sinners." Also, 1 John 5:16-18 is ultimately talking about confessed sin and not hidden or secret faults (Although it can be expanded to include them - But in this case, they are minor faults and not "grevious sin" (like murder, etc.) that would define a person as a "sinner." However, if you are a stickler for words, you have to realize that the Bible also does have homonyms within it; In other words, just because there are words that have the same name does not mean they are talking about the same exact thing; For example: The name or words "sons of God" can refer to both angels and believers).

In any event, I hope this helps.
May God's love shine upon you.
And please be well.


....

Jason,

Your diatribe doesn't speak to the questions I asked. You say "But to answer your question: Am I a sinner?" That's not the question I asked. Seems you're in need of some basic reading comprehension skills. Maybe you can take a remedial reading course to help you understand what other people are saying.

You bring up the terminology that "a believer may commit hidden or secret faults." Then let me ask you this, using your own terminology, have you committed non-hidden, non-secret faults? If so, how frequently? And do you lose your salvation when you commit non-hidden, non-secret faults? Or is it only you who keep your alleged salvation status and no one else when they commit such sins? Do you judge others who do the same as you, and not judge yourself?

Let's take slander, for example. Let's say you falsely accused someone of using the soteriology of OSAS as an excuse to live a lifestyle of sin, bearing false witness against your neighbor. Is such slander a hidden, secret sin or a non-hidden non-secret sin? Consider that "slanderers" are one of the categories of people the Bible says does not inherit the kingdom of God.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Aren't we all evil and rebellious?

No. The 144,000 are found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5). That means if they can be found without fault before the throne of God, then so can you. There is nothing magical or more special about them than you. For it is God that works in us to overcome sin.

I happen to think that God's love will ultimately result in the reconciliation of all. This doesn't have to do with how "moral" people are or have been, but with how loving God is, and how adamant that God's good purposes in creation are finally realized.

If believers are not living morally or righteously then they are showing that Christ does not live within them. Granted, they may be on the road to overcoming their sin thru confessing and forsaking their sin with God's help and the help of His people, but if one does not care about how they live it shows that they do not care about what is truly good like God does. Jesus says we will know false prophets (i.e. false believers) by their fruit. Fruits are deeds. So if one does evil, they are showing forth their true colors that they do not know the Lord (Who is the source of our salvation).


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Jason,

Your diatribe doesn't speak to the questions I asked. You say "But to answer your question: Am I a sinner?" That's not the question I asked. Seems you're in need of some basic reading comprehension skills. Maybe you can take a remedial reading course to help you understand what other people are saying.

You bring up the terminology that "a believer may commit hidden or secret faults." Then let me ask you this, using your own terminology, have you committed non-hidden, non-secret faults? If so, how frequently? And do you lose your salvation when you commit non-hidden, non-secret faults? Or is it only you who keep your alleged salvation status and no one else when they commit such sins? Do you judge others who do the same as you, and not judge yourself?

First, my question and answer was to address the heart of your questions overall. The major focus of your questions is to get me to admit that I am sinner? Yes, or no? For do you not believe that salvation is nothing that you do, right?

Second, I do not believe in every case that a believer instantly loses their salvation the nano second they sin. I believe in some cases, God will first try to convict them to repent of their sins by the Spirit. If that doesn't work, then their salvation is at risk, and God will then employ chastisement to bring them back to living righteously if they are a son and not a bastard. But there are cases whereby believers have been instantly killed physically and sent to hell immediately. Ananais and Saphirra are two examples of this. For fear and not peace (i.e. peace that they were in God's Kingdom) had fell upon the church and all who heard of how they were killed.

As for hidden or secret faults: I do not think you realize what they actually are. Hidden faults is something that you are not aware of. Hence, the words "hidden faults." These are minor transgressions that do not lead unto the Second Death or the Lake of Fire. Now, there are other minor transgressions that a believer can be easily be aware of, too. For example: Let's say you didn't take out the trash last week, when you knew you should have. For he that knows to do good and he does it not, to him it is sin. But again, are minor transgressions like this mentioned among the list of sins in the Bible that will cause one to be cast into the Lake of Fire? No.

The Bible lists certain sins that do lead unto the Second Death which is the Lake of Fire. In Revelation 21:8, we see sins like murder, whoremongering, idolatry, and lying that will cause a person to be cast into the Lake of Fire. Paul lists similar sins several times that will cause a person not to inherit the Kingdom of God or whereby the Wrath of God abides on them.

Let's take slander, for example. Let's say you falsely accused someone of using the soteriology of OSAS as an excuse to live a lifestyle of sin, bearing false witness against your neighbor. Is such slander a hidden, secret sin or a non-hidden non-secret sin? Consider that "slanderers" are one of the categories of people the Bible says does not inherit the kingdom of God.

First, I am not accusing ALL people who believe in Once Saved Always Saved as thinking they have a license to sin (And I have made mention of this several times on this forum and other ones). I know of a fellow brother (who is a good friend of mine) who believes in a form of Eternal Security that says that you must live holy in order for OSAS to be true. If you are not living holy then you were never born again to begin with. Granted, I do not agree with his belief, but I will not push the issue too much with him because he is a close friend and he does not justify living in sin on some level (like the more popular versions of OSAS).

Second, this is not my first rodeo in talking against the most popular versions of Once Saved Always Saved or Eternal Security. I have discussed this topic for many, many years and I have gotten to know all the Eternal Security Proponent's false arguments and beliefs very well. The two most popular versions of Eternal Security or Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) are:

Eternal Security Type #1:
A believer can sin and still be saved (And it does not matter how they live or what kind of sins they commit).

Eternal Security Type #2:
A believer is supposed to generally live a holy life (or they are not true believers), but dying in one or two unrepentant sins like lying or lusting after a woman does not mean that one is not saved.​

In fact, I remember one time talking with someone who claimed to be a Christian who thought that they could mow down a crowd of people with sub machine gun and still be saved. This would be the type of Christian who identifies as being of the belief of the Eternal Security Type #1 above. I have also encountered this type of believer online many times, as well; And let's just say they were not nice or Christ like in any way. They called me some pretty bad names (Because the forum was loose with their rules back then). But this just lets me know that they were not of God. For they had nothing nice to ever say towards me. They were always seeking to attack me and tear me down (even when I did not attack them personally). For my goal is to attack the belief and not the person when I have these types of discussions. So the scenario that you are describing of me judging another for them believing in a doctrine of immorality personaly is very rare. I usually speak in a third person kind of way. If a person speaks up and say they do not believe in justifying sin in any way, then there is no reason they should ever be accused falsey by me (on those very rare rare occasions I might imply that they believe in the OSAS version that justifies sin). But if they give me the run a round and do not give me straight answers all the time, chances are they believe in some kind of doctrine of immorality. But again, my focus of attack is their belief and not them personally. For I am commanded to pray for my enemies and to do good unto them. Yes, there was one or two times I recall whereby a person believed like my friend, and I apologized to them openly. But this type of belief is very rare among Eternal Security Proponents. Most justify living in sin on some level (Which is wrong).

As for committing the sin of slander: Yes, this is a sin that leads to the Lake of Fire. However, a true believer or son of God will be convicted by the Spirit to repent of this sin. If they persist in this sin, they then put at risk their salvation and will be chastised by God ONLY if they are a son (who will return to God thru repentance of their sin) and not if they are bastard (who prefers their sin over God).


...

 

[alexandriaisburning]

No. The 144,000 are found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5).

I'm not sure I understand the connection between "without fault" and "morality". That is a connection that you are making...not one that is necessarily implied by the text.

That means if they can be found without fault before the throne of God, then so can you. There is nothing magical or more special about them than you. For it is God that works in us to overcome sin.

Still don't understand the basis upon which you are equating "sin" with "morality". Again, this is an assumption that you are forcing to support your point; but it is an assumption that has yet to be demonstrated as valid.

If believers are not living morally or righteously then they are showing that Christ does not live within them.

AGAIN, what does "morality" have to do with "showing that Christ lives in them"? Morality is a human contrivance; the content of a culture's common morality may or may not be meaningfully associated with what it means to be "righteous".

 

[Gabriel Anton]

Peace be with you.

Are there Christians today who minimize the consequences of sin and ignore morality on some level?

Yes. I think those Christians have missed and not understood the Word of God altogether. I would say that the devil and the power of darkness have done an excellent job in bringing this about by taking advantage of the weakness of mortal man. The proof is in the pudding.

God bless you.

 

[bcbsr]

First, my question and answer was to address the heart of your questions overall. The major focus of your questions is to get me to admit that I am sinner? Yes, or no? For do you not believe that salvation is nothing that you do, right?

Second, I do not believe in every case that a believer instantly loses their salvation the nano second they sin. I believe in some cases, God will first try to convict them to repent of their sins by the Spirit. If that doesn't work, then their salvation is at risk, and God will then employ chastisement to bring them back to living righteously if they are a son and not a bastard. But there are cases whereby believers have been instantly killed physically and sent to hell immediately. Ananais and Saphirra are two examples of this. For fear and not peace (i.e. peace that they were in God's Kingdom) had fell upon the church and all who heard of how they were killed.

As for hidden or secret faults: I do not think you realize what they actually are. Hidden faults is something that you are not aware of. Hence, the words "hidden faults." These are minor transgressions that do not lead unto the Second Death or the Lake of Fire. Now, there are other minor transgressions that a believer can be easily be aware of, too. For example: Let's say you didn't take out the trash last week, when you knew you should have. For he that knows to do good and he does it not, to him it is sin. But again, are minor transgressions like this mentioned among the list of sins in the Bible that will cause one to be cast into the Lake of Fire? No.

The Bible lists certain sins that do lead unto the Second Death which is the Lake of Fire. In Revelation 21:8, we see sins like murder, whoremongering, idolatry, and lying that will cause a person to be cast into the Lake of Fire. Paul lists similar sins several times that will cause a person not to inherit the Kingdom of God or whereby the Wrath of God abides on them.



First, I am not accusing ALL people who believe in Once Saved Always Saved as thinking they have a license to sin (And I have made mention of this several times on this forum and other ones). I know of a fellow brother (who is a good friend of mine) who believes in a form of Eternal Security that says that you must live holy in order for OSAS to be true. If you are not living holy then you were never born again to begin with. Granted, I do not agree with his belief, but I will not push the issue too much with him because he is a close friend and he does not justify living in sin on some level (like the more popular versions of OSAS).

Second, this is not my first rodeo in talking against the most popular versions of Once Saved Always Saved or Eternal Security. I have discussed this topic for many, many years and I have gotten to know all the Eternal Security Proponent's false arguments and beliefs very well. The two most popular versions of Eternal Security or Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) are:

Eternal Security Type #1:
A believer can sin and still be saved (And it does not matter how they live or what kind of sins they commit).

Eternal Security Type #2:
A believer is supposed to generally live a holy life (or they are not true believers), but dying in one or two unrepentant sins like lying or lusting after a woman does not mean that one is not saved.​

In fact, I remember one time talking with someone who claimed to be a Christian who thought that they could mow down a crowd of people with sub machine gun and still be saved. This would be the type of Christian who identifies as being of the belief of the Eternal Security Type #1 above. I have also encountered this type of believer online many times, as well; And let's just say they were not nice or Christ like in any way. They called me some pretty bad names (Because the forum was loose with their rules back then). But this just lets me know that they were not of God. For they had nothing nice to ever say towards me. They were always seeking to attack me and tear me down (even when I did not attack them personally). For my goal is to attack the belief and not the person when I have these types of discussions. So the scenario that you are describing of me judging another for them believing in a doctrine of immorality personaly is very rare. I usually speak in a third person kind of way. If a person speaks up and say they do not believe in justifying sin in any way, then there is no reason they should ever be accused falsey by me (on those very rare rare occasions I might imply that they believe in the OSAS version that justifies sin). But if they give me the run a round and do not give me straight answers all the time, chances are they believe in some kind of doctrine of immorality. But again, my focus of attack is their belief and not them personally. For I am commanded to pray for my enemies and to do good unto them. Yes, there was one or two times I recall whereby a person believed like my friend, and I apologized to them openly. But this type of belief is very rare among Eternal Security Proponents. Most justify living in sin on some level (Which is wrong).

As for committing the sin of slander: Yes, this is a sin that leads to the Lake of Fire. However, a true believer or son of God will be convicted by the Spirit to repent of this sin. If they persist in this sin, they then put at risk their salvation and will be chastised by God ONLY if they are a son (who will return to God thru repentance of their sin) and not if they are bastard (who prefers their sin over God).


...

You still didn't answer my question. But at least you clarified what you mean by secret sins. So "secret sins" are sins you are not aware of. Have you committed sins of which you are aware? If so, in committing such sins did you lose your salvation? If there is some time frame allowance between sin and repentance as you seem to allude to, then what happens if you die prior to repentance - die guilty of some unrepented sins?

Secondly you say you tend to accuse others in the third person. Here's what you actually said to me. "So that just gets you off the hook, right? You can do evil and be in God's good graces?" That is an accusation in the SECOND person, accusing me personally.

Which brings me to another question, what if a person is sinning all the time but claims ignorance of such sins? Or more generally what of those who living a lifestyle of sin, such as the sexually immoral (1Cor 5 case in point), but are unaware they are sinning? Does their unawareness get them off the hook? Should we make them aware of the sin they are ignorant of? If we tell them of their sin, but they still don't feel guilty are they nonetheless culpable?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You still didn't answer my question. But at least you clarified what you mean by secret sins. So "secret sins" are sins you are not aware of. Have you committed sins of which you are aware? If so, in committing such sins did you lose your salvation? If there is some time frame allowance between sin and repentance as you seem to allude to, then what happens if you die prior to repentance - die guilty of some unrepented sins?

First, there is no rule stating I do not have to answer your questions in the way that you desire. In fact, even Jesus did not always answer his accusers. Besides, I believe I can still get to the heart of the answer you are seeking by answering in a different way. For we are on a Bible forum and not Facebook. Surely you can ask the same questions in a third person way and get your answer that way.

Second, as for Hidden Faults: They are minor transgressions that you are not aware of (like going over the speed limit a little while you are worried about your grandma). This is not talking about sins like murder, adultery, theft, hate, and lying, etc. As i said, God will convict a believer of these sins to repent of them (and as they study God's Word).

Secondly you say you tend to accuse others in the third person. Here's what you actually said to me. "So that just gets you off the hook, right? You can do evil and be in God's good graces?" That is an accusation in the SECOND person, accusing me personally.

Well, nowhere did I not say that I cannot speak in the second person by asking questions. Asking a question is not the same as making a statement about what you believe. Asking a question is to ascertain (or to confirm my POSSIBLE suspicions) about what you truly believe. If that is not what you believe you can say, "No. I believe a saint cannot live immorally and be saved." But is that the impression I am getting from your words here? Not so far. You are going to have to convince me otherwise.

Which brings me to another question, what if a person is sinning all the time but claims ignorance of such sins? Or more generally what of those who living a lifestyle of sin, such as the sexually immoral (1Cor 5 case in point), but are unaware they are sinning? Does their unawareness get them off the hook? Should we make them aware of the sin they are ignorant of? If we tell them of their sin, but they still don't feel guilty are they nonetheless culpable?

No. The sin of adultery is not applied to hidden or secret faults. Hidden of secret faults are ONLY minor transgressions and they are NOT the sins as listed in Revelation 21:8, and Galatians 5:19-21, etc.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm not sure I understand the connection between "without fault" and "morality". That is a connection that you are making...not one that is necessarily implied by the text.

Morality is just another word for "righteousness" or right or good principles held by a person. It is also the recognizing of good vs. evil by what people do. The 144,000 were without fault before the throne of God because of their actions. If you were to read the chapter you will see that it lists their actions as a part of how they are without fault before the throne of God.

Still don't understand the basis upon which you are equating "sin" with "morality". Again, this is an assumption that you are forcing to support your point; but it is an assumption that has yet to be demonstrated as valid.

1 John 3:7 says he that does righteousness (i.e. what is moral and good) is righteous.
1 John 3:8 says he does sin is of the devil.

AGAIN, what does "morality" have to do with "showing that Christ lives in them"? Morality is a human contrivance; the content of a culture's common morality may or may not be meaningfully associated with what it means to be "righteous".

No. Morality is just a word within the English that helps us to recognize that there are good things versus evil things in this world. Do you not think that the Bible teaches that there are good things versus bad things?


...

 

[bcbsr]

First, there is no rule stating I do not have to answer your questions in the way that you desire. In fact, even Jesus did not always answer his accusers. Besides, I believe I can still get to the heart of the answer you are seeking by answering in a different way. For we are on a Bible forum and not Facebook. Surely you can ask the same questions in a third person way and get your answer that way.

Second, as for Hidden Faults: They are minor transgressions that you are not aware of (like going over the speed limit a little while you are worried about your grandma). This is not talking about sins like murder, adultery, theft, hate, and lying, etc. As i said, God will convict a believer of these sins to repent of them (and as they study God's Word).



Well, nowhere did I not say that I cannot speak in the second person by asking questions. Asking a question is not the same as making a statement about what you believe. Asking a question is to ascertain (or to confirm my POSSIBLE suspicions) about what you truly believe. If that is not what you believe you can say, "No. I believe a saint cannot live immorally and be saved." But is that the impression I am getting from your words here? Not so far. You are going to have to convince me otherwise.



No. The sin of adultery is not applied to hidden or secret faults. Hidden of secret faults are ONLY minor transgressions and they are NOT the sins as listed in Revelation 21:8, and Galatians 5:19-21, etc.


...

And once again you still haven't answered my questions.

By making a slanderous remark and ending it with a question mark, that gets you off the hook, right?

Now it seems from what you've said your viewpoint leads to 4 categories of sin.

1. Minor sins of which you are not aware.
2. Minor sins of which you are aware.
3. Major sins of which you are not aware.
4. Major sins of which you are aware.

Still haven't answered my question about dying with unconfessed sins. But now there are even more questions.

Have you committed minor sins of which you are aware? Did you lose your salvation when you committed such sins? What if you died before repenting from such minor sins?

You can't say you haven't committed the category 3 major sins of which you are not aware, since by definition you wouldn't be aware of them. But let's say hypothetically you committed such sins, would one lose their salvation by doing so? Not be aware they sinned, there would be no possibility of repenting from such sins of which they are not aware, so they would die in sin. Does that mean they go to hell?

What about major sins of which you are aware? Have you commit such, like slander, for example, bearing false witness against your neighbor, intentionally misrepresenting your neighbor's point of view? What about covetousness, another "major" sin? Have you coveted your neighbor's whatever? Did you lose you salvation if you did so. What if you died before repenting from such covetousness?

 

[alexandriaisburning]

Morality is just another word for "righteousness" or right or good principles held by a person. It is also the recognizing of good vs. evil by what people do. The 144,000 were without fault before the throne of God because of their actions. If you were to read the chapter you will see that it lists their actions as a part of how they are without fault before the throne of God.

What are the criteria for determining that an action is "good" or "bad"? And what about cases in which one's behavior doesn't correlate to one's professed "moral principles", whether because of weakness (emotional, physical, or otherwise), circumstance, compulsion, or otherwise? Is righteous *really* reducible to moral action? That is certainly not a biblical perspective. Moral action is certainly related to righteousness, but is definitely not (from a biblical perspective) the same.

1 John 3:7 says he that does righteousness (i.e. what is moral and good) is righteous.
1 John 3:8 says he does sin is of the devil.

Great, but the question of determining "right" action is still unanswered.

No. Morality is just a word within the English that helps us to recognize that there are good things versus evil things in this world. Do you not think that the Bible teaches that there are good things versus bad things?

That idea is certainly present, but you cannot take the whole breadth of biblical teaching about "righteousness" and reduce it to alignment with "moral actions". Many of the "actions" that demonstrate righteousness, after all, are not "moral" in any meaningful sense. Any many "moral" actions may be done out of the most unrighteous of motivations. As such, the equivalence which you are trying to create between "moral actions" and "righteousness" is rather ignorant of basic biblical teaching on the subject.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And once again you still haven't answered my questions.

By making a slanderous remark and ending it with a question mark, that gets you off the hook, right?

Now it seems from what you've said your viewpoint leads to 4 categories of sin.

1. Minor sins of which you are not aware.
2. Minor sins of which you are aware.
3. Major sins of which you are not aware.
4. Major sins of which you are aware.

Still haven't answered my question about dying with unconfessed sins. But now there are even more questions.

Have you committed minor sins of which you are aware? Did you lose your salvation when you committed such sins? What if you died before repenting from such minor sins?

You can't say you haven't committed the category 3 major sins of which you are not aware, since by definition you wouldn't be aware of them. But let's say hypothetically you committed such sins, would one lose their salvation by doing so? Not be aware they sinned, there would be no possibility of repenting from such sins of which they are not aware, so they would die in sin. Does that mean they go to hell?

What about major sins of which you are aware? Have you commit such, like slander, for example, bearing false witness against your neighbor, intentionally misrepresenting your neighbor's point of view? What about covetousness, another "major" sin? Have you coveted your neighbor's whatever? Did you lose you salvation if you did so. What if you died before repenting from such covetousness?

Again, asking a question is not the same as making an accusation. For example, if you gave me the impression you like chocolate but I wasn't sure, I could ask, why do you like chocolate? Asking a question does not necessarily mean I know for sure I know the answer to your question. You could simply say "no", I don't like chocolate. Hence, why I ask so as to find out the truth.

For example, do you take offense every time a test asks you a question? The test could ask you "if you are under the influence of alcohol should you drive?" You might find this question offensive because you do not touch alcohol. But the question is merely asked so as to discover your knowledge of the truth (regardless of your personal belief about alcohol).

Furthermore, you are not providing me any reason to believe that a believer can't sin grevious types of sins and still be saved. Please convince me. For so far by what you said, you have given me the wrong impression about your stand on morality or the goodness of God.

As for your 4 categories of sin: Category 3 does not exist for the believer because God will bring to their attention such a sin so that they will repent of it.

As for sins unto death (Like murder, hate, adultery, etc.): A saint can lose their salvation if they refuse to repent of sins that lead to the Second Death. My life, whether I lived holy or not does not change this truth in the Bible. I am subject to God's Word just as much as you are.


...

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Are there Christians today who minimize the consequences of sin and ignore morality on some level?

You know, are there believers today who treat serious sins (like murder, hate, adultery, theft, etc.) as if it was like we spilled a glass of milk before God?

I would have to answer both of these questions with a "yes."

Why? Well,, when I hear certain believers speak about sin: It makes it sound like God is saying this to them when they sin:

GOD:

"Aw, that's okay, my child. You just spilled a little milk. I can clean that up. It is not that big of a deal."​

To me, that is what it sounds like whenever hear certain Christians say that a believer can abide in unrepentant sin like (lusting after a woman or lying) and still be saved (as long as they have a belief on Jesus).

They say a believer will be chastised. But is that really a form of punishment? Do not even unbelievers go thru the same challenges as unbelievers?

Is not a "Sin and still be saved" type of belief minimizing sin and ignoring morality on some level?

Is not God good?

Why would God allow His people to get away with doing evil?

Does the work of Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and ascension really undo a person's current rebellion against God?

Why would God allow evil and rebellious people into God's Kingdom?
Why doesn't God just save everyone then?

Anyways, please answer the main question of the thread and cast your vote in the poll.

Thank you for reading.
And may God's love shine upon you.

...

Is this the extent of your Christianity?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What are the criteria for determining that an action is "good" or "bad"? And what about cases in which one's behavior doesn't correlate to one's professed "moral principles", whether because of weakness (emotional, physical, or otherwise), circumstance, compulsion, or otherwise? Is righteous *really* reducible to moral action? That is certainly not a biblical perspective. Moral action is certainly related to righteousness, but is definitely not (from a biblical perspective) the same.



Great, but the question of determining "right" action is still unanswered.



That idea is certainly present, but you cannot take the whole breadth of biblical teaching about "righteousness" and reduce it to alignment with "moral actions". Many of the "actions" that demonstrate righteousness, after all, are not "moral" in any meaningful sense. Any many "moral" actions may be done out of the most unrighteous of motivations. As such, the equivalence which you are trying to create between "moral actions" and "righteousness" is rather ignorant of basic biblical teaching on the subject.

No. Morals is the same thing as righteousness; And righteousness comes from the Bible. Prove your case with Scripture if you believe otherwise.

Side Note:

Please take note that while man may have morals of his own that may differ from God's morals (or righteousness or goodness), they are not the same thing as God's true morals or righteousness (Which are always right and good) that come from the Bible. These morals from God are always good. If you believe otherwise, then I would have to question if you believe the Bible or not. For the Scriptures say that God is good.

...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Is this the extent of your Christianity?

Did I say it was the whole some of Christianity?

Anyways, by your negative question to the question I asked for the thread, it seems like you do not like my question? Is this true? And if so, why is that?

...

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Did I say it was the whole some of Christianity?

Anyways, by your negative question to the question I asked for the thread, it seems like you do not like my question? Is this true? And if so, why is that?

...

It's all you ever write about.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It's all you ever write about.

Because it is an error on the behalf of many professing Christians today that they need to be corrected on.
But Jesus said narrow is the road that leads unto life and few be there that find it.

Side Note:

Also, by your negative response so far, you are making me believe you are against morality or God's goodness. I hope this is not true. If you are not against morality or God's goodness, then explain your belief in light of morality (or God's goodness) using Scripture.


...