• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Sin No More

Status
Not open for further replies.

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I think it's more because no matter what response you recieve you keep asking.
Asking gives me further insight.
I agreed with you at one point and you tried to twist it! If you're here to play games mate, you can count me out.
Yes, that is a common charge too. It often comes from when people offer a 'rule' and it's shown to have holes in it.
My beliefs come from the Bible.

Mine come from the church that gave you the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

anada

777
Oct 6, 2010
179
7
Brisbane
✟23,957.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, that is a common charge too. It often comes from when people offer a 'rule' and it's shown to have holes in it.

Where we're these supposed holes?

Mine come from the church that gave you the Bible.

No yours come from the church which put their traditions above the Bible. Mine however, just come straight from the Bible :)
 
Upvote 0

1Prophetess

Amazing Grace, How Sweet You Are Lord Jesus!
Jan 17, 2010
1,397
240
California USA
✟25,161.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Goodness Huldah! I have been living my life for years on I John 1:9 which says, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." I sincerely hope that He has done that because, although I want to please my Lord, I would hate to have my unrighteousness brought up again. And if it was, that would make the Word a lie.

I think I'm clean.
 
Upvote 0

1Prophetess

Amazing Grace, How Sweet You Are Lord Jesus!
Jan 17, 2010
1,397
240
California USA
✟25,161.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
It is true that God will cleanse us from our sins. How might this be done? Will it be painful or will he just simply say--You're just fine for the unrepented sins you have commited. All WILL be saved. But there is a judgment of it wouldn't be called thus and I don't believe it'll be just for rewards.
Yeshua Bless You

No, I don't either. I think we will be judged for our good things we did outside of Christ.

I can give something wonderful to you for the credit. I can give something wonderful to you for God's credit. If I do it for my credit, that will be judged. But if for Christ, I will be blessed.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

anada

777
Oct 6, 2010
179
7
Brisbane
✟23,957.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Getting rid of consequences of sin.

Where did I say this? Do you believe that you need confess every little thing or else you won't be saved? That Christ's promise isn't enough? Oh that's right you believe in purgatory don't you and mortal/venial sins?

Scripture in tradition

Like the great Biblical tradition of baptising babies? Or that faith alone in Jesus alone isn't enough for eternal salvation?

Paul taught without the NT at all.

Shall we ignore the NT then? Of course not. Paul had the Spirit guiding him and watching over him, he still taught and spread Christ's story and message, did he not? Not too sure what you're getting at here mate?
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Where did I say this?
Are you saved?

Do you still sin?

What are the consequences of that sin?

Do you believe that you need confess every little thing or else you won't be saved? That Christ's promise isn't enough? Oh that's right you believe in purgatory don't you and mortal/venial sins?

If I were a Catholic you'd probably have more luck with the stock-standard Protestant objections as I don't believe in purgatory, mortal/venial sins.

Like the great Biblical tradition of baptising babies?
Is that wrong?

Or that faith alone in Jesus alone isn't enough for eternal salvation?
Jesus said himself "Not all who cry "Lord!" "Lord!" will be saved except those that DO the will of the Father"
Shall we ignore the NT then? Of course not.
Absolutely; of course not
Paul had the Spirit guiding him and watching over him, he still taught and spread Christ's story and message, did he not? Not too sure what you're getting at here mate?

He taught to keep his teachings whether by word of mouth, or tradition



Addendum

Paul writes an Epistle to the Galatians.

He sends it to them.

How do they know its from him?

Is it because he wrote "From Paul?"

Would not the person taking it be known to the Galatians and bear witness that the Epistle he carries is from Paul?

Therefore the authority of the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians is confirmed by the carrier of it, and then by the church that holds it.

Not the work itself.

The work itself is not self-authenticating, nor self-authorising.

Over time other churches – in Corinth, Rome, etc would all say that they too had an Epistle from Paul.

Each has that as a 'tradition' that the work they have is from Paul. They would share this tradition. If a century later a church in Epehsus heard that a church in Spain claimed to have an Epistle of Paul's they would say "We have never heard of this before". It would be rejected because it falls out of the scope of what was known to be the works of Paul – assured by tradition.

Over time someone decided to compile all these into a single work – the Bible

They based this on (and being guided by the Holy Spirit in this task) that the churches held tradition that the books they had were authentic.

www.earlychristianwritings has hundreds of works mentioning Christianity and Christ. There's the "Acts of Paul", for example. It is rejected though.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

3rdHeaven

Truth Seeker
Nov 23, 2011
1,282
57
✟1,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
My thoughts on confession of sins, nothing wrong with it but you don't need a priest to do it, you can go straight to the Man Jesus!

Think about the whole idea of confessions for a minute and you will see how utterly impractical it is.

If *everyone* went to confession, the Church would be hit like a killer tidal wave, no way possible they could handle it, and that's just in the USA! The sheer math behind it should thro that in perspective. Imagine the long lines around the blocks!

So my view is confessions is good but not really required, and the Church should be thankful not everyone goes!
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
My thoughts on confession of sins, nothing wrong with it but you don't need a priest to do it, you can go straight to the Man Jesus!
People kid themselves though.
Think about the whole idea of confessions for a minute and you will see how utterly impractical it is.
Like going to church?

Imagine if everyone went to church, how bad would that be...?



:doh:
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,541
29,061
Pacific Northwest
✟813,072.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Like the great Biblical tradition of baptising babies?

Well, yes, actually. Scripture doesn't limit who may or may not receive Baptism, it's for everyone, as St. Peter mentions, "This is for you and your children, and to all those who are far off, whomever the Lord our God will call." and also the mentioning of entire households being baptized. There simply isn't a good reason to restrict Baptism to persons of a certain age. God's gift of new life is for everybody, God loves everyone. As we can also recall, Jesus Himself said, "Do not prohibit the children from coming to me, for to such as these belongs the kingdom of heaven". Rather than barring certain people from Baptism, our job is to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, instructing them in all that I have taught".

Or that faith alone in Jesus alone isn't enough for eternal salvation?

What is sufficient is God's grace.

Shall we ignore the NT then? Of course not. Paul had the Spirit guiding him and watching over him, he still taught and spread Christ's story and message, did he not? Not too sure what you're getting at here mate?

Montalban's point is simply the historical narrative of how we have received the Bible. The Canon of the Bible came together through the consensus of the Church over the course of many centuries, thus the fact that you or I even have a Bible, bound cover to cover, is because of our Christian fore-bearers receiving, reading, collecting and agreeing that this collection of books constitute Sacred Scripture. It comes to us from the ancient and received tradition of the Christian Church.

If it didn't then either:

A) There should exist some self-evident divinely-inspired table of contents saying, "This is the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus ... Jude, Revelation." However, such a thing does not exist.

B) We must individually discern for ourselves what constitutes our own individual Bible. That, however, is chaos and completely undermines the whole concept of a Canon of Scripture in the first place making the Bible nothing more than personal preference.

The only sensible, and historically viable position is that you and I have received down from generation to generation that collection of books which we regard as Sacred Scripture, and therefore call "The Bible".

This doesn't mean Sola Scriptura is wrong, but it does mean that Sola Scriptura must be understood appropriately and as it was originally intended; not as a rejection of the Church's received Tradition, but as universally agreed upon final court of appeal. If, when or where the Church or those of us in the Church may err, our ultimate appeal is to the written word of Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Well, yes, actually. Scripture doesn't limit who may or may not receive Baptism, it's for everyone, as St. Peter mentions, "This is for you and your children, and to all those who are far off, whomever the Lord our God will call." and also the mentioning of entire households being baptized. There simply isn't a good reason to restrict Baptism to persons of a certain age. God's gift of new life is for everybody, God loves everyone. As we can also recall, Jesus Himself said, "Do not prohibit the children from coming to me, for to such as these belongs the kingdom of heaven". Rather than barring certain people from Baptism, our job is to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, instructing them in all that I have taught".



What is sufficient is God's grace.



Montalban's point is simply the historical narrative of how we have received the Bible. The Canon of the Bible came together through the consensus of the Church over the course of many centuries, thus the fact that you or I even have a Bible, bound cover to cover, is because of our Christian fore-bearers receiving, reading, collecting and agreeing that this collection of books constitute Sacred Scripture. It comes to us from the ancient and received tradition of the Christian Church.

If it didn't then either:

A) There should exist some self-evident divinely-inspired table of contents saying, "This is the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus ... Jude, Revelation." However, such a thing does not exist.

B) We must individually discern for ourselves what constitutes our own individual Bible. That, however, is chaos and completely undermines the whole concept of a Canon of Scripture in the first place making the Bible nothing more than personal preference.

The only sensible, and historically viable position is that you and I have received down from generation to generation that collection of books which we regard as Sacred Scripture, and therefore call "The Bible".

This doesn't mean Sola Scriptura is wrong, but it does mean that Sola Scriptura must be understood appropriately and as it was originally intended; not as a rejection of the Church's received Tradition, but as universally agreed upon final court of appeal. If, when or where the Church or those of us in the Church may err, our ultimate appeal is to the written word of Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran

I want to hire you
 
Upvote 0

anada

777
Oct 6, 2010
179
7
Brisbane
✟23,957.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Are you saved?

Yes, I believe so.

Do you still sin?

Yes.

What are the consequences of that sin?

Discipline from God.

“As you endure this divine discipline, remember that God is treating you as his own children. Whoever heard of a child who was never disciplined? If God doesn’t discipline you as he does all of his children, it means that you are illegitimate and are not really his children after all. Since we respect our earthly fathers who disciplined us, should we not all the more cheerfully submit to the discipline of our heavenly Father and live forever? For our earthly fathers disciplined us for a few years, doing the best they knew how. But God’s discipline is always right and good for us because it means we will share in his holiness. No discipline is enjoyable while it is happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Hebrews 12:5-11).

If I were a Catholic you'd probably have more luck with the stock-standard Protestant objections as I don't believe in purgatory, mortal/venial sins.

Oops my bad. I apologise for some reason I thought you were Catholic. However there are still doctrines and beliefs your church holds which I think are unbiblical, thus the whole "elevating church tradition above God's word" which I was getting at.

Jesus said himself "Not all who cry "Lord!" "Lord!" will be saved except those that DO the will of the Father"

"What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?" Jesus said, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent" (John 6:28-29)
 
Upvote 0

anada

777
Oct 6, 2010
179
7
Brisbane
✟23,957.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well, yes, actually. Scripture doesn't limit who may or may not receive Baptism, it's for everyone, as St. Peter mentions, "This is for you and your children, and to all those who are far off, whomever the Lord our God will call." and also the mentioning of entire households being baptized. There simply isn't a good reason to restrict Baptism to persons of a certain age. God's gift of new life is for everybody, God loves everyone. As we can also recall, Jesus Himself said, "Do not prohibit the children from coming to me, for to such as these belongs the kingdom of heaven". Rather than barring certain people from Baptism, our job is to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, instructing them in all that I have taught".

Haha wow you've really got a bone to pick with me don't you mate ;)

You misunderstand the verse where Paul addresses the jailer. The Bible does not teach infant baptism. In reality, nowhere in Scripture can you find even a single example or command to do so.

(1) When the jailor asked Paul what he must do to be saved, Paul did NOT say, "Believe on Jesus and be baptized and take communion." Rather, Paul said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household" (v. 31). Thus, we see that it is faith that is the ingredient necessary for salvation. It was understood that one who believed would be baptized, but baptism was not necessary for salvation. If it were, Paul would have given it more weight in his missionary journeys (1 Corinthians 1:14-18).

(2) We see that the "family" could not have included infants or toddlers, as it states in verse 34 that the jailor had "believed in God with all his household." Infants and toddlers cannot exercise faith in God in such a fashion.


I don't know about you, but my one year old is flat out saying much more than Mum, Dad etc. let alone understanding Christ's sacrifice and accepting Him into her life. When she is old enough to understand I will take her to be baptised when she chooses, but as a step of obedience, not to be saved. Really what good is infant baptism for a newborn when they have no idea what's going on? I'd rather she make that decision and have it mean so much more, rather than just follow a tradition started in the church.

In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3-4). Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.
What does the Bible say about infant baptism?
 
Upvote 0

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild
Feb 11, 2004
19,359
3,426
✟183,333.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
UK-Greens
"What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?" Jesus said, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent" (John 6:28-29)
Now, imagine this exchange taking place in real life, with an as-of-yet uncrucified Jesus replying to an actual question, NOT addressing a reading posterity who imbues that line with all sorts of hindsights.

What would that reply have conveyed to the person who was asking, at that time?
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Yes, I believe so.

Yes.
Discipline from God.
So you're punished in heaven? Or is this purgatory you believe in?

Oops my bad. I apologise for some reason I thought you were Catholic. However there are still doctrines and beliefs your church holds which I think are unbiblical, thus the whole "elevating church tradition above God's word" which I was getting at.
How would you know when you don't know anything about my church?
"What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?" Jesus said, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent" (John 6:28-29)

If believing were enough Jesus wouldn't have given us the whole 'separation of the sheep from the goats' episode.

Mt 25:45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
You misunderstand the verse where Paul addresses the jailer. The Bible does not teach infant baptism. In reality, nowhere in Scripture can you find even a single example or command to do so.

It doesn't say to baptise someone at 20, or at 18, or 65.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.