- Jul 22, 2014
- 41,433
- 7,859
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
And did he lose his ownership of the car which was allegedly a "free gift"? Your idea is that eternal life is a "free gift" which you have to work for "afterwards", both of which are contradictory. It's not eternal life if you end up hell. So the time frame you're talking about when a person receives the "free gift" of salvation from hell fire is not until after a person dies. Consequently the "works" you're talking about under your soteriology are works you do before you allegedly receive the "free gift", which isn't actually free since you had to work for it.
Not sure if you ever owned a car before, but here on planet Earth, we do have to bring forth: "Works of Responsibility" in owning a car. Your gift (of being given a free car) can be taken away from you by the law if you drive drunk and or run red lights (leading to manslaughter), and or if you hit pedestrians. If you refuse to take care of your tires even, and you try to drive with a flat tire, you can get in accident and destroy your car and others. It's your responsibility to work at taking care of the problem of a flat tire. The same is true if a man sees his wife as an answer to pray from God (kind of like a free gift). Does that mean the man can now live as if she does not exist? Can the man cheat on her? Are there 0% responsibilities in a marriage? Can he just say, "I loves you" to his wife and then not bring forth any actions of love and expect that marriage to work? Surely not. If a man treats his wife like dirt and or if he cheats on her, she can divorce and leave him. Granted, believers only have grounds to divorce on the basis if the other partner is unfaithful. But the point here is that free gifts do come with responsibilities.
You said:Furthermore even if one is allegedly given a "free gift" but there are stipulations in which he must live up to a certain standard or the "free gift" is taken away, then it's not really free as it's contingent upon how well you comply to a set of regulations.
Again, not true. A child can receive a free gift of a drone for Christmas. But that does not mean he can fly the drone in an airshow and potentially have it damage an aircraft and thus kill people. Free gifts does not mean we get to do whatever we want with that gift. The child did not have to pay for the gift. It was was free. But free gifts does not mean we get to be irresponsible with those gifts. I am kind of in awe that I would even have to tell you this.
You said:And finally what about yourself. Have you perfectly lived a sinless "Christian" life? If you sinned then by your own soteriology you lost your "free gift".
But there is forgiveness. Christians confess of their sin to the Lord Jesus in order to be forgiven of sin (1 John 1:9) (1 John 2:1). They also become more and more in the image of Christ, and they are not ruled by their sins as your interpretation on 1 John 1:8 suggests. For in your view on 1 John 1:8, you say that Christians are not characteristically sinning. But yet you also say that Christians who are into holiness are denying their own sinfulness. That is not what 1 John 1:8 is saying. For do you believe that say the "sin of lying" is bubbling up in a Christian every 10 years or every 6 months? Or lets say it is the "sin of inappropriate contentography." Are you saying that a Christian can partake of this sin every 2-4 months and it is okay because he does not do it all the time? But when we read 1 John 1:8, it is not referring to several month time period or a several year time period. It is speaking in the present tense. It is speaking in the moment on a daily ongoing basis.
You said:Anyone can see that the manner in which you're misconstruing those verses are covered by the concepts in the OP.
Well, by the way that you interpret Romans 2, and Romans 4, I do not see how. Your interpretation on those two chapters is completely ignoring what they actually say. I want to do a commentary later on these two chapters when I have time to refute your false exegesis on these two chapters.
Last edited:
Upvote
0