Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Budman is guilty here of an EQUIVOCATION FALLACY.
Sin is anything that misses the standard of perfection. When we say we sin everyday, it could mean an impure motive, a careless word, an omission, etc. No one would think that sin in this manner indicates a lack of faith. But Paul does say
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
SO Budman is conflating single occurances of sins of frailty with continual willful sins. That is an equivocation fallacy.
If any one sins willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there remains no sacrifice for sin. The sin willfully is also present, continuous, progressive tense.
Sin is anything that misses the standard of perfection. When we say we sin everyday, it could mean an impure motive, a careless word, an omission, etc. No one would think that sin in this manner indicates a lack of faith. But Paul does say
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
SO Budman is conflating single occurances of sins of frailty with continual willful sins. That is an equivocation fallacy.
If any one sins willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there remains no sacrifice for sin. The sin willfully is also present, continuous, progressive tense.
Equivocation fallacy
You are conflating acts of sin which are based on human frailty and not habitual with willful habitual, progressive, continual sin.
If anyone sins (present, active, progressive tense) willfully, there remains no sacrifice for sins.
Progressive means it continuing step by step, not an isolated occurance of sin, like a thoughtless word or a momentary occurance.
You are conflating acts of sin which are based on human frailty and not habitual with willful habitual, progressive, continual sin.
If anyone sins (present, active, progressive tense) willfully, there remains no sacrifice for sins.
Progressive means it continuing step by step, not an isolated occurance of sin, like a thoughtless word or a momentary occurance.
U
You missed the continual and progressive part. And no one said anything about accidents.
By your argument, I can say "oh, I just got angry at someone and said a thoughtless word" and having a untamed tongue all the time are the same thing. It's an absurd argument when you take it to it's logical conclusion
By your argument, I can say "oh, I just got angry at someone and said a thoughtless word" and having a untamed tongue all the time are the same thing. It's an absurd argument when you take it to it's logical conclusion