The great divide...

[Phil 1:21]

These two sides should not be at war with each other, or be hating one another in any way, and, beyond that, they should each be open to even considering changing their views based upon and being also open to each sides views and opinions...

How do we do that...?

God Bless!

I completely agree. We should be able to have respectful conversations in a manner befitting our blessings from God.

To say we cannot reach sinless perfection is to doubt the power of God.

To say we have achieved it is to deny our own weakness.

You know what? That's really good.

 

[aiki]

Weird. I was raised baptist and all I ever heard from evangelicals was judgmental attacks on others while preaching grace.

Yet when I went to a more traditional church that focused on grace and works together there was no judgement whatsoever.

Even most Roman Catholics I've met are less judgemental than the typical evangelical.

And? Is your experience supposed to be representative of everyone else's? My in-laws are Catholics and they are extremely judgmental - and superstitious. I've recently been discipling a convert from Eastern Orthodoxy and he is glad to be free from the "lifeless rituals and endless recitations" that he labored under from childhood. He is convinced everyone in the Eastern Orthodox church he grew up in were blazing hypocrites. Should I say, then, that he's accurately representing all Eastern Orthodoxy? I'm sure you'd say not.

 

[Neogaia777]

And? Is your experience supposed to be that of everyone else? My in-laws are Catholics and they are extremely judgmental - and superstitious. I've recently been discipling a convert from Eastern Orthodoxy and he is glad to be out from under the "lifeless rituals and endless recitations" that he labored under from childhood. He is convinced everyone in the Eastern Orthodox church he grew up in were blazing hypocrites. Should I say, then, that he's accurately representing Eastern Orthodoxy? I'm sure you'd say not.

Excellent point!

The danger of judigng and trying to say, "always in this case always this, and always in that case that, ect, and it's all black and white and there are never any exceptions to anything, ever...

These are the ideas of closed minds that apparently want to stay closed, and do not want to broaden the horizon's of their own perspective(s)...

God Bless!

 

[RaymondG]

I'm sorry about my questions, but I am trying to go somewhere with it/them... But that did seem to me to be what you were kind of saying...? Please correct me if I am wrong...?

God Bless!

There comes a point in time when we have to realize that God gives wisdom.....And if you have been given wisdom through the grace of God......told things that you would not have believe/understand yourself without coming from the source......we will understand that others will not believe us, should not believe us, and cannot believe us.

Meat, while good for adults, can kill a babe........so why force it on them and get angry at them if they choke, or cannot otherwise take it?

I dont believe that one given Truth, would argue it with others or experience hate for those who dont believe them...... This is something more a result of personal interpreting, personal study, and personal judgement. When you spend so much of your personal time diving into books to come up with your beliefs....you are offended when one rejects it.... But when God reveals something through grace....you have no personal attachment and probably couldnt adequately explain it even if you tried. Some things are better left to be explained by the Great Teacher.....

 

[Vicomte13]

I only meant that in the sense that a protestant would consider you to be the most "works based".

I would also consider us to be the most works based - the world's largest charitable organization, by far. If the Catholic Church stopped doing what we do and the American government had to take over our medical, educational and social services functions in the USA, the tax burden on US citizens would probably have to go up by 8-10%. The Catholic Church is a government, a worldwide government structured to provide education, health care, and social services to vast numbers of people. This, we believe, is the essence of what Jesus commanded. Having ideas about God in the head is swell - and you have to in order to contribute the time and money to run a worldwide government of health, education and welfare. But the belief is self-evident - nobody gives that kind of money and time to something they don't believe in. The hard part is the works. They're expensive, time consuming, often thankless, and sometimes perilous. So yeah, we're a works-based church. In fact the whole Church IS a work, and it's purposes is to be that. The effort required for the mental belief part, which seems to totally consume so many other folks, is trivial for Catholics. We all believe, we already believe, we all have faith - most of it have had it since we were baptized as children and God sealed us then and there. We grew up in the light of the Lord, with him holding our hand - the Vanyar, as it were, to use an obscure reference. What mental effort is really required to believe in and love God? For me, and for the Catholics I know, virtually none? So all of the endless effort poured into agonizing over faith - what is the issue here? Do people really find basic belief in God THAT HARD that they have to spend all their time working about it, thinking about it, their whole lives, that nothing ever gets past trying to convince themselves that God actually exists?

I don't understand it. And I expect that most Catholics don't understand it. Perhaps this is the great advantage of infant baptism. We were all originally breathed out by God, and being consecrated to God so young, we never passed through the phase of forgetting about him or not sensing him, however subtly, and knowing he exists. You'll find plenty of Catholics sinning - and knowing it's sin - and therefore leaving the Church because they don't want to think of themselves as sinners (even though they know they are). But the Catholics IN the Church? We just don't spend time thinking about "faith", about whether God exists. Obviously he does. We already know the alphabet. We don't need to keep going over and over again "A is for Apple", "B is for Bear", and so on. We know God. God gave us marching orders, let's get on with the marching orders.

Doing that seems to really annoy other Christians? Oh well. We don't spend time worrying about THAT either. Works - yes, they are most of what we do. That's what the Church IS, a great big sprawling worldwide work that does more than any other organization to make human suffering less, human longevity better, protect human children, open human eyes and minds with learning. What ELSE should we be spending our time doing? Reading a book over and over again? We do that - in Mass they read two parts of the OT and two parts of the NT every time. If you went to every Mass every day you'd end up hearing about 60% of the whole Bible read to you (and about 90% of the New Testament) over the course of three years. Then you'd hear it again. The important parts are read completely. Is it really necessary to dwell on the 30 pages of minute detail about the construction of the tabernacle in the desert, or going through the genealogy tables of Jacob, Isaac and Jesus?

So yeah, the Catholic Church is a church of works. Everybody has "faith", since infancy generally. We all know there's God. If we didn't believe it we wouldn't spend so much money and time doing all this stuff. Heck, even if we do believe it its hard to give that much and do that much, for purely human reasons.

That was a long response that didn't need to be written. My own conclusion about these things is this: Catholic minds work differently, we're never going to understand the others, and they're never going to understand us. So let's break bread, share a cup, be kind to each other, and get on with life and the parts that God thinks it's important for us to do.

 

[Neogaia777]

There comes a point in time when we have to realize that God gives wisdom.....And if you have been given wisdom through the grace of God......told things that you would not have believe/understand yourself without coming from the source......we will understand that others will not believe us, should not believe us, and cannot believe us.

Meat, while good for adults, can kill a babe........so why force it on them and get angry at them if they choke, or cannot otherwise take it?

I dont believe that one given Truth, would argue it with others or experience hate for those who dont believe them...... This is something more a result of personal interpreting, personal study, and personal judgement. When you spend so much of your personal time diving into books to come up with your beliefs....you are offended when one rejects it.... But when God reveals something through grace....you have no personal attachment and probably couldnt adequately explain it even if you tried. Some things are better left to be explained by the Great Teacher.....

Except God works through people, and one who has been given Truth has been given a lot and has a responsibility to that Truth... For better or for worse, richer of poorer, ect, till death do you part... And that will involve people, or other people as well... God is all about people, and we must be also... but yet, trying to do it without sinning; that is, out of love alone...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

So let's break bread, share a cup, be kind to each other, and get on with life and the parts that God thinks it's important for us to do.

How do we do that...? With so many differences of opinion, isn't it important for us to be wholly unified and in agreement on some basics at least...? and if so, what are those basics...?

So that we can break bread together, share a cup together, ect...?

This "divide" (and other divides) is/are not helping with that, that much I know...

God Bless!

 

[Oldmantook]

The Bible says it only takes one act of murder to be a murderer (Numbers 35:16-18), and it says that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him (1 John 3:15).

Of course it only takes one act of murder to be a murderer. I never wrote that one act of sin does not make one a sinner did I? So your point is?
Furthermore, your interpretation of 1 Jn 3:15 is incorrect. The Greek word for "hate" in this word is misōn which is a present tense participle therefore accurately translated as "hating." In other words, this action of hating someone is a continuous act - not a one-time act of hate - which makes one a murderer. If one has ongoing hate - one is a murderer of which there is no forgiveness because ongoing hate is the obvious evidence that there is no repentance of being hateful. Where there is no repentance, there is no forgiveness.

The Bible says one act of adultery is considered as adultery (Leviticus 20:10), and Proverbs 6:32 says that he that commits adultery destroys his own soul. Jesus says that if you look upon a woman in lust, you have committed adultery already with her in your heart, and your whole body can (potentially) be cast into hell fire (See Matthew 5:28-30). Jesus did not say you need to keep looking at woman in lust to commit adultery.

As in my above reply, one can certainly repent of one act of adultery. On the other hand, one who practices adultery/looks lustfully on a regular basis has no forgiveness as it is quite evident that such a person has not repented but instead keeps on doing it. You fail to distinguish between occasional one-time sin and habitual sin. Again, you fail to account for the verb tenses in this verse: "But I say to you that whoever looks (blepōn | βλέπων | pres act ptcp nom sg masc) at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Blepōn is present tense particple meaning "looking." Paying attention to the Greek verb tenses is critical in understanding Scripture.

1 John 3:9 is not talking about habitual sin. The key to understanding 1 John 3:9 is 1 John 3:6. If we ABIDE in Christ, we cannot sin while we abide in Him. So 1 John 3:9 is saying that we cannot sin (not even one time) while we are in the born again state and while we are abiding in Christ. When we choose to sin, we are not doing so while we are abiding in Christ and while we are abiding in the born again state. For if we willfully sin after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 10:26). For what fellowship does light have with darkness? None (of course).

So do you believe you are without sin? Yes or no?
Again you fail to account for the Greek verb tenses as 1 Jn 3:6 states "No one who abides in him keeps on sinning...." It is translated as "keeps on sinning" because hamartanei is a present tense verb. This verse can in no way refer to one-time sin.
Same thing with Heb 10:26 as it is apparent that you have not referenced the Greek text. Correctly, translated Heb 10:26 reads: "For if we deliberately persist in sin...." Hamartanontōn is a present tense participle denoting sinning - not one-time sin as you claim.

Ananais and Sapphira died for their one time sin of lying to the Holy Ghost and a great fear came upon the church and not comfort, joy, or sadness. One grievous sin (that is not repented of) is all it takes to be separated from God. For what do you think happened with Adam and Eve? Did not Adam's one time sin make him to die spiritually? Was it not the devil's lie that was said to Eve that they would not die if they disobeyed God?

Of course, one-time sin separates from God. However you fail to acknowledge and distinguish that one-time sin is still forgiveable IF one is WALKING IN THE LIGHT and repents of it according to 1 Jn 1:7. Sometimes there are exceptions like Annanias/Sapphira and Adam/Eve where there are dire consequences for sinning one-time which is why we should not presume upon the grace of God and work out our salvation with fear and trembling. According to your belief, if one is abiding in Christ as manifested by walking in the light, one cannot choose to sin, if I understand you correctly. A believer always has a choice whether to abide in the Spirit or abide in the flesh.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Oh the Hypocrisy...

Thank you for the slanderous words.
Please show me where I was being hypocritical please.

@jason OK, some sins are worse than others, so I guess those are permissible...

Did I say that we as believers can disobey Jesus? No. We should seek to obey all of Jesus's commands (even the commands that are not attached or related to inheriting eternal life).

And "who" again was guilty of the greater sin...? Either Herod, or the Pharisees or the Jews in general...?

Judas, and he was once a saved disciple but he later lost his salvation.
Check out this CF thread here by poster: "Love of Truth."

Who would that be today...?

The point I was trying to show you is that some sins can be greater than others.
This truth obviously would not change because we can see it in other places in Scripture like with Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42.

And, if some sins are better or worse than others, what about a person and/or persons who had it much harder in life than you ever have, or maybe ever can even imagine, and on the outside they seem to be "greater sinners" (than as I guess you or you would put it Jason), but they really may not be, (Jesus may point to that being or not being the case) anyway, should that be factored in...? And what about "all the other factors" that need to be considered in any accurate, true, or truly just judgement...? cause that's what you are talking about is judgment, and were just not qualified to judge one another without at least knowing "some of the story" first most especially... And even then, we will not do it anywhere near to perfectly...

Again, you seem to falsely think believers cannot judge, and yet that is what you are doing now. For you are judging by saying it is wrong to judge. That is your judgement. To judge anything is to have a sense of right and wrong and to stand behind that conviction. Do you believe murder is wrong? Well, you have a right to judge someone who murders somebody in front of you. You have a right to say that is wrong because the Bible says no murderer has eternal life abiding in them. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says we can correct others according to the Scriptures. Paul says not to have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather, reprove them. Jesus says we are to judge righteous judgment and not judge by appearances. How exactly do these truths in Scripture line up with your belief here? They don't.

As for sin that a person may be committing:

I can point them to the Word of God that shows a particular sin that God condemns and it would not be me judging them but it would be the Word of God. For I did not write the Word of God. God wrote His Word through men of God.

Best to leave that up to God don't you think...? We certainly cannot judge sin inasmuch as trying to determine whether we or someone, or somebody else, is a "better or worse sinner" than everybody else... What is the true motive behind this kind of thinking anyway...? and insisting on making or trying to make this distinction or judgement in the first place...? I would say any and all motives for that is sin, and only not unless it is God...

If somebody is sinning and they are justifying that sin, I have a right to say what God's Word says about their sin. If they are doing a sin that does not lead to spiritual death, I would probably not mention it. But if they are doing something really bad, I can point it out that sin is destroying their soul. Proverbs 6:32 says adultery destroys a person's soul. Do you believe that? 1 John 3:15 says no murderer has eternal life. Do you believe that?

On top of that your saying one can't sin at all even or they are not saved, and that is not true under the NC, as long as you are under the NC...

Just because you say it, does not make it so. You need verses to prove your case. But on the contrary, the New Covenant does teach that even just one grievous sin can destroy a believer spiritually. Ananais and Sapphira are just one example.

Do we have to imprison and punish people and send them to jail sometimes, yes, we do, but that is a whole lot different than us wishing them to go to hell, and giving up on them when you think you know they are going to hell, or not caring at all, cause they are a "bad person" in your eyes, much worse than you, right...?

It's not about me. It's about what the Word of God says. I also need to overcome in my faith just like every other believer. We all have to overcome in our faith and not justify sin because there are eternal consequences at stake.

God is holy and He cannot agree with any man's thinking that they can commit grievous sin with them being rewarded with Heaven.

We also have to be aware of our making a lot, A LOT of terrible, horrible mistakes in our trying to mettle out justice for and among ourselves, due to how truly difficult it is...

But Jason knows, Jason has everything figured out right...? So let's just ask him and make him our judge, right...?

God Bless!

I am just a messenger of God's Word. If you disagree with the message from God's Word that I have shown to you, we can discuss it or you can take it up with God. But please do not shoot the messenger. I am only relaying to you what God's Word says.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Of course it only takes one act of murder to be a murderer. I never wrote that one act of sin does not make one a sinner did I? So your point is?
Furthermore, your interpretation of 1 Jn 3:15 is incorrect. The Greek word for "hate" in this word is misōn which is a present tense participle therefore accurately translated as "hating." In other words, this action of hating someone is a continuous act - not a one-time act of hate - which makes one a murderer. If one has ongoing hate - one is a murderer of which there is no forgiveness because ongoing hate is the obvious evidence that there is no repentance of being hateful. Where there is no repentance, there is no forgiveness.


As in my above reply, one can certainly repent of one act of adultery. On the other hand, one who practices adultery/looks lustfully on a regular basis has no forgiveness as it is quite evident that such a person has not repented but instead keeps on doing it. You fail to distinguish between occasional one-time sin and habitual sin. Again, you fail to account for the verb tenses in this verse: "But I say to you that whoever looks (blepōn | βλέπων | pres act ptcp nom sg masc) at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Blepōn is present tense particple meaning "looking." Paying attention to the Greek verb tenses is critical in understanding Scripture.


So do you believe you are without sin? Yes or no?
Again you fail to account for the Greek verb tenses as 1 Jn 3:6 states "No one who abides in him keeps on sinning...." It is translated as "keeps on sinning" because hamartanei is a present tense verb. This verse can in no way refer to one-time sin.
Same thing with Heb 10:26 as it is apparent that you have not referenced the Greek text. Correctly, translated Heb 10:26 reads: "For if we deliberately persist in sin...." Hamartanontōn is a present tense participle denoting sinning - not one-time sin as you claim.


Of course, one-time sin separates from God. However you fail to acknowledge and distinguish that one-time sin is still forgiveable IF one is WALKING IN THE LIGHT and repents of it according to 1 Jn 1:7. Sometimes there are exceptions like Annanias/Sapphira and Adam/Eve where there are dire consequences for sinning one-time which is why we should not presume upon the grace of God and work out our salvation with fear and trembling. According to your belief, if one is abiding in Christ as manifested by walking in the light, one cannot choose to sin, if I understand you correctly. A believer always has a choice whether to abide in the Spirit or abide in the flesh.

Was King David saved while he committed his sins of adultery and murder?
Or did he lose his salvation and needed to have it restored?

 

[Neogaia777]

Put away the judging and trying to be "a" or "the judge" as much as possible, (which should be most of the time) and throw off the pride, and stop being hypocritical, or lying, or being deceptive toward your own self and others, for these last three are all the same, and let's proceed from there, or from some point of real "truth" and honesty shall we...?

God Bless!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Put away the judging and trying to be "a" or "the judge" as much as possible,

Are you not judging by saying that I cannot judge?
Jesus says you can judge righteous judgment.
Do you disagree with Jesus?
Paul says to not have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.
Do you disagree with Paul?

 

[Neogaia777]

Was King David saved while he committed his sins of adultery and murder?
Or did he lose his salvation and needed to have it restored?

Depends of which God you are talking about... One always knew everything about David from the moment of making him, or even making anything and/or everything, at all, from that ones perspective David was OSAS... but, if you are talking about God the Son, David and him had some things to work on and work out together, and David's relationship which started out good, was broken and needed to be restored with that one (God the Son)...

It is the difference between a fully truly omniscient point of view, and one that might be only just slightly less...

God Bless!

 

[NW82]

Yes, Yes, Yes, guys, I've heard this all before, and I tend to lean heavily toward you guy's views, but, what about the questions, and especially "concerns that follow"...? since sin, destroy's, nations, or a people, and/or individual people, and/or societies, and/or worlds...?

God Bless!

Scripture answered the question in 1 John 1:8, I'm not sure why it's even a topic now. Asked and answered, end of debate.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Depends of which God you are talking about... One always knew everything about David from the moment of making him, or even making anything and/or everything, at all, from that ones perspective David was OSAS... but, if you are talking about God the Son, David and him had some things to work on and work out together, and David's relationship which started out good, was broken and needed to be restored with that one (God the Son)...

It is the difference between a fully truly omniscient point of view, and one that might be only just slightly less...

God Bless!

David was not saved when he was committing his sins of adultery and murder. Numbers 35:16-18 says it only takes one act of murder to be a murderer. 1 John 3:15 says no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. Leviticus 20:10 says that one act of adultery is all it takes to be an adulterer. Proverbs 6:32 says that he that commits adultery destroys his own soul. Jesus says that if one were to look upon a woman in lust, they have committed adultery already in their heart and they are in danger of having their whole body being cast into hell fire. Jesus did not say that they had to keep looking at many women in lust multiple times to be in danger of hell fire. Why do you think David needed to confess of his sins? Read Psalms 51. He was confessing so as to be forgiven of his sins. If a person is saved, they do not need to be forgiven of their sins.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Scripture answered the question in 1 John 1:8, I'm not sure why it's even a topic now. Asked and answered, end of debate.

Well, what is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 changes the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being 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.

 

[Neogaia777]

Are you not judging by saying that I cannot judge?
Jesus says you can judge righteous judgment.
Do you disagree with Jesus?
Paul says to not have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.
Do you disagree with Paul?

Righteous Judgement only judges when it is absolutely necessary, and even then does it begrudgingly, and certainly does not not judge to elevate or separate their own selves from the rest of the herd so as to be above them... Is that righteous Judgement, judging at the wrong or inappropriate and unnecessary times, or out of the wrong heart motives or reasons...? Cause that would actually be sin wouldn't it...?

Did Paul say to have no fellowship with sinners...? Or just those who produce or are producing the "unfruitful works of darkness"...? And just who do you think, or which group of people do you think Paul meant were of this, or were doing this, or were producing this...? Maybe what it says in Ephesians 5:1-10, before verse 11...? But How many fail already in just the word "covet", I find it unusual that it mentions that a lot... And then, "proving what is acceptable to the Lord..." What is acceptable to him...?

Making strenuous effort to always be constantly sinless in your own strength...? Or is that, or could that be "missing the point"...? And if so, what point is that...? or what point is it not...?

God Bless!

 

[Phil 1:21]

Judas, and he was once a saved disciple but he later lost his salvation.

Where in scripture does it state Judas was ever saved?

 

[Neogaia777]

@Jason0047, What does it mean to you to be "in the world, but not of it"...?

God Bless!