E
EleventhHour
Guest
No but I did manage a run outside ... all the neighbors crossed the street when they saw me coming though...
my "hazmat suit" is only a precautionary measure
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.
No but I did manage a run outside ... all the neighbors crossed the street when they saw me coming though...
my "hazmat suit" is only a precautionary measure
I literally just read 2 John. Anyone who wanders away from (Christ) has no relationship with God. But anyone who remains in the teaching of Christ has a relationship with both the Father and the Son.
Obviously people derive from this Scripture that salvation can be lost. However, Jesus states that God will not lose even one of His. Paul states that God remains faithful even when we are not faithful. The latter two Scriptures emphasize salvation can not be lost.
To answer your question, of course it would bother me immensely if saints are able to walk away and be lost. It’s beyond words. I deem salvation cannot be lost, but if I’m wrong and it can be forfeited then so be it to those who forfeit their salvation.
Jude 1:22 And have mercy on those who waver;
Jude 1:23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; have mercy on others, coupled with a fear of God, hating even the clothes stained by the flesh.
Jude 1:23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; have mercy on others, coupled with a fear of God, hating even the clothes stained by the flesh.
No but I did manage a run outside ... all the neighbors crossed the street when they saw me coming though...
my "hazmat suit" is only a precautionary measure
Everybody is keeping their distance here. That's good though.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
It was supposed to be funny though ... I surely do not run with a hazardous material suit on.
But these are trying times that is for sure.
I keep my distance as well.
Taking that completely out of context. Paul was writing to the Roman church that had a problem, they were dividing themselves up between the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers. The law in mind doesn't mean a moral law of right and wrong but a far more limited law of ceremonial offerings and circumcisions. When Jesus spoke of false disciples in Matthew 7, he reproved two attitudes simultaneously. Those who would have no law to rule over them and those who thought through their good works they could impress God. Paul himself, when writing to the Corinthians that he was under Christ's law. And that's an actual, moral law.
I didn't see the responses from you or 11th, but Matt 24:3 is precisely about being saved during the great tribulation (which was in the 1st century)
(Luke 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh)
The context for the above in Luke is when Jerusalem was surrounded by the Roman armies in the war of 66-70 AD
(Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.)
Paul also stated the deliverance was near when he wrote:
(Rom 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.)
(Rom 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.)
Paul stated the day was at hand when he wrote, not 2000 years into his and the Romans' future.
Paul is speaking of THE law - The Law that the Jew's knew brought death.
(2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away)
(Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.)
(Rom 7:10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.)
This is where the lawyers such as the SDA fall apart.
I'm not sure what your point is. Paul was speaking of the law that came at Sinai, and as Paul said in Romans 5 even before the law sin reigned and death with it. So which is it, did the law bring death or did sin bring death?
You stated - "The law in mind doesn't mean a moral law of right and wrong but a far more limited law of ceremonial offerings and circumcisions. "
I was pointing out that the Law in view are the ten commandments given by Moses, not a "limited law of ceremonial offerings and circumcisions."
Sort of, but not quite. It is the law that came at Sinai which was marked by the 10 commandments, but 9 of those commandments were re-established within the new covenant. However, the scope of Romans has in mind the things that separate the people of God which is why I mentioned ceremonial offerings and circumcisions. It's not about being free from a morality, in fact Paul says we establish the law through faith. Long and the short, "the law" is a stand in for the old covenant not a declaration of antinomianism.
Oh there are a number of them over the years on this thread, and the will say "I quit sinning when . . . . ."
Then I will quote these scriptures:
1 Thessalonians 1:5 (NASB)
5 for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.
Ecclesiastes 7:20 (NKJV)
20 For there is not a just man on earth who does good And does not sin.
1 Peter 2:13-17 (NKJV)
13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man
for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme,
14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for
the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put
to silence the ignorance of foolish men--
16 as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as
bondservants of God.
17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.
{That would be President Donald Trump, if you are an American.}
- 
I perceive that You are Lying. You do to Sin, and that makes you Guilty of Breaking all of GOD'S LAWS.
James 2:10 (NCV)
10 A person who follows all of God’s law but fails to obey even one command is guilty of breaking all the commands in that law.
Then the SPOUT OFF for about two Posts, and LEAVE.
While there may be some who literally claim to have quit sinning, it's not necessary to deny OSAS. The fact that you threw in something about Trump(who is not king in America, the sovereign in America is the voter) shows you're ok with twisting Scripture to suit your opinions. Though maybe I'm being uncharitable, did you speak of honoring the king when Obama was in office?
That said, the idea that righteousness must be absolute is a modern conception. Job was innocent and righteous, Noah was righteous, David was righteous. All these men committed sins but they are still considered righteous by the Bible. Sin was an absolute death sentence for both the righteous and the wicked not on account of guilt but because sin causes destruction. The law brought knowledge of sin so that when God judges men who stand accused will have both their wickedness and knowledge of their wickedness to testify against them. On the cross, God judged sin and when He returns Christ will judge sinners.
In Bible time every Country had a KING. Now We have a PRESIDENT, PRIME MISTER, it is Leader of the Country the PETER was referring to.
The king was a lot more than the leader of a country. Presidents and Prime Ministers aren't "absolute" sovereigns. The sovereign in America is the individual, with us collectively appointing someone to manage collective interests. But again, there's really no need for such a mention in the context of this conversation. Did you feel the same way when Obama was in office and insert how necessary it was to honor him in random discussions?
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,
32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord.
33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Two important points that are being made here:
1) God wanted a covenant to function permanently and not one that fails because people break it by lawlessness. If the new covenant can be broken by lawlessness, it is not any better than the old. God states this will be different. (God can't host lawlessness though, hence point 2)
2) Their hearts will be changed in such a way that they walk the walk. Which is why the covenant will not fail/be broken because God surely isn't the one to fail, it's us.
The real question, like you said, is who is truly saved. Only God knows this and the person may inquire God for themselves. We were only given some clues to be able to know to know things to a point in order to protect the church from the wolves, like to look at the fruits of the Spirit.
Predestination and free will are harmonized through foreknowledge ability of God (1 Peter 1:2). God already knows what beings He designed will choose, given all their influences. One cannot break the other, or the Scriptures, since they preach both, would be broken. So I believe we have free will but it cannot break God's plans, and God does what He pleases with us being the potter and shaping us as clay, but it doesn't negate free will.
(I have to accept that I will never fully comprehend this with my human mind.)
It's warning against arrogance. Falling means falling into temptation here, because the very next verses are about temptations.
God will always reprove arrogance by hammering it down some way, it's what God does.
Is it really arrogance to believe God holds me securely and that He will always lead me until the end of my journey?
Does God want me to stress all my life? I had quite a lot of anguish about losing salvation first few years of being a believer. Sometimes I couldn't sleep for days and when I did sleep, I'd cry myself to sleep in great despair and have nightmares. I don't see how is that the peace of Christ.
2 Timothy 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
"Vessels of wrath prepared for destruction", too.
Romans 9 addresses in depth what you wrote above (Specifically that pre-ordination does not mean God wants some damned)
I think you're confusing salvation with sanctification process that unfolds after one is saved.
This is human logic and estimate how things work.
Spiritual things don't operate logically but rather confound logic.
The law, which is by logic supposed to bring order, enabled sin. (Rom 7:5, 1 Cor 15:56)
Forbid something, and people are soon dying to do just that.
In the same way, grace, not keeping a dose of "healthy" fear, is what leads towards perfection:
1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Osas is not based on self, it’s based on God and more importantly, his promise and his trustworthiness
what you have to ask yourself is this
is God so untrustworthy i have Lost faith in him, his promises are baseless, he does not keep his word, in fact, I do not even think he is real anymore?
and if this is true, what God have you been following? Because it certainly is not the God of heaven. I mean he may not give us all we desire, but does that mean he is untrustworthy? And he never promised that to begin with,
in my view, people who think a person can possibly lose faith have never met God, because if they did, they would never make such a claim
i was a prodigal child for 5 years, yet I never completely lost faith in him, or stopped believing, I was just going through a situation where I lost faith in the church, and questioned it, and rightly so, because when God brought me to my knees and I returned, I learned much of what I was trained to believe was not really true
plus again, like I say to all my companions who think a person who is for christ, and goes to church, changing and become against crist, leaving the church, that they were “never of us, for if they were of us they never would have departed, they departed to expose the truth, that they were never of us.”
they did not lose salvation
they did not say here God I do not want this anymore
they NEVER had salvation,
you can’t lose something you never had
Look at what else he said.
I almost fell out of my chair when I read that!
