Logical Problems with Calvinism

[Bible Highlighter]

You'll say just about anything to keep from seeming wrong won't you?

“this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.” Acts 2:23

“For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out. ………………” 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15

"But the Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief." Isaiah 53:10

Really? Are you just looking at one side of the story? Why did it please God the Father to crush the Son? Because it meant bringing many sons to glory and reconciling man back to God. Jesus was not forced against His will to do this, either. Christ had willingly laid down His own life (In agreement with the Father) to save us from our sins. For God so loved the world. That is why God did it. God did not just allow Jesus to suffer needlessly at the hands of his own country men for no reason or purpose. Christ died so as to redeem mankind. There was a greater purpose and plan behind it all. So no, God the Father and the Son of God were not ignoring morality. On the contrary, they were establishing it by proving that God so loved the world that He was willing to sacrifice His only Son (with the Son's approval) so as to save us. Christ died in our place. He was our substitute. He did this because He loved us. Yes, on the surface it might have appeared like God might have been unjust in allowing His Son to die. Even the devil was deceived by God's plan. Little did the devil know that Christ was being crucified for the sins of the entire world so as to offer man the free gift of salvation. But that does not change the fact that God's sacrifice was not a perfectly just and good one.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Don't be silly - of course circumcision was commanded by God but it was done by human hands.

Not everyone who did it received the circumcision made without hands.

That's one real thing. The other things are only shadows of the real thing.

The seal of the Holy Spirit cannot be broken by human hands and God will not break it Himself. That fact is, after all, the entire point of the passage concerning the seal of the Holy Spirit.

But that is an assumption on your part. Nowhere does the Bible say that such a seal cannot be broken. In fact, we know it can be broken because we see many fall away from the faith even in the New Testament. I have already provided verses for this several times already within this thread for that (to prove that such is the case). The evidence in the Bible is too overwhelming to ignore (Unless one wants to ignore it).

But if you are truly interested in looking at the verses I presented already, I can provide the post # for you.

Side Note:

Oh, and as I said before, circumcision can be undone according to Scripture, too. But it is undone by an act of disobedience and not by some kind of surgery or anything. This proves that a seal can be broken by one's sin. In fact, read Hebrews 10:26 on after and it will tell you that disobedience and the bad results is the same in both the Old and in the New.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I explained the passage 1 Thess 5:4-11, and this is your response?? Didn't you at least read it? And where in the world does that question come from?

I read your posting of this passage and the reply of others to you (who disagreed with you) on another Christian forum. My repeating what they said is not really going to help you. So I decided to try a different tactic. If you do not accept my explanation with God's Word, I cannot help you. But if you are honestly after the truth and are objective and willing to admit that you are not 100% infallible when it comes to interpreting God's Word, then I would ask the Lord to open your understanding on this passage. I mean, examine both sides of the argument as being true and see which one fits the best. Look at the passage for what it says and not for what you want it to say because of some pre-conceived Theology or belief that you have. This is difficult to do. But I have done it before and it is truly helpful in getting to the actual truth of what the Bible says.

This demonstrates just how out of touch you are with my views. When believers are in fellowship (1 Jn 1), filled with (Eph 5:18) and walking by means of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:16), they ARE moral as God intends. Anything LESS than this means loss of fellowship, and sin.

I believe in the substitionary atonement. I believe Jesus can impute righteousness to the believer. But this only works if they honestly repent of their sins and believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior (Whereby they would then seek to live a righteous and holy life from that point on). The substitionary atonement does not give a person a free pass when it comes to grevious or horrible sins in their life that they would commit after they accepted Christ. It doesn't work like that. A believer has to confess of their sins so as to be forgiven of sin (1 John 1:9). This is in context to 1 John 1:7 which says we are to walk in the light as He is in the light so that the blood of Christ can cleanse you of all sin. This lines up with Proverbs 28:13 that says that he that confesses and forsakes sin shall have mercy.

How does that verse refute what I've explained about v.4-11? Of course believers are to hold on to what is good. I've said nothing to the contrary.

Well, first, you agreed with another here who clearly displayed an Antinomian type belief. Second, by my reading of your posts, I was also getting the strong impression that you were pushing an Antinomian belief, as well. In other words, please tell me how morality (or living righteously) is a requirement in God's plan of salvation. That would convince me that you are for God's goodness or on the side of morality (Which is of God).

What would make anyone think it takes a "license" to sin anyway? Being born sinners with a sin nature, sin comes naturally.

So you think nobody can stop sinning? Is that it? Then why on Earth did Jesus tell the woman caught in the act of adultery to: "sin no more"? Was Jesus playing a cruel joke on her? What about the man Jesus healed, whereby he told him to: "Sin no more, unless a worse thing come upon you"?

And since you think I have promoted a theology with a "license to sin", please at least cite the post # and my specific words. Or apologize for so badly misunderstanding my posts.

Every time I defended God's morality or goodness in regards to a verse, you were against me on it. Your attack on such a position led me to believe you were against morality because that was my defensive position.

Aren't you aware of Heb 12:5-11?

Ah, I get it. You believe that God chastens those believers who live immoral lives. That is the check and balance. Right? Sorry, that is not good enough. Most men who think they can sin and still be saved are not going to care about what might happen to him in this life because of the pleasure of their sin. Why? Because bad things happen to even good people. Yes, God does chasten his believers. But this is for those who honestly want to follow God and do right by Him. This is not for the person who thinks they can sin and still be saved or who promotes a doctrine that says that a believer can sin and still be saved (Which leads others down the path of unrighteousness or sin).

Besides, whether one is chastened or not, the damage is already done. If one preaches a sin and still be saved doctrine, it can lead even children into thinking they can sin and still be saved (Which is wrong). How so? Well, Jesus says, "But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea" (Matthew 18:6) (New Living Translation).

In other words, lets say a child who acceptes Christ struggles with trying to overcome the sin of stealing things. Lets say he has grown in the Lord and has overcome this sin. However, one day he hears a sermon on TV from a preacher claiming that he can sin and still be saved. He then changes his Theology. Then a few weeks later, he is tempted to steal. Before, he realized that continuing in such a sin would put his soul in danger. But now, he does not need to worry about that. So he falls back into stealing again believing that there are no consequences that truly matter in the type of serious sin that he does. He eventually falls back completely into his old life of sin like when he was an unbeliever (all because of some preacher who gave him a false interpretation on a few set of verses that led him to believe he could sin and still be saved). This preacher is partially responsible for leading this child into sin. Yet, Jesus says it is better that a milestone be hung about the neck of those who lead a child into sin. That is why Antinomianism, or Easy Believism is a dangerous and deadly doctrine.

Yes, that is exactly my assessment of your post here. It is absolute rubbish and I believe that you do know it deep down.

Do you believe a person can sin and still be saved? If so, then you are against God's goodness or morality. How so? Well, it would sort of be like an evil dictator sending in an army to rape and kill a bunch of people and then they were later rewarded by him regardless of their performance of doing either good or bad. That is exactly what a sin and still be saved doctrine is saying. A person can do evil in God's name and then later be rewarded by God by giving them entrance into Heaven (with God turning a blind eye towards their evil that was done with no remorse). Granted, you probably think God's grace covers that. But it doesn't. Why? Because God would be condoning evil by allowing a person to do evil in his name. Also, think of all the hurt and pain you would have caused by such said sin, as well. Think of how it effects others and how they view you. Therefore, grace and forgivenss only works if you are truly sorry about your sin and you seek to not to ever sin again. If you do so, then you have his mercy to fall back down upon. But this is not a license to sin. Grace is there for us to overcome sin.

In other words, please use a real world example or parable of how a sin and still be saved doctrine is moral and good. My bet is that you cannot do so, my friend.


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Yup, proving again that you haven't read my posts to you. I pointed out that souls will live for eternity; either with God or apart from God.

Jesus says, "And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna" (Matthew 10:28) (Berean Literal Bible). (Gehenna is the Lake of Fire - Which is called the Second Death for a reason).

So when Scripture speaks of God destroying people, it refers to physical death. Only the physical body can be destroyed. So once again, your verse doesn't support your claims.

Jesus said fear the one who can destroy both body AND SOUL in Gehenna.


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Please explain WHY Christ died for us.

I just did in the very post you quoted, my friend.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Anyways, ....



May the Lord's love shine upon you greatly this 2016.
And may God bless you all.
And please be well.


....

 

[Marvin Knox]

No. I am telling you that man has a moral compass in letting him know that certain things are right and wrong. The Scriptures talk about this,

"For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves" (Romans 2:14).

For a person in our culture today who does not know right from wrong or does not have any moral compass is called a "sociopath." This is why I am deeply troubled by many here who claim to hold to a sin and still be saved doctrine. In other words, for a person to hold to a sin and still be saved doctrine means that they have to turn off their moral compass or in what they know deep down to be right....

There's a very big difference between saying that a person does not lose their salvation when they sin and saying that we have no sin.

There is no internal "moral compass" that tells us that we are eternally secure and yet are still to stand before God to be judged for our sins. The Word of God is our only compass in that respect.

The Word tells us that we are His children and secure in that. The Word tells us that we will all stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ to receive rewards and suffer loss.

The Word of God tells us that we are sealed by the very Holy Spirit of God and that He is able to keep that which we have trusted to Him against the day of judgment.

You say that those who believe those things are condoning sin. You are wrong in that and you know it.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Really? Are you just looking at one side of the story? Why did it please God the Father to crush the Son? Because it meant bringing many sons to glory and reconciling man back to God. Jesus was not forced against His will to do this, either. Christ had willingly laid down His own life (In agreement with the Father) to save us from our sins. For God so loved the world. That is why God did it. God did not just allow Jesus to suffer needlessly at the hands of his own country men for no reason or purpose. Christ died so as to redeem mankind. There was a greater purpose and plan behind it all. So no, God the Father and the Son of God were not ignoring morality. On the contrary, they were establishing it by proving that God so loved the world that He was willing to sacrifice His only Son (with the Son's approval) so as to save us. Christ died in our place. He was our substitute. He did this because He loved us. Yes, on the surface it might have appeared like God might have been unjust in allowing His Son to die. Even the devil was deceived by God's plan. Little did the devil know that Christ was being crucified for the sins of the entire world so as to offer man the free gift of salvation. But that does not change the fact that God's sacrifice was not a perfectly just and good one. ...

You said that God does not allow any kind of injustice to take place. I simply refuted what you said.

You do know, don't you, that God allowed the crucifixion of His own righteous, holy and innocent Son - at the hands of evil men?

Perhaps your missing the fact that God allowed that "kind of injustice to take place" is the root of your not understanding the gospel correctly.

I am not just looking at one side of the story. It appears to me that you are the one doing that.

God clearly did allow evil and injustice to take place. That He had a good reason for doing it doesn't change that fact. You were wrong in what you said and I corrected you on it. It's as simple as that.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Matthew 18
2 Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3 and said,“Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Unless you turn around (repent) you can not enter the kingdom.

Repentance is a gift that must be granted by God that they repent. And if God grants repentance to an person, then they will know the truth and be saved.

."

You can not be serious in your explanation of that verse.

That is very misleading.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Spoken by one who has a view of grace that began in the mid 20th century and is without merit scripturally.

Says you. Grace began in the Bible at Gen 1:1. And continues throughout all of eternity.

Your view of grace was NOT born of sound exegesis but of a reaction against Reformation theology. This is the historical fact of it.

lol Reformed theology was a REACTION to the teachings of Arminius. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. lol

Free grace theology is a return to sound, biblically based theology.

What does it claim that has not been supported by Scripture? (this is a challenge)

We know that there are no verses that support the idea that God chooses who will believe.
We know that there are no verses that support the idea of limited atonement.
We know that there are no verses that indicate that God's grace is irresistible.
We know that there are no verses that support the idea that all believers will persevere in the faith.

So, go ahead. Accept the challenge.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I read your posting of this passage and the reply of others to you (who disagreed with you) on another Christian forum. My repeating what they said is not really going to help you. So I decided to try a different tactic. If you do not accept my explanation with God's Word, I cannot help you. But if you are honestly after the truth and are objective and willing to admit that you are not 100% infallible when it comes to interpreting God's Word, then I would ask the Lord to open your understanding on this passage. I mean, examine both sides of the argument as being true and see which one fits the best. Look at the passage for what it says and not for what you want it to say because of some pre-conceived Theology or belief that you have. This is difficult to do. But I have done it before and it is truly helpful in getting to the actual truth of what the Bible says.





I believe in the substitionary atonement. I believe Jesus can impute righteousness to the believer. But this only works if they honestly repent of their sins and believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior (Whereby they would then seek to live a righteous and holy life from that point on). The substitionary atonement does not give a person a free pass when it comes to grevious or horrible sins in their life that they would commit after they accepted Christ. It doesn't work like that. A believer has to confess of their sins so as to be forgiven of sin (1 John 1:9). This is in context to 1 John 1:7 which says we are to walk in the light as He is in the light so that the blood of Christ can cleanse you of all sin. This lines up with Proverbs 28:13 that says that he that confesses and forsakes sin shall have mercy.





Well, first, you agreed with another here who clearly displayed an Antinomian type belief. Second, by my reading of your posts, I was also getting the strong impression that you were pushing an Antinomian belief, as well. In other words, please tell me how morality (or living righteously) is a requirement in God's plan of salvation. That would convince me that you are for God's goodness or on the side of morality (Which is of God).





So you think nobody can stop sinning? Is that it? Then why on Earth did Jesus tell the woman caught in the act of adultery to: "sin no more"? Was Jesus playing a cruel joke on her? What about the man Jesus healed, whereby he told him to: "Sin no more, unless a worse thing come upon you"?



Every time I defended God's morality or goodness in regards to a verse, you were against me on it. Your attack on such a position led me to believe you were against morality because that was my defensive position.





Ah, I get it. You believe that God chastens those believers who live immoral lives. That is the check and balance. Right? Sorry, that is not good enough. Most men who think they can sin and still be saved are not going to care about what might happen to him in this life because of the pleasure of their sin. Why? Because bad things happen to even good people. Yes, God does chasten his believers. But this is for those who honestly want to follow God and do right by Him. This is not for the person who thinks they can sin and still be saved or who promotes a doctrine that says that a believer can sin and still be saved (Which leads others down the path of unrighteousness or sin).

Besides, whether one is chastened or not, the damage is already done. If one preaches a sin and still be saved doctrine, it can lead even children into thinking they can sin and still be saved (Which is wrong). How so? Well, Jesus says, "But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea" (Matthew 18:6) (New Living Translation).

In other words, lets say a child who acceptes Christ struggles with trying to overcome the sin of stealing things. Lets say he has grown in the Lord and has overcome this sin. However, one day he hears a sermon on TV from a preacher claiming that he can sin and still be saved. He then changes his Theology. Then a few weeks later, he is tempted to steal. Before, he realized that continuing in such a sin would put his soul in danger. But now, he does not need to worry about that. So he falls back into stealing again believing that there are no consequences that truly matter in the type of serious sin that he does. He eventually falls back completely into his old life of sin like when he was an unbeliever (all because of some preacher who gave him a false interpretation on a few set of verses that led him to believe he could sin and still be saved). This preacher is partially responsible for leading this child into sin. Yet, Jesus says it is better that a milestone be hung about the neck of those who lead a child into sin. That is why Antinomianism, or Easy Believism is a dangerous and deadly doctrine.





Do you believe a person can sin and still be saved? If so, then you are against God's goodness or morality. How so? Well, it would sort of be like an evil dictator sending in an army to rape and kill a bunch of people and then they were later rewarded by him regardless of their performance of doing either good or bad. That is exactly what a sin and still be saved doctrine is saying. A person can do evil in God's name and then later be rewarded by God by giving them entrance into Heaven (with God turning a blind eye towards their evil that was done with no remorse). Granted, you probably think God's grace covers that. But it doesn't. Why? Because God would be condoning evil by allowing a person to do evil in his name. Also, think of all the hurt and pain you would have caused by such said sin, as well. Think of how it effects others and how they view you. Therefore, grace and forgivenss only works if you are truly sorry about your sin and you seek to not to ever sin again. If you do so, then you have his mercy to fall back down upon. But this is not a license to sin. Grace is there for us to overcome sin.

In other words, please use a real world example or parable of how a sin and still be saved doctrine is moral and good. My bet is that you cannot do so, my friend.


....

Regarding post #1983, if you cut out all the comic cartoons, I'll respond. Otherwise, I won't lower myself to that level.

But, regarding your comment about how others who disagreed with my explanation of 1 Thess 5:4-11, so what? Anyone can disagree. One doesn't even need an education to do that.

But to actually refute someone does require some education.

If anything I said about that passage is wrong, it seems to me that it should be relatively easy to show HOW and WHY it is wrong.

Are you up to that? Or just hide behind the disagreements of other, none of which refuted anything I said about that passage.

So, if you are up to it, take each verse and explain what it means, as I did.

I've laid my cards on the table. Are you up to doing the same?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Regarding post #1983, if you cut out all the comic cartoons, I'll respond. Otherwise, I won't lower myself to that level.

But, regarding your comment about how others who disagreed with my explanation of 1 Thess 5:4-11, so what? Anyone can disagree. One doesn't even need an education to do that.

But to actually refute someone does require some education.

If anything I said about that passage is wrong, it seems to me that it should be relatively easy to show HOW and WHY it is wrong.

Are you up to that? Or just hide behind the disagreements of other, none of which refuted anything I said about that passage.

So, if you are up to it, take each verse and explain what it means, as I did.

I've laid my cards on the table. Are you up to doing the same?

You really have not laid your cards on the table if you refuse to answer the points that I have made. First, you assume that the use of pictures or comics is immature form of communication. It is not. The Egyptians used to communicate by pictorial form. Airlines use comics to illustrate the safety procedures in the event of an emergency on board an aircraft. Sequential Art is merely a medium of communication. Many adults today read comics and it does not mean they are immature or childish in any way.

Second, if you are really on the level, then you will provide for me a real world example as to how a sin and still be saved doctrine is moral, just, or good. But we both know you cannot do that because it is not moral.

Third, I honestly do not think it has anything to do with the pictures that I provided in my post as to why you are not answering. I believe you simply cannot answer the points that I have made because you are unable to answer them.


....

 

[ToBeLoved]

[QUOTE="Marvin Knox, post: 69062202, member: 352687]
The Word tells us that we are His children and secure in that. The Word tells us that we will all stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ to receive rewards and suffer loss.

The Word of God tells us that we are sealed by the very Holy Spirit of God and that He is able to keep that which we have trusted to Him against the day of judgment.t.[/QUOTE]


Yup. Good stuff!

 

[FreeGrace2]

You really have not laid your cards on the table if you refuse to answer the points that I have made.

I've already refuted your points. But you didn't like it.

First, you assume that the use of pictures or comics is immature form of communication. It is not. The Egyptians used to communicate by pictorial form.

Are you Egyptian? I'm not.

Airlines use comics to illustrate the safety procedures in the event of an emergency on board an aircraft.

Neither of us are planes, either.

if you are really on the level, then you will provide for me a real world example as to how a sin and still be saved doctrine is moral, just, or good. But we both know you cannot do that because it is not moral.

This only provides clear focus on your total misunderstanding, or maybe outright rejection, of grace.

God's plan is grace. Please explain what you think grace means. I'm beginning to think that you have no idea.

Third, I honestly do not think it has anything to do with the pictures that I provided in my post as to why you are not answering. I believe you simply cannot answer the points that I have made because you are unable to answer them. ....

lol I challenged you. Apparently you aren't willing nor able to lay out all your cards on the table.

So be it.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You said that God does not allow any kind of injustice to take place. I simply refuted what you said.

But Christ's sacrifice was not an injustice because His death was a way to save mankind. God did not make the devil or the pharisees or the Romans to crucify the Lord. Nor was God helpless in this event happening. In fact, God planned for it to happen. Also, anyone who crucified the Lord is not going to get away with it. For if those who crucified him do not repent, then they will have to answer for their crimes in crucifying the Lord at the Judgment. Furthermore, time does not operate the same way with us as it does with God. So there is no injustice that had taken place.

I am not just looking at one side of the story. It appears to me that you are the one doing that.

God clearly did allow evil and injustice to take place. That He had a good reason for doing it doesn't change that fact. You were wrong in what you said and I corrected you on it. It's as simple as that.

It is true that God allows evil and sin to take place, but there is no such thing as God allowing injustice to take place in His universe (That spans all the corridors of time). All evil and sin is already punished at the Judgment in God's eyes. He already knows who will be punished and who will be rewarded. There is a set date for all sin and evil to be judged and then destroyed. According to God: There are no cases were the bad guy gets away with his crimes so as to allow injustice to happen in God's universe. Not gonna happen. Now, from man's perspective of time, there might appear to be an injustice taking place. But that is merely man's near sighted nature of not being aware that all sin will be judged by God. The Scriptures say that all men will give an account to God. In fact, it pleased God the Father to crush the Son. So it was not like God was surprised or in shock or mad that the Son had to go thru such a horrible injustice. The Lamb was slain since the foundation of the world. God planned it. God already knew what He had to do to save mankind. There are no surprises with God.

Also, Christ not only died and suffered so as to save us from our sins, but he also suffered as an example for how we are to live, too.

21 "For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:

24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed." (1 Peter 2:21-24).


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I've already refuted your points. But you didn't like it.

No. You didn't refute all my points I made in the post I provided with the pictures. For example (on one of the points you ignored): What do you make of a man preaching a sin and still be saved doctrine for children to hear? What if such a preach or message by such a man leads a child to think sin is not all that big of a deal anymore and this child backslides into a life of sin (All because of this man's "sin and still be saved" message)? Do you not know that Jesus says that if one leads a child into sin it is better for a milestone to be hung around their neck?

Are you Egyptian? I'm not.

Egyptians are a part of mankind. God is not a respecter of persons; And neither should you be.

Neither of us are planes, either.

This statement just doesn't even make sense. Planes do not make the comic books for passengers safety. The comics are there for people to get the clear message of what to do in an event of an emergency. You simply have a false view that comic books are only for children (Which is an immature view to have).

This only provides clear focus on your total misunderstanding, or maybe outright rejection, of grace.

However, your version of grace is at the expense of morality, though. God does not condone His people in doing evil. But if they are sorry over their sin and desire forgiveness of that past sin, and want to change and walk uprightly, then God will extend grace to them. God does not give grace to those who live like the devil.

God's plan is grace. Please explain what you think grace means. I'm beginning to think that you have no idea.

Grace is unmerited favor but grace does not involve God allowing His people to get away with evil.

lol I challenged you. Apparently you aren't willing nor able to lay out all your cards on the table.

So be it.

Again, no you haven't. Please go back and address all the points that I have made in my previous post.

Also, i will ask you again. If you truly are on the side of the truth: Then you will have no trouble in making a real world example to illustrate the goodness and morality behind a sin and still be saved doctrine.

Anyways, thank you for reading.
And may God bless you.
And happy 2016.


....

 

[FreeGrace2]

No. You didn't refute all my points I made in the post I provided with the pictures. For example (on one of the points you ignored): What do you make of a man preaching a sin and still be saved doctrine for children to hear?

Apparently you view is that one can enter a state of sinless perfection. Which is NOT biblical. However, salvation is NOT based on sin. In fact, Christ died for all sin. And you haven't dealt with that FACT regarding your views. Sin is NOT an issue in salvation.

What if such a preach or message by such a man leads a child to think sin is not all that big of a deal anymore and this child backslides into a life of sin (All because of this man's "sin and still be saved" message)?

Could you please cite someone who actually preaches what you are so afraid of? I don't believe you can. And please provide a source so everyone can check it out for themselves.

Do you not know that Jesus says that if one leads a child into sin it is better for a milestone to be hung around their neck?

Yes, I do. Why don't you believe His words about believers being held in the Father's hand, in which NO ONE is able to snatch a believer out of. Which would obviously include the believer himself.

We're held by God. Not the other way around, which your view insinuates.

However, your version of grace is at the expense of morality, though.

Another statement that illuminates your failure to understand the meaning of grace.

God does not condone His people in doing evil.

No one says He does. Why do you think there is anyone who does think this?

But if they are sorry over their sin and desire forgiveness of that past sin, and want to change and walk uprightly, then God will extend grace to them. God does not give grace to those who live like the devil.

Were you saved by grace or by your own morality?

Grace is unmerited favor but grace does not involve God allowing His people to get away with evil.

Who EVER said that anyone does "get away" with anything? I've repeatedly said that NO ONE gets away with anything. Why haven't you read that in my posts?

Also, i will ask you again. If you truly are on the side of the truth: Then you will have no trouble in making a real world example to illustrate the goodness and morality behind a sin and still be saved doctrine.

Your request is impossible. There is no goodness/morality behind ANY sin. So the request is bogus.

The point of Scripture is that when one is saved, they STAY saved. Sin has already been paid for, which is something that you apparently don't yet understand.

What else you seem to be totally unaware of is God's hand of discipline, in which He disciplines His children, which can be extremely severe, whether you see it in others or not.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Second, if you are really on the level, then you will provide for me a real world example as to how a sin and still be saved doctrine is moral, just, or good. But we both know you cannot do that because it is not moral.
....

So what you are really saying is that Christ's sacrifice for sin is not good enough and that the Father should not have accepted it

Who cares what you think is moral, just and good?

Who are you providing eternity for?

I think the other poster is right. You have no comprehension of what grace is. Or that Jesus has the power of complete forgiveness.

You can't preach what you feel is moral and or just. You are just not the judge.

 

[nobdysfool]

No one teaches a "sin and still be saved" doctrine the way Jason is presenting it. That is nothing but a straw man.

The reality is, Even the most pious Christian will sin, occasionally, for one simple reason: We're not yet perfected, being new creatures living in the old man's house (body). Much as he would like us to not see it, we know that even Jason still sins. Jason is of the opinion that only his past sins, up to the time he was saved, were forgiven, and that any sins he has committed after he was saved must be specifically confessed and repented of, or he will lose his salvation.

Apparently he has not considered that when Jesus died for sin, ALL of Jason's sins were yet future. By his own reckoning, none of his sins should have been forgiven. Only the sins of those who were living at the time of Jesus would fall under Jason's twisted view.

And, it has been pointed out that Grace apparently doesn't fit into his view in any meaningful way. Grace is what bridges the gap between a person sinning and their repentance and confession of it. That is what allows a Christian to sin and yet remain saved, not so he can continue sinning, but so he can remain saved while God deals with him about the sin, through conviction, and other means of bringing the person back into fellowship and right standing with God. This idea of a believer cycling in and out of salvation multiple times per day is not Grace, that is bondage! Bondage to a works-based, performance-based idea that one has to prove themselves worthy of God's ongoing blessing and protection.

It has been pointed out to Jason many times that salvation relies not on what we do, but what He has done. It's too bad it falls on deaf ears.

.

 

[Marvin Knox]

But Christ's sacrifice was not an injustice because His death was a way to save mankind. God did not make the devil or the pharisees or the Romans to crucify the Lord. Nor was God helpless in this event happening. In fact, God planned for it to happen.

The murder of Jesus Christ was an injustice from our point of view.

I agree that God was not helpless. I agree that God planned it (predestined it to happen in Calvinist lingo). And your point?

Also, anyone who crucified the Lord is not going to get away with it. For if those who crucified him do not repent, then they will have to answer for their crimes in crucifying the Lord at the Judgment. ...

Who said or believes otherwise? No Calvinist and certainly not I would say otherwise. Are you constructing another straw man to punch around?

So there is no injustice that had taken place....

Utter nonsense. Of course it was an injustice. In fact it was outright murder. There were at least a dozen Jewish laws broken at the trial of Jesus alone.

And, please, don't tuy to set up another straw man concerning the righteous decree of God that it all take place.

I believe in the concurrent actions of the omnipresent God and evil men.

God's decrees are all together righteous. But He decrees that they be carried out by the unrighteous acts of sinful men.

The predestination of everything that happens in God's creation and the free will of His creation are completely compatible.

I don't know how many times I've argued that point in this forum.

It is true that God allows evil and sin to take place, but there is no such thing as God allowing injustice to take place in His universe (That spans all the corridors of time). All evil and sin is already punished at the Judgment in God's eyes. He already knows who will be punished and who will be rewarded. There is a set date for all sin and evil to be judged and then destroyed. According to God: There are no cases were the bad guy gets away with his crimes so as to allow injustice to happen in God's universe. Not gonna happen. Now, from man's perspective of time, there might appear to be an injustice taking place. But that is merely man's near sighted nature of not being aware that all sin will be judged by God. The Scriptures say that all men will give an account to God. ...

Utter nonsense. God does allow injustice to take place. It's called sin.

Of course God is omniscient. But you seem to have a better handle on the way time works than is explained to us in scripture.

Who said anyone gets away with sin? You are just building another straw man for you to punch in the nose? Rather transparent IMO.

Also, Christ not only died and suffered so as to save us from our sins, but he also suffered as an example for how we are to live, too.

21 "For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:

24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed." (1 Peter 2:21-24)....

No kidding? Is that what the Bible says?

You seem to like to set up straw men and then tear them down.

The only trouble is that no Calvinist (and certainly not I) say or believe the things that you insinuate that we do.

Stop misrepresenting your bothers and sisters. That is sin.

If you really believe the drivel that you are putting out - surely you know that lying about your brothers and sisters will end in Hell fire for you.