TomPJr

No they don't. They think about it for about 2 minutes, laugh out loud, and go on to a more serious theory. On the 'interesting' thread, my last post concerned the chalk. I posted it, and all the creationists immediately stopped posting, because they had no answer. They can't come up with an explanation, becasue there isn't one - the process can be seen today, and it takes millions of years, and it takes still water, not a deluge. ..and rock ages are based on dating methods. And please don't dismiss the dating methods(all 40 of them!) with some ludicrous theory that atoms decayed at different rates duting the flood...and I still want to know what those Tyrannosaurus Rex's ate after they embarked from the ark... Hi Dave, What chalk are you refering to? I think I know what you are talking about, but would like you to clarify. I believe I do have an explanation. You said it takes millions of years..... how can you know that? has it been observed? Could God have created it there? These are retorical questions, and my answer about the chalk will be quite different. As far as T-rex goes....I doubt that Noah had full grown ones on the ark, so they were little, and up until that time everything was vegetarian. You might say, no look at their teeth...they were for eating meat. Well I submit to you that they weren't. Look at a panda bear. They have quite big k-nines and they eat leaves. Also, many animals go into a hibernation state during bad weather. anyhow, what chalk were you talking about? and what other so-called proof do you have? Peace, Tom

Did you visit the link? It has answers to all your questions. No, never a cow. The transitional form(s) are thought to belong to an extinct family of carnivores called the Pakicetids . The only similarity it has to cows is hooves. (Source.) If you are kidding, then you're a funny guy. If you are serious, then I just feel bad. Scientists have made sense of the evolution of whales and I think you should read up on it. No. Evolution by natural selection is a very simple theory, basically, the adaptation of organisms to their environment via differential reproductive success AKA survival of the fittest. That this idea could in itself be "highly racist" is silly, almost as silly as saying the law of gravity is racist, or a particular mathematical theorem is racist. The Scopes Trial took place in Tennessee in the year 1925--not exactly the most egalitarian place in American history. Racism was rampant in the South long before Darwin and it is not surprising that racists made (false) Darwinian claims about race as soon as they had the chance. I should also mention that racism is still rife in the South, especially among fundamentalist Christians who don't believe in evolution at all. In conclusion, racism that is ascribed to Darwinism can be blamed squarely on the racists that tried to put it there. And the racism never sticks, because scientific studies don't corroborate it. (In fact, "race" is no longer even considered a valid biological classification in anthropology.) I hope, hr.jr., that in the future you take a little time to learn about scientific theories before you choose to slander them. YES, I checked out your link. I used to believe that stuff....I was brainwashed to believe it since first grade. I respectfully ask you to give me scientific evidence that we evolved from other species or that the earth is more than 10,000 years old. I ask you to give specific evidence so that I can directly address each one to show you how they were proven false or how they're not scientific. I have much evidence to support young earth, but it would take much time so I would prefer to address specific issues that you say are your proof. One thing you mentioned before was the cambrian era... well...the cambrian era is an unproved theory. let me explain. All the different (prehistoric) ages are based on layers of rock or sediment in the earths crust. Correct. by studying those layers, many scientists and evolutionists automatically assume that it took thousands, and millions of years to make the layers. They leave out the possibility of a world wide desaster such as the flood spoken of in the bible which covered the whole world. The Flood. Have you ever seen the side of a dirt road after a heavy rain. The water can quickly carve out mini-canyons. Now imagine the Whole earth being rain on for 40 days, and then fountains being broken up from below the surface of the earth, and the whole earth is flooded 15 cubits higher than the highest mountain peak. Then let the water stay there for a year, and then by Gods power, the water receeds. This would explain most of the layers in the earth, and also the Grand Canyon. You see...much of the sedimentary layers would be soft while they were covered with water. As the world was flooded, and the animals and people were killed, they would naturally be sorted in the layers according to their weight and density. Also, many of the more inteligent creatures are found in the higher layers, because they were smart enough to climb to the high places and they survived longer. As far as not all animals being in the same layer....they wouldn't be, due to the natural sorting as they sank to the bottom of the water. then they wolud be covered by sediment in the same way. There is a term for this type of sorting, but I can't remember it. Any way...that is just one way in brief summary to tackle the cambrian issue. Respecfully, with love in Christ, Tom

As this debate goes round and round, I thought I'd throw in a little thought. I would really like to believe in once saved always saved, however I can't see it in scripture when all things are considered. here's a little picture on how I see it.... The bible describes the Christian walk as a race, and it is mentioned that "narrow is the path that leads to heaven, and broad and wide is the path that leads to destruction".....It also talks about how the wide road is easy and the narrow road is hard... I kind of see our Christian walk like being on a very steap mountain or cliff, and Jesus is at the top. He threw down a rope that reaches all the way down to the bottom, and said grab ahold and I will pull you up. He says I will never let go. All we have to do is hold on....we can't make it up the steep incline alone. Many people, however, will let go of the rope for various reasons, and they will fall down. It seems that the higher we get when we let go the harder we fall too. The good thing is that the rope that Jesus threw down is very long, and still reaches the bottom, and is there for us to grab a hold of again if we fall. All we have to do is hold on. We do have the choice to let go though. Jesus does not tie the rope around us, that is up to us. If we let go of him we will fall, and if we don't grab back ahold then there is no way to make it up the mountain. In the same sense....we must hold on to Jesus, we must stay close to him, and continually be progressing in our walk. The free gift of salvation is the rope. It is our life line, but we have to grab it and hold on. we still have the choice to let go.

First you are rounding an infinitesimal to 0, then you are underestimating forever. Assuming there is no reason why any particular string of letters of a given length is any less likely than any other, then, given an infinite amount of time, the complete works of shakespear WILL be written. And they will be written an infinite many times. And they will be written with one letter wrong an infinite many times etc etc etc. Of course, if you have your little monkey going on this project, there is no garuntee that at any time when you check on him, he will have written anything legible, no matter how long you wait. In fact, you can't check on him at all, because doing so applies a finite time constraint, no matter when you do it (you can't check on him after forever, because forever hasn't elapsed yet and it never will). Well I

Puffeth Puffeth Oh Mighty Dragon "The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts." "His ways are always grievous; thy judgments are far above out of his sight: as for all his enemies, he puffeth at them." (Psalms 10:4-5) Love, Joe

Or could it be that the premise upon which the bible is interpreted is false?

I think I understand what you are trying to say. But . . . where do you say 'conversion' fits in with what Jesus said about the one thing that enables a person to see or enter the kingdom of heaven. Being born again. You see to me, if one is not born of the Spirit, he/she cannot be 'saved'. I think that being born again is the same as being converted... If you are truly born again in spirit, then your heart is converted. However, we still have our old nature and bad habits that we must overcome lest they un-convert us. Many people claim to be born again, but they are lying to themselves, or the temptations overtake them an they fall back to their old nature. I believe that Judas was converted, and born again, but he let his sinful nature overtake him. If your heart is converted then you are on the road to repentence and making progress along the way. If you are not converted, then there will be no true progress, and just vain attempts to justify your lifestyle. the truth is that while God is willing for us to be converted unto Godlyness, Satan is trying to convert us to his side. We are what we behold. We become like what we spend time with. That is why it is so important to abstain from immoral conduct, whether it be in person, tv, radio, etc.... If we choose to endulge in immoral activities, we just strengthen the old habbits. You know i see you keep saying that you can lose salvation, or be unconverted. There has been plenty of scripture that says you can't. YOu claim there is scripture that says it can happen, somethings wrong! IF you have scripture that says you can lose salvation going against the very doctrine of Chrsit, then you don't believe the bible is inerrant. The bible IS however inerrant and agrees completely with itself. So based on that, it would be impossible to lose one salvation based on your verses. Since they do not agree with the verses taht say Salvation is secure then they must mean something else. Otherwise the bible is entirely false. Or could it be that your verses mean something else? I do not believe that the bible contradicts itself...just the lies that Satan has decieved people with so that they will not be ready, and they will falsly believe they are secure That is exactly what Satan wants.... I, like the aposltes, warn people to repent, and convert.... People like you tell them to relax, your saved, you don't have to do anything, Jesus will do it all for you, there's nothing to worry about.... well, if your heart is converted then there is nothing to worry about.

I agree with you totally. It sounds like some are thinking that you are implying it is okay to date and have sex. I know that is not the case. To expand on what you said.... If two people vow to eachother and God, they are married. The unbelievers will have no problem with that, like someone else said, because they wont know the difference. If they tell them they are married, who will ask to see their liscence. The truth is that you don't need a liscence at all. You can still have your marriage recognized by the government if you want to without a liscence, by signing a document such as from a family bible, and having it witnessed. Then you have it recorded at the county building. You are not living in sin if you don't have it recorded though....you will just not be recognized by the government and may lose out on certain marriage benefits. One more thing.... If someone decides to proceed with this type of common law marriage, without record, the reasons for divorce from the bible still hold. You can't just get tired of eachother and break up...then you would be committing adultery when you fornicated with someone else. If you get into a sexual relationship with someone, without a lifelong commitment you are living in sin. with love in Christ, Tom

6-day creation HAS been disproved. That's why they don't teach it in public schools or accredited colleges, and less than 5% of scientists believe it. Where have you been? Have you ever heard of Kent Hovind? He asked scientists exactly what you are asking...knowing very well a scientific theory CAN'T be proved. Theories, by definition, cannot be proved. Of course evolution, like the theory of gravity, has been overwhelmingly confirmed. One more thing. I don't feel the need to convince you evolution has occurred. It's up to you to get an education, and where you put your faith is also up to you. If you have faith in a literal Genesis, no amount of scientific evidence can move you. Moving is up to you. You are a talking contradiction Evolution (macro evolution) is a theory, not observable fact. You admitted that a theory cannot be proven. Then you said that evolution has been confirmed. Well, it is a confirmed theory, but not fact. Gravity has been demonsatrated and is demonstrated continually....where is a demonstration of evolution? and even more....much of the evidence that scientists use to support evolution has been proven false. Nothing at all about creation can be proven false. It is unprovable theories that contradict it, from scientists who want to define their own God instead of giving credit where credit is due. If you don't want to convince me then why are you on this thread? I challenge you again, to show me proof of evolution. You also said that 6 day creation has been disproved....how? The reason they don't teach it in schools anymore is because satan has a stronghold on our society and leadership.

I am not a scientist but I did get an education in it (a bachelors in biology) and I am well aware it doesn't exactly jive with literal creation. It doesn't jive at all, really. Are you are scientist, Tom? If not, how can you possibly tell us what "true science" is? Note: I believe in God. I already have faith, I don't need creationist pseudoscience to support my belief. Creationist pseudoscience is a poor substitute for real science, and an even poorer substitute for faith. I think you are letting your anger get in the way of reason. any idiot can look up the term science and have an adequate definition sci

Lol

I think I understand what you are trying to say. But . . . where do you say 'conversion' fits in with what Jesus said about the one thing that enables a person to see or enter the kingdom of heaven. Being born again. You see to me, if one is not born of the Spirit, he/she cannot be 'saved'. I think that being born again is the same as being converted... If you are truly born again in spirit, then your heart is converted. However, we still have our old nature and bad habits that we must overcome lest they un-convert us. Many people claim to be born again, but they are lying to themselves, or the temptations overtake them an they fall back to their old nature. I believe that Judas was converted, and born again, but he let his sinful nature overtake him. If your heart is converted then you are on the road to repentence and making progress along the way. If you are not converted, then there will be no true progress, and just vain attempts to justify your lifestyle. the truth is that while God is willing for us to be converted unto Godlyness, Satan is trying to convert us to his side. We are what we behold. We become like what we spend time with. That is why it is so important to abstain from immoral conduct, whether it be in person, tv, radio, etc.... If we choose to endulge in immoral activities, we just strengthen the old habbits.

I read through some of these replies and see some peoblems....I won't mention names. First of all....Science and creation go hand in hand. It is Macro-Evolution which is contrary to creation. Science (true science) is the study of Gods creation. I think that the problem comes in when people try to say that evolution is science, when in fact it is NOT! Well wait a minute...let me back up....there are two types of evolution, by definition, which come in to play here. Macro-Evolution, as I mentioned earlier, is the theory that we all were evolved from some primortial soup after the big bang. (This kind of evolution is not science at all. It takes faith to believe in it because there is absolutely no proof, and it is therfore just another religon) Micro-Evolution is science based and observable. It is small variations within a species. It is not the changing from one kind to another. There are many variations of dogs, but they are all dogs. A good example of Micro-evolution (or adaptation) is a certain moth(I forget the name) lived in a big city where there was much smog. This type of moth had either white ones or black ones, of the same kind. Eventually the white ones were eaten by preditors and now only the black ones remain because of their camoflaged dark color in the smog. Yes, they were of the same kind and could produce white ones, but eventually the white trait became extinct and wasn't passed on anymore. True Science (not Macro-Evolution) goes hand in hand with Creation and demonstrates Gods awsome Creation.

Hi, Welcome, I think that it depends on who you ask. I presume that most people think it means that you have salvation. and...many believe that it is when you accept Chist. That is why they say "I was saved in (year)" I believe, however, that there is a difference. I don't think that we should presume on our salvation, because we don't know what we are going to do tomorrow. Salvation comes by grace through faith, if you confess, ask forgiveness, and are willing to repent. anyone can say "I accept Jesus" or "I got saved", but are they converted? Salvation comes with conversion. Many will come saying Lord Lord, and he will say I never knew you...(they thought they were saved) Thanks Tom. May I ask then, what to you is conversion? Certainly, Conversion is the changing of your heart from the old nature to love sin, to the new nature to love and want to obey God. That doesn't mean that we cannot stumble into sin, but it should not be the norm. The norm for one who is converted is continual growth and repentence. Lets examine ourselves. I believe that we must be converted in order to receive salvation and the Kingdom of heaven, just as certain computer files have to be converted in order to be opened by other programs. Imagine Heaven is the new program... we are corrupt files that will spread a deadly virus unless we are converted into new files without the virus. That is the whole point of us being quaranteened here on this sin deseased earth. Sin cannot exist in the presence of God, so we must be in a process of sanctification(being made Holy) by getting rid of our sins and developing great love for our Creator. I don't think that we can do this unless our hearts are converted. does that make sense to you?

Hi, Welcome, I think that it depends on who you ask. I presume that most people think it means that you have salvation. and...many believe that it is when you accept Chist. That is why they say "I was saved in (year)" I believe, however, that there is a difference. I don't think that we should presume on our salvation, because we don't know what we are going to do tomorrow. Salvation comes by grace through faith, if you confess, ask forgiveness, and are willing to repent. anyone can say "I accept Jesus" or "I got saved", but are they converted? Salvation comes with conversion. Many will come saying Lord Lord, and he will say I never knew you...(they thought they were saved)

Just some comments on the above question and a few others that relate directly to it, such as "Christ has already forgiven all of our sins, past, present and future". There seems to be a continual thread of assumption in those that hold to some form of eternal security that Christ has forgiven sins. I'm going to assume that it is related to the Atonement, and by virtue of Christ dying upon the Cross forgave man's sins. First, Christ forgave no man his sins. Not one single sin was forgiven on the Cross. The Cross made the forgiveness of sins possible ONLY because Christ propitiated those sins, the penalty of those sins. If that were actually true, then all of mankind is automatically spiritually saved. That is a whole new form of Universalism. There is absolutely no forgiveness without repentance. It is stated this way all through the NT. Even in the OT. We have an obligation as believers to be reconciled to God. II Cor 5:20 Also Matt 5:24 relates to the Lord's Prayer and also the unfaithful servant. God holds us accountable also for those who wrong us. We are to forgiven them. We are to forgive them seventy times seven. There is no end to the forgiveness. As we forgive those who treaspass against us, so He will forgive our trespasses. We MUST keep sin out of our lives. We must work to remain in Him and when we sin, we must seek forgiveness of those sins. Sin separates man from God. That is why daily confession is an absolute must in the life of a believer. There is no such thing as automatic forgiveness. No forgiveness without repentance/confession. Another area is that of the long list of evildoers who will not enter into heaven. Some assume that believers cannot fall or resort to this kind of evil. The problem with evil is that it starts small, not very beguiling in order to begin to get a beleiver to slip and slide and work him over to the precipice. When a believer begins to rationalize, to make excuses he is well on the way to overt, willingly sinning and just simply overlooking it. This is probably the greatest danger to the view of OSAS. We become hardened to sin. We assume that we are automatically forgiven because we at one time believed. Yet, sin, moves one outside of being IN Christ. At other places in this thread, comments questioning just how many sins does it take to fall from salvation. The answer is ONE. See the Story of Adam. A believer possesses a fallen human nature, will sin, he must make sure he is aware, even confess sin without knowledge, to make sure that He remains reconciled to God. This is the anquish of Paul in Rom 7:13-25. That is the reason for repenting. Satan is very good a getting people to keep their sins... Sin keeps us from God and that is what Satan wants. How clever....he tells people to believe in God, tells them to go to church, and tells them that God is so merciful that we don't really have to repent. (really not that funny)

If you are saying that the conviction from the Holy Spirit is not real, or you make excuses, you are speaking against the Holy Spirits work. You are taking it upon yourself to decide what's right or wrong instead of really listening to the Holy Spirit. Think about it....To blaspheme God, you claim the power of God for yourself....If you are choosing to rebel against the Holy Spirit and rely on your own interpretation and understanding of what is good and acceptable, then you are blaspheming the Holy Spirit by claiming those attributes that are possessed by the Holy Spirit. and... Salvation comes by faithe, confession, asking forgiveness, and repentence.....if you continually ignore the Holy Spirit you become in danger of hardening your heart and deafening you ears to the very one who convicts you to do those things. Then you will no longer be convicted to ask fogiveness or repent. The only unforgiveable sin is the one you fail to ask forgiveness for. That is why we should head the convictions from the Holy Spirit lest we Grieve him away. That is an interesting response, but it doesn't fit. In the first place, when Jesus spoke of the Pharisees being guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, they were attributing the works of the Spirit to the devil. As such, it is obvious that was their sin, not simple rejection of Christ. You can reject something without being guilty of blasphemy. In reality, most of us didn't get saved the first time we felt conviction. I was under conviction for 6 months before getting saved. In addition, one can reject salvation without speaking against God or his Spirit. I have known people who will not speak against God at all, but won't get saved either. One man I know once said that he believes in the Lord, but doesn't serve him. That is not blasphemy or speaking against. It is simply making a bad choice. Butero. Hi. Please read my post again slowly with consideration. then continue with this response. I think that what you said goes hand in hand with what I said...The pharisees attributed the works of Jesus to the Devil actually. But they did, however, ignore the Holy Spirits convictions, due to their selfish pride, greed, and unwillingness to change. In this sense, because they denied that it was from God, they blasphemed the Holy Spirit which was their only means of being convicted to repent. Remember...the Holy Spirit is here to enlighten us and bring us into the truth, and to convict us of sin. If we deny that it is devine conviction we are denying the Holy Spirit. If we deny that it is from God then it might as well be from Satan. Thus Blasphemy of the HolyGhost. The pharisees were taking upon themselves the authority of the Holy Spirit by claiming that they knew what was true and denying the real truth. They, by their own accord, condemd others....not by true inspiration. I am interested to hear from you. With love in Christ. Tom. Hello Tom. I guess to get to the bottom of this, we need to look at the scripture where the issue comes up, from Matthew 12:22-32 22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb spake and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. Jesus just gets through casting a devil out of a man, and the people begin to marvel. Notice that the Pharisees don't simply reject Jesus as being the Messiah, but they take things a step further and accuse him of using the power of the devil to cast out devils. In reality, it wasn't the power of the devil at all that empowered Jesus, but the Holy Spirit, the same Spirit that decended upon him in the form of a dove at his earlier baptism. Let's continue. 25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Jesus responds to the Pharisees by pointing out that Satan will not cast himself out of someone he is possessing. It makes no logical sense to do so. It would be like someone in the military fighting against his own troops. If someone does this, they will not stand because they are divided. Jesus goes on to make this same point in reference to a kingdom or a house divided. He then mentions the fact that some of their children have been casting out devils, and asks by whose power they are operating? Verse 28 is very important. In this verse, Jesus tells us where the real power to cast out devils lies. It is not through Beelzebub, but through the Spririt of God. When a person is possessed, the devils inside him are not going to up and leave on their own. It requires one stronger than them to force them to leave. We in our own power are not capable of doing this, but the Spririt of God is. In verse 30, Jesus says that those not for him are against him. The Pharisees who are rejecting Jesus are making themselves his enemy and attempting to keep others from accepting him. He then goes on in verse 31 and 32 to make the following statement. 31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. If we only had verses 31 and 32 to go by, and they were isolated from all other scripture, we could draw any number of conclusions as to their meaning. However, that is not the way they are presented. Jesus is continuing to speak to the event that had just occured, where the Pharisees had said he was casting out devils by "Beelzebub the prince of the devils" in verse 24, and Jesus was setting them straight by saying that it was by the "Spirit of God" he was in actuality casting them out in verse 28. We can see that the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was attributing the work of God's Spirit to the devil. Jesus takes things a step further and warns us against speaking against the Holy Ghost at all in verse 32, telling us that this sin will not be forgiven, "neither in this world, neither in the world to come." This sin cannot simply be rejecting salvation or Jesus, because he tells us that "whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him." He makes a distinction between attacking him and attacking the Spirit. Hi Butero, I think that we are in more agreement than you think....mybe not, but let me explain more. You said, "We can see that the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was attributing the work of God's Spirit to the devil." That goes hand in hand with what I was talking about. The Pharissees where denying the power of the Holy Spirit. They accused Jesus of blasphemy(claiming the power of God). If the Pharisees would have repented then they would have been saved, but they let their pride and selfishness harden their hearts and they would not head the warnings from Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Think about this... If it is bad to Just talk bad about the Holy Spirit, how much worse would it be to talk bad about Jesus or the Father. Of the three, the Father has the highest rank. The reason it is so dangerous to deny or blaspheme the Holy Spirit, is because he is the means by which we are convicted of the need to repent and ask forgiveness. The bible says that we must ask forgiveness and repent, so if we grieve away the Holy Spirit, we will no longer have the conviction to ask forgiveness or repent. When Jesus was accused of blasphemy it was because he claimed the authority or power of God... When we deny the convictions From the Holy Spirit, we are taking him from his position and putting ourselves in his place....just like Jesus putting himself in the place of God. The only difference is that jesus had the right to. If we continue to put ourselves in his place too long, there will come a point when probation closes, and like I sai above, we will grieve away the Holy Spirit and he will no longer convict our hearts, which leads us to ask forgiveness and repent. All other sins can be forgiven because we can ask forgiveness and repent....once you grieve away the Holy Spirit, you will no longer feel the need to do so. The only sin that is not forgiven is the one you don't ask forgiveness for and repent of. Tom I don't totally dissagree with what you said. If the Holy Spirit leaves you, you will not be convicted and therefore won't repent and be forgiven. There is no doubt that is true. In the same fashion, I don't believe that a person who sincerely wants forgiveness for sins could have been guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because it is the Spirit that brings conviction in the first place. I guess the only thing I dissagree with you on is exactly what the Pharisees sin was. I don't believe it was rejecting Jesus. I believe it was attributing the work of the Spirit to the devil. The Spirit was the power that was casting out devils, and they claimed it was Beelezebub, prince of the devils that was doing it. To simply reject salvation is not blasphemy. In addition, while you may feel like it is as bad or worse to blaspheme the Father or Jesus, that is the exact opposite of what Jesus said. He said if we blaspheme him or the Father, we can still be granted forgiveness, but if we blaspheme or speak a word against the Holy Ghost, there will be no forgiveness granted. I don't fully understand why this is the greater offense, but it clearly is. hello again, I'm glad to see we are in agreement.... however, I didn't say that they were damned because they rejected Jesus...I do think that whether you say they attributed the work of the Spirit to the devil or they rejected the Holy Spirit, are one in the same. If they hadn't rejected the Holy Spirit working in their life, they wouldn't have attributed it to Satan. also, you said "He said if we blaspheme him or the Father, we can still be granted forgiveness, but if we blaspheme or speak a word against the Holy Ghost, there will be no forgiveness granted. I don't fully understand why this is the greater offense, but it clearly is." I agree 100%. I just think it goes to reason that this is because of what we already agreed on....if the Holy Spirit is ignored too long we can harden our hearts not to hear the conviction and need for confession and repentence. One more thought... I think that a person may literally attribute the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan, but later learn the truth, be convicted, and repent. Some peoples minds are full of so much garbage from our society, and may have a warped sense of truth, and therefore may attribute the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan. This isn't the unparidinable sin yet because they can still be reached. It is the continual willfull disregaurd of the convictions from the Holy Spirit which will ultimately lead to the Unpardinable sin, because they will get to the point where they will not ask for forgiveness or even think about repentence. If a person is feeling conviction then they probably haven't committed it. Tom

"I believe"...."probably be forgiven"...."I really don't think it's as cut and dry as people try to make it." For someone who is so absolutely sure that a believer can lose their salvation for "intentional premeditated sin", you sure don't seem very concrete with regards to "unintentional sin." Yet the Bible makes no distinction between the two. It has been repeated in this thread that, "neither idolators, drunkards, liars........will inherit the kingdom of the heavens." Yet there has not once been the proper distinction made that "those who practice such things" do so with intent and malice. No true believer "practices sin." You had better be absolutely sure that you know the difference, and don't make assumptions about what you think God might do with your unrepentant "unintentional" sin. That is why it is so omportant to repent and live according to Gods will, obedient to his word and to his laws. Obey his commands out of love, respect, and fear, and cultivate those thing within your heart so you will naturally want to keeps his laws and hate breaking them. If you do that then you are secure. If not then you got something to work on. If you are totally converted then there is nothing to worry about, but it will be easy for someone who is young in faith to fall away or get comfortable in their sins and continue in them, not willing to repent, because they are convinced that they are already saved and they can't lose it. Can't you see why that is such a dangerous teaching? They hold so tightly to their warm and fuzzy security blanket that someone like you gave them and start compramizing their faith because, "hey god forgives and I'm already eternally secure". They will never be truly converted, because they think they already are. God bless Tom

Then in terms of what you believe concerning salvation, you had better hope beyond all hope that you don't have a single sin unrepented of when your time is up on this earth. Imagine....A Christian going to hell because of a single loose word said half a second before a bus runs him over. That's precisely why OSNAS doesn't work! Hi Ovedya, I knew somebody would respond with that. I Probably left you presuming what I believe by giving you a lack of information. Kind of like how the bible says that sinners will die or that idoitors and fornicators will have no part in the Kingdom of heaven. If you stop there in those passages there is no room for forgiveness, but we both agree that God forgives, right? Like I and others mentioned before, it is a matter of the heart. God knows your heart... Do you agree that even a person whos heart is with God will stumble and sin sometimes? Even a person who has a converted heart can stumble sometimes, but it is the willfull premeditated sin that is a direct turning away from God. If you turn away on purpose, and don't repent, then you are throwing your salvation away. Period. on the other hand, I believe, that if a person whos heart is with God sins in the spur of the moment, without really thinking about it, then they would probably be forgiven even if they died before they asked forgiveness, since God knows their heart and they aren't intentionally premeditating their sin. I really don't think it's as cut and dry as people try to make it....like I said, God judges our hearts, and it's not for us to say that Joe Blow is saved or not. The wise man will be prepared by true conversion, and the foolish man presumes on his salvation.

If you are saying that the conviction from the Holy Spirit is not real, or you make excuses, you are speaking against the Holy Spirits work. You are taking it upon yourself to decide what's right or wrong instead of really listening to the Holy Spirit. Think about it....To blaspheme God, you claim the power of God for yourself....If you are choosing to rebel against the Holy Spirit and rely on your own interpretation and understanding of what is good and acceptable, then you are blaspheming the Holy Spirit by claiming those attributes that are possessed by the Holy Spirit. and... Salvation comes by faithe, confession, asking forgiveness, and repentence.....if you continually ignore the Holy Spirit you become in danger of hardening your heart and deafening you ears to the very one who convicts you to do those things. Then you will no longer be convicted to ask fogiveness or repent. The only unforgiveable sin is the one you fail to ask forgiveness for. That is why we should head the convictions from the Holy Spirit lest we Grieve him away. That is an interesting response, but it doesn't fit. In the first place, when Jesus spoke of the Pharisees being guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, they were attributing the works of the Spirit to the devil. As such, it is obvious that was their sin, not simple rejection of Christ. You can reject something without being guilty of blasphemy. In reality, most of us didn't get saved the first time we felt conviction. I was under conviction for 6 months before getting saved. In addition, one can reject salvation without speaking against God or his Spirit. I have known people who will not speak against God at all, but won't get saved either. One man I know once said that he believes in the Lord, but doesn't serve him. That is not blasphemy or speaking against. It is simply making a bad choice. Butero. Hi. Please read my post again slowly with consideration. then continue with this response. I think that what you said goes hand in hand with what I said...The pharisees attributed the works of Jesus to the Devil actually. But they did, however, ignore the Holy Spirits convictions, due to their selfish pride, greed, and unwillingness to change. In this sense, because they denied that it was from God, they blasphemed the Holy Spirit which was their only means of being convicted to repent. Remember...the Holy Spirit is here to enlighten us and bring us into the truth, and to convict us of sin. If we deny that it is devine conviction we are denying the Holy Spirit. If we deny that it is from God then it might as well be from Satan. Thus Blasphemy of the HolyGhost. The pharisees were taking upon themselves the authority of the Holy Spirit by claiming that they knew what was true and denying the real truth. They, by their own accord, condemd others....not by true inspiration. I am interested to hear from you. With love in Christ. Tom. Hello Tom. I guess to get to the bottom of this, we need to look at the scripture where the issue comes up, from Matthew 12:22-32 22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb spake and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. Jesus just gets through casting a devil out of a man, and the people begin to marvel. Notice that the Pharisees don't simply reject Jesus as being the Messiah, but they take things a step further and accuse him of using the power of the devil to cast out devils. In reality, it wasn't the power of the devil at all that empowered Jesus, but the Holy Spirit, the same Spirit that decended upon him in the form of a dove at his earlier baptism. Let's continue. 25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Jesus responds to the Pharisees by pointing out that Satan will not cast himself out of someone he is possessing. It makes no logical sense to do so. It would be like someone in the military fighting against his own troops. If someone does this, they will not stand because they are divided. Jesus goes on to make this same point in reference to a kingdom or a house divided. He then mentions the fact that some of their children have been casting out devils, and asks by whose power they are operating? Verse 28 is very important. In this verse, Jesus tells us where the real power to cast out devils lies. It is not through Beelzebub, but through the Spririt of God. When a person is possessed, the devils inside him are not going to up and leave on their own. It requires one stronger than them to force them to leave. We in our own power are not capable of doing this, but the Spririt of God is. In verse 30, Jesus says that those not for him are against him. The Pharisees who are rejecting Jesus are making themselves his enemy and attempting to keep others from accepting him. He then goes on in verse 31 and 32 to make the following statement. 31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. If we only had verses 31 and 32 to go by, and they were isolated from all other scripture, we could draw any number of conclusions as to their meaning. However, that is not the way they are presented. Jesus is continuing to speak to the event that had just occured, where the Pharisees had said he was casting out devils by "Beelzebub the prince of the devils" in verse 24, and Jesus was setting them straight by saying that it was by the "Spirit of God" he was in actuality casting them out in verse 28. We can see that the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was attributing the work of God's Spirit to the devil. Jesus takes things a step further and warns us against speaking against the Holy Ghost at all in verse 32, telling us that this sin will not be forgiven, "neither in this world, neither in the world to come." This sin cannot simply be rejecting salvation or Jesus, because he tells us that "whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him." He makes a distinction between attacking him and attacking the Spirit. Hi Butero, I think that we are in more agreement than you think....mybe not, but let me explain more. You said, "We can see that the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was attributing the work of God's Spirit to the devil." That goes hand in hand with what I was talking about. The Pharissees where denying the power of the Holy Spirit. They accused Jesus of blasphemy(claiming the power of God). If the Pharisees would have repented then they would have been saved, but they let their pride and selfishness harden their hearts and they would not head the warnings from Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Think about this... If it is bad to Just talk bad about the Holy Spirit, how much worse would it be to talk bad about Jesus or the Father. Of the three, the Father has the highest rank. The reason it is so dangerous to deny or blaspheme the Holy Spirit, is because he is the means by which we are convicted of the need to repent and ask forgiveness. The bible says that we must ask forgiveness and repent, so if we grieve away the Holy Spirit, we will no longer have the conviction to ask forgiveness or repent. When Jesus was accused of blasphemy it was because he claimed the authority or power of God... When we deny the convictions From the Holy Spirit, we are taking him from his position and putting ourselves in his place....just like Jesus putting himself in the place of God. The only difference is that jesus had the right to. If we continue to put ourselves in his place too long, there will come a point when probation closes, and like I sai above, we will grieve away the Holy Spirit and he will no longer convict our hearts, which leads us to ask forgiveness and repent. All other sins can be forgiven because we can ask forgiveness and repent....once you grieve away the Holy Spirit, you will no longer feel the need to do so. The only sin that is not forgiven is the one you don't ask forgiveness for and repent of. Tom

If you are saying that the conviction from the Holy Spirit is not real, or you make excuses, you are speaking against the Holy Spirits work. You are taking it upon yourself to decide what's right or wrong instead of really listening to the Holy Spirit. Think about it....To blaspheme God, you claim the power of God for yourself....If you are choosing to rebel against the Holy Spirit and rely on your own interpretation and understanding of what is good and acceptable, then you are blaspheming the Holy Spirit by claiming those attributes that are possessed by the Holy Spirit. and... Salvation comes by faithe, confession, asking forgiveness, and repentence.....if you continually ignore the Holy Spirit you become in danger of hardening your heart and deafening you ears to the very one who convicts you to do those things. Then you will no longer be convicted to ask fogiveness or repent. The only unforgiveable sin is the one you fail to ask forgiveness for. That is why we should head the convictions from the Holy Spirit lest we Grieve him away. That is an interesting response, but it doesn't fit. In the first place, when Jesus spoke of the Pharisees being guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, they were attributing the works of the Spirit to the devil. As such, it is obvious that was their sin, not simple rejection of Christ. You can reject something without being guilty of blasphemy. In reality, most of us didn't get saved the first time we felt conviction. I was under conviction for 6 months before getting saved. In addition, one can reject salvation without speaking against God or his Spirit. I have known people who will not speak against God at all, but won't get saved either. One man I know once said that he believes in the Lord, but doesn't serve him. That is not blasphemy or speaking against. It is simply making a bad choice. Butero. Hi. Please read my post again slowly with consideration. then continue with this response. I think that what you said goes hand in hand with what I said...The pharisees attributed the works of Jesus to the Devil actually. But they did, however, ignore the Holy Spirits convictions, due to their selfish pride, greed, and unwillingness to change. In this sense, because they denied that it was from God, they blasphemed the Holy Spirit which was their only means of being convicted to repent. Remember...the Holy Spirit is here to enlighten us and bring us into the truth, and to convict us of sin. If we deny that it is devine conviction we are denying the Holy Spirit. If we deny that it is from God then it might as well be from Satan. Thus Blasphemy of the HolyGhost. The pharisees were taking upon themselves the authority of the Holy Spirit by claiming that they knew what was true and denying the real truth. They, by their own accord, condemd others....not by true inspiration. I am interested to hear from you. With love in Christ. Tom.

Hmm that would mean the blood shed on the cross by Jesus wasn't sufficient enough to overcome the law when we accept him as Lord over our life. You stated three words that threw up a red flag for me...."we must do"....we mustn't do anything but place our faith in Jesus Christ in order to be saved. the blood on the cross did not overcome the law in anyway...in fact his blood was shed because of the law. If there was no law there would have been no transgression and no need for the sacrifice. Jesus's blood made it possible to reconcile us to God. Even if you stopped sinning, if it weren't for Jesus, you still wouldn't be able to be reconciled. Even if you stopped sinning totally(because of your passed sin). Jesus did not do away with the law, but he established it and how we can keep it.