IS IT SIN TO BREAK THE 10 COMMANDMENTS? (Yep!)

[Bible Highlighter]

No, you know it would be a preposterous
No, you know it would be a proposterous statement to make to a thirteen year old, yet that is your belief, so all you can do is deflect from answering

No. I am not God to know the hearts of people. I am not saying God would condemn a 13 year old, but if He did, the Lord would be just in doing that. God actually destroyed an entire world with a global flood (Including babies and children). Granted, I believe babies and children are saved. The age of accountability can be possibly different for each child.

 

[Archippus]

No. I am not God to know the hearts of people. I am not saying God would condemn a 13 year old, .

Why would you not say a thirteen year old who had accepted Christ as their saviour would be cast into hell if they had impure thoughts? That is your stated belief? Do you not really believe what you repeatedly state on this website? Do you not have the courage to confirm your beliefs when given an example and asked to do so?

 

[Archippus]

Those who tell you, you can only be justified before God if you obey the moral law, least reflect in their lives what Christ termed the higher points of the law. They have to carry(if they are sincere) little conviction as to what is sin. As the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, it follows they have little conviction of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If we claim to be without sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us 1John1:8

I have found, that to be a very accurate statement concerning those who claim to be without sin.

Does not 1 John 1:8 say that if we have no sin we deceive ourselves?

Answer: Well, what is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at it's immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 moves verse 8 (which is present tense) into a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned at some point in their life (Regardless of whether they are an OSAS believer or a Conditional Salvationist). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin,
we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NET).​

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their sins are paid for: Past, present, and future by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Why would you not say a thirteen year old who had accepted Christ as their saviour would be cast into hell if they had impure thoughts? That is your stated belief? Do you not really believe what you repeatedly state on this website? Do you not have the courage to confirm your beliefs when given an example and asked to do so?

Now you are grasping at straws by putting words into my mouth that I never said. I said I do not know the age of accountability for a child whereby God would hold them accountable to their sins. I did not say it was 13 years of age whereby God can condemn a child. I said.... if... if... God did decide to condemn a 13 year old (Who committed a grievous sin), He would be just in doing that (Suggesting a possibility). I did not say this was a matter of fact.

Anyways, one of the many problems with your belief is that people have committed suicide thinking they would be saved because of a belief on OSAS. You can ignore that fact if you like, but it does not undo such a truth.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Those who tell you, you can only be justified before God if you obey the moral law, least reflect in their lives what Christ termed the higher points of the law. They have to carry(if they are sincere) little conviction as to what is sin. As the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, it follows they have little conviction of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

Was King David saved while he committed his sins of adultery and murder?

 

[Archippus]

Now you are grasping at straws by putting words into my mouth that I never said. I said I do not know the age of accountability for a child whereby God would hold them accountable to their sins. I did not say it was 13 years of age whereby God can condemn a child. I said.... if... if... God did decide to condemn a 13 year old (Who committed a grievous sin), He would be just in doing that (Suggesting a possibility). I did not say this was a matter of fact.

Anyways, one of the many problems with your belief is that people have committed suicide thinking they would be saved because of a belief on OSAS. You can ignore that fact if you like, but it does not undo such a truth.

OK. Would you tell a sixteen year old if they had impure thoughts they would be condemned to hell? Or are you going to say they may not have reached the age of accountability? More deflection?

 

[Archippus]

Was King David saved while he committed his sins of adultery and murder?

David said:
Do not bring your servant into judgement, for no one living is righteous before you Psalms143:2

 

[Archippus]

Does not 1 John 1:8 say that if we have no sin we deceive ourselves?

Answer: Well, what is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at it's immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 moves verse 8 (which is present tense) into a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned at some point in their life (Regardless of whether they are an OSAS believer or a Conditional Salvationist). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin,
we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NET).​

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their sins are paid for: Past, present, and future by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

1John1:8 is plainly written:
If we claim to be without sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Your attempts to do gymnastics with the plainly written words mean nothing to me.

Here's another verse from John:

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 1John 3:9

Easy to explain if(if) you can see beyond the letter itself

 

[Archippus]

Anyways, one of the many problems with your belief is that people have committed suicide thinking they would be saved because of a belief on OSAS. You can ignore that fact if you like, but it does not undo such a truth.

As for the above statement. I have not mentioned OSAS

 

[Archippus]

Now you are grasping at straws by putting words into my mouth that I never said. I said I do not know the age of accountability for a child whereby God would hold them accountable to their sins. I did not say it was 13 years of age whereby God can condemn a child. I said.... if... if... God did decide to condemn a 13 year old (Who committed a grievous sin), He would be just in doing that (Suggesting a possibility). I did not say this was a matter of fact.

Anyways, one of the many problems with your belief is that people have committed suicide thinking they would be saved because of a belief on OSAS. You can ignore that

As for the above statement. I have not mentioned OSAS

fact if you like, but it does not undo such a truth.

BTW
Please tell me why, in your view, the letter that kills refers to law that could be faultlessly obeyed
And please tell me why you could not be declared righteous concerning law you can faultlessly obey
Thanks

 

[Bible Highlighter]

OK. Would you tell a sixteen year old if they had impure thoughts they would be condemned to hell? Or are you going to say they may not have reached the age of accountability? More deflection?

It's not deflection. You are asking me to know something only God can know. Nowhere does God communicate extensively within His Word about the age of accountability. But what if I encountered a 16 year old and they asked me about what you are talking about? I would tell them what I told you. While I do not know for sure what age God holds children accountable for their actions, I would also tell them that if I was in their shoes, I would not want to take any chances and lust after a woman to find out (Just in case I was wrong). The words of Jesus are still true in what He says in Matthew 5:28-30. But somehow you don't think they seem to apply to you.

 

[Archippus]

It's not deflection. You are asking me to know something only God can know. .

You would be hard pushed indeed to find any Christian minister or reputable denomination who did not believe a sixteen year old had reached the age of accountability. And you of course know that. You just do not want to answer the question do you. So you have to deflect. Proof that your head theology on this website is not reflected in real life experience or conviction. For according to your belief, you would be failing in your duty to a sixteen year old not to tell them they will be condemned if they have impure thoughts.

Incidentally, though you will not understand this. Many today, who accepted Christ as their saviour believed as you say you do now, and they ended up full of all manner of concupiscence, as did Saul the Pharisee. Your views stir up sin in people, not bring victory over it. But then, you do not understand Pauls message do you. And your head theology is devoid of the practical realities of the human life and emotions. It is simply, faulty head theology

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You would be hard pushed indeed to find any Christian minister or reputable denomination who did not believe a sixteen year old had reached the age of accountability. And you of course know that. You just do not want to answer the question do you. So you have to deflect. Proof that your head theology on this website is not reflected in real life experience or conviction. For according to your belief, you would be failing in your duty to a sixteen year old not to tell them they will be condemned if they have impure thoughts.

Incidentally, though you will not understand this. Many today, who accepted Christ as their saviour believed as you say you do now, and they ended up full of all manner of concupiscence, as did Saul the Pharisee. Your views stir up sin in people, not bring victory over it. But then, you do not understand Pauls message do you. And your head theology is devoid of the practical realities of the human

Personally, I would take the Jonathan Sperry approach if I could and be more tactful with my words instead of trying to scare them with hellfire.

 

[Archippus]

Personally, I would take the Jonathan Sperry approach if I could and be more tactful with my words instead of trying to scare them with hellfire.

You would water down your convictions? I will repeat this. According to your convictions you would have no choice but to plainly tell them what you say you firmly believe.

 

[Archippus]

Jason does not fully obey the moral law. If he claims to, it simply shows he has no true understanding, or conviction of the demands of the moral law. Either this is true, or, he is guilty as the Pharisees were, of not practicing what he preaches:

The measure you use to judge others will be used to judge you Matt7:2

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You would be hard pushed indeed to find any Christian minister or reputable denomination who did not believe a sixteen year old had reached the age of accountability. And you of course know that.

No. I don't know that. I don't attend regular churches much. My study of God's Word is my own daily thing over the passed few years. I believe I have been taught by the Spirit many times and not in the wisdom of men and or in the cleverness of their speeches.

You just do not want to answer the question do you. So you have to deflect.

You are not answering my questions and you are deflecting. So that is like the kettle calling the pot as being... black.

Proof that your head theology on this website is not reflected in real life experience or conviction. For according to your belief, you would be failing in your duty to a sixteen year old not to tell them they will be condemned if they have impure thoughts.

Jesus says the children are of the Kingdom of God.
Like I said, I do not know what age God considers a person an adult or a child. It could be different based on their age and or experience. I don't know. God's Word does not specifically talk about that. I would tell them the words of Jesus and say they are true. But you are not doing that. You are openly denying what Jesus says in Matthew 5:28-30. Do you even care to explain how Matthew 5:28-30 is true according to your belief? I have heard some in your camp say that it only applied before the cross. But that does not work because we have other sins listed that say that can condemn us after the cross (that are similar); And Paul says if any man speaks contrary to the words of Jesus and the doctrine according to godliness, they are proud and they know nothing (See 1 Timothy 6:3-4).

Incidentally, though you will not understand this. Many today, who accepted Christ as their saviour believed as you say you do now,

That is like so not true.
Most churches here in America believe in OSAS and they do not believe in holiness as a requirement for salvation. Most churches are on the wide gate path and seek to justify a sin and still be saved type belief. Obviously the Pharisees believed in a sin and still be saved type belief, too. For Jesus said they ignored the weightier matters of the law like love, faith, justice, and mercy and yet they claimed to be fathers of Abraham. But Jesus called them hypocrites.

...and they ended up full of all manner of concupiscence, as did Saul the Pharisee. Your views stir up sin in people, not bring victory over it. But then, you do not understand Pauls message do you. And your head theology is devoid of the practical realities of the human

In regards to Romans 7:8:

Well, in Romans 7:7-13, Paul is talking as a Jew who received the Law for the first time from Moses. In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is taking from his experience in trying to obey the Law of Moses when he was a Pharisee within the Pharisee religion (that did not include Jesus Christ). For Paul says he was alive without the Law once before. How is that possible unless Paul is a time traveler. So Paul is talking about how the Hebrew was without the Law once before the Law of Moses was given unto them. The point Paul is trying to make is that Paul struggled to keep the Law Alone because he did not have Jesus Christ and a New Covenant yet. Paul needed to by faith first believe in Jesus for salvation and then submit to Jesus so that he could overcome sin. For if you were to read Romans 8 again, you would see that it gives you a solution to overcoming sin.

2 "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
(Romans 8:2-4).

"But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof." (Romans 13:14).

"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live." (Romans 8:13).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You would water down your convictions? I will repeat this. According to your convictions you would have no choice but to plainly tell them what you say you firmly believe.

I cannot tell them that which I do not know. I would tell them the words of Jesus are true, and if they pushed the matter in regards to what you are talking about: I would tell them that I would not take any chances with my soul based on knowing if they are in the safe zone with God because of their age. However, if that did not happen, I would be more tactful and loving with them in regards to God's Word. That is my conviction because I would want them to see the love of God within my life.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Jason does not fully obey the moral law. If he claims to, it simply shows he has no true understanding, or conviction of the demands of the moral law. Either this is true, or, he is guilty as the Pharisees were, of not practicing what he preaches:

So you have a video camera taping my life and you are God to know my heart and life?

The measure you use to judge others will be used to judge you Matt7:2

I seek to attack the belief and not the person or individual. You are attacking me personally and you are trying to make it about me instead of just sticking with talking about the belief with Scripture.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Jason does not fully obey the moral law. If he claims to, it simply shows he has no true understanding, or conviction of the demands of the moral law. Either this is true, or, he is guilty as the Pharisees were, of not practicing what he preaches:

The measure you use to judge others will be used to judge you Matt7:2

You also said you don't want to talk with me anymore on this matter?
Why the sudden change of heart?
Can you please address the verses I have showed to you before?