Salvation

[Smalcald]

JC do you believe that Christians can become totally without sin on this earth?

[JCISGD]

JC do you believe that Christians can become totally without sin on this earth?

hi Smd, yes i do and its not based on flimsy proof. But we will not see it if we want to cling to our cherished beliefs. Man would not have landed on the moon if he did not first think it possible, and the reason the church remains weak and pitiful is because most still believe sin must continue to rule.

I have tried to show the truth of this a number of times, but im willing to try again although it is off topic and we may have to do it by pm or new topic.

Staying on topic, i havnt seen here what the jewish concept of salvation is other than 100% obedience to the law, and the rich young ruler stated that he had kept all the law since childhood, all he needed to be righteous was to do it in spirit and truth was to give up his life for Jesus by selling his belongings and following. This was possible but he chose not to.

So the arguement that we are unable to keep all Gods commands is false, the rich young ruler was not even spirit filled. How is it any harder to obey God than ourself ? It is only a matter of preference.

Abraham was saved by faith in Christ to come, and IMO Jews that fail to see that Christ has come are lost in their sins.

[Guest shiloh357]

JC do you believe that Christians can become totally without sin on this earth?

hi Smd, yes i do and its not based on flimsy proof. But we will not see it if we want to cling to our cherished beliefs. Man would not have landed on the moon if he did not first think it possible, and the reason the church remains weak and pitiful is because most still believe sin must continue to rule.

I have tried to show the truth of this a number of times, but im willing to try again although it is off topic and we may have to do it by pm or new topic.

Staying on topic, i havnt seen here what the jewish concept of salvation is other than 100% obedience to the law, and the rich young ruler stated that he had kept all the law since childhood, all he needed to be righteous was to do it in spirit and truth was to give up his life for Jesus by selling his belongings and following. This was possible but he chose not to.

So the arguement that we are unable to keep all Gods commands is false, the rich young ruler was not even spirit filled. How is it any harder to obey God than ourself ? It is only a matter of preference.

Abraham was saved by faith in Christ to come, and IMO Jews that fail to see that Christ has come are lost in their sins.

The problem is not that we cannot keep God's laws. The problem is that we cannot keep them to the same degree Jesus did. Jesus kept all of God's laws perfectly, but Jesus was already sinless.

Your problem is that you are trying keep God's laws in order to become sinless. But in order to keep God's laws to His satisfaction, you would already have to be sinless to begin with.

Rather than resting what Christ has done, as the Bible commands, you are trying to find perfection in your own work. That is legalism, not Christianity.

[JCISGD]

JC do you believe that Christians can become totally without sin on this earth?

hi Smd, yes i do and its not based on flimsy proof. But we will not see it if we want to cling to our cherished beliefs. Man would not have landed on the moon if he did not first think it possible, and the reason the church remains weak and pitiful is because most still believe sin must continue to rule.

I have tried to show the truth of this a number of times, but im willing to try again although it is off topic and we may have to do it by pm or new topic.

Staying on topic, i havnt seen here what the jewish concept of salvation is other than 100% obedience to the law, and the rich young ruler stated that he had kept all the law since childhood, all he needed to be righteous was to do it in spirit and truth was to give up his life for Jesus by selling his belongings and following. This was possible but he chose not to.

So the arguement that we are unable to keep all Gods commands is false, the rich young ruler was not even spirit filled. How is it any harder to obey God than ourself ? It is only a matter of preference.

Abraham was saved by faith in Christ to come, and IMO Jews that fail to see that Christ has come are lost in their sins.

The problem is not that we cannot keep God's laws. The problem is that we cannot keep them to the same degree Jesus did. Jesus kept all of God's laws perfectly, but Jesus was already sinless.

Your problem is that you are trying keep God's laws in order to become sinless. But in order to keep God's laws to His satisfaction, you would already have to be sinless to begin with.

Rather than resting what Christ has done, as the Bible commands, you are trying to find perfection in your own work. That is legalism, not Christianity.

Hi Shiloh, which command do you find impossible to keep by Gods grace ?

You are wrong in your assumption in what i say entire sanctification entails.

First of all it does not mean keeping the law without specific grace by God, and it does not mean trying harder to please God or keep His laws.

It is quite the opposite actually and is a second work of God after salvation.

[Guest shiloh357]

Hi Shiloh, which command do you find impossible to keep by Gods grace ?

All of God's commands are keepable. Like I said, that is not the problem.

You are wrong in your assumption in what i say entire sanctification entails.

I am not assuming anything about you. I don't really care what YOU say entire sanctification entails. YOU did not create the doctrine, so what YOU think is irrelevant. I simply demonstrating the inherent flaw in entire sanctification.

First of all it does not mean keeping the law without specific grace by God, and it does not mean trying harder to please God or keep His laws.

The notion that man can be sinless in this world is not found in Scripture.

It is quite the opposite actually and is a second work of God after salvation.

It s a carnal, manmade doctrine and rather sloppy theology to boot.

[JCISGD]

Hi Shiloh, which command do you find impossible to keep by Gods grace ?

All of God's commands are keepable. Like I said, that is not the problem.

You are wrong in your assumption in what i say entire sanctification entails.

I am not assuming anything about you. I don't really care what YOU say entire sanctification entails. YOU did not create the doctrine, so what YOU think is irrelevant. I simply demonstrating the inherent flaw in entire sanctification.

First of all it does not mean keeping the law without specific grace by God, and it does not mean trying harder to please God or keep His laws.

The notion that man can be sinless in this world is not found in Scripture.

It is quite the opposite actually and is a second work of God after salvation.

It s a carnal, manmade doctrine and rather sloppy theology to boot.

Thats your opinion your welcome to it, as for me i will accept the scriptural proof that it is not only possible but desirable.

Hmmm let me see, will i accept the theology of an unknown man on the internet such as yourself, or... that of men like John Wesley, Hudson Taylor, Oswald Chambers, John Bunnyan and Finney who was the greatest revivalist America has ever seen?

Shiloh its your loss that you insist your right in the face of truths and proofs presented.

[Guest shiloh357]

Hi Shiloh, which command do you find impossible to keep by Gods grace ?

All of God's commands are keepable. Like I said, that is not the problem.

You are wrong in your assumption in what i say entire sanctification entails.

I am not assuming anything about you. I don't really care what YOU say entire sanctification entails. YOU did not create the doctrine, so what YOU think is irrelevant. I simply demonstrating the inherent flaw in entire sanctification.

First of all it does not mean keeping the law without specific grace by God, and it does not mean trying harder to please God or keep His laws.

The notion that man can be sinless in this world is not found in Scripture.

It is quite the opposite actually and is a second work of God after salvation.

It s a carnal, manmade doctrine and rather sloppy theology to boot.

Thats your opinion your welcome to it, as for me i will accept the scriptural proof that it is not only possible but desirable.

Hmmm let me see, will i accept the theology of an unknown man on the internet such as yourself, or... that of men like John Wesley, Hudson Taylor, Oswald Chambers, John Bunnyan and Finney who was the greatest revivalist America has ever seen?

Shiloh its your loss that you insist your right in the face of truths and proofs presented.

That's the difference between you and I. Your theology is based on human authors. My theology is based on what the Bible says. You can have Wesley, Taylor Chambers, Bunyan and Finney. I will just take Christ and His Word. Jesus is good enough for me.

[JCISGD]

Hi Shiloh, which command do you find impossible to keep by Gods grace ?

All of God's commands are keepable. Like I said, that is not the problem.

You are wrong in your assumption in what i say entire sanctification entails.

I am not assuming anything about you. I don't really care what YOU say entire sanctification entails. YOU did not create the doctrine, so what YOU think is irrelevant. I simply demonstrating the inherent flaw in entire sanctification.

First of all it does not mean keeping the law without specific grace by God, and it does not mean trying harder to please God or keep His laws.

The notion that man can be sinless in this world is not found in Scripture.

It is quite the opposite actually and is a second work of God after salvation.

It s a carnal, manmade doctrine and rather sloppy theology to boot.

Thats your opinion your welcome to it, as for me i will accept the scriptural proof that it is not only possible but desirable.

Hmmm let me see, will i accept the theology of an unknown man on the internet such as yourself, or... that of men like John Wesley, Hudson Taylor, Oswald Chambers, John Bunnyan and Finney who was the greatest revivalist America has ever seen?

Shiloh its your loss that you insist your right in the face of truths and proofs presented.

That's the difference between you and I. Your theology is based on human authors. My theology is based on what the Bible says. You can have Wesley, Taylor Chambers, Bunyan and Finney. I will just take Christ and His Word. Jesus is good enough for me.

Hi Shiloh i would like to apologise for the times i was disrespectful to your seniority here on worthy in the early days and for any disrespect since. We do seem to have got off to a bad start? please forgive me.

This is an honest question and not a sideswipe. Why are you sure you have the right understanding of the bible, considering many say they are interpreting it the right and only way, but yet they often differ?

[Guest shiloh357]

Why are you sure you have the right understanding of the bible, considering many say they are interpreting it the right and only way, but yet they often differ?

Because there is only one interpretation in any given text. I go off of the intent of the author. I do not filter the Bible through the writings of others. I use commentaries to augment the Scripture, not as a means of injecting a meaning into it.

The notion of entire sanctification cannot be found in any biblical texts. It is an extrabiblical doctrine and as such, I am not under obligation to accept it.

[JCISGD]

Why are you sure you have the right understanding of the bible, considering many say they are interpreting it the right and only way, but yet they often differ?

Because there is only one interpretation in any given text. I go off of the intent of the author. I do not filter the Bible through the writings of others. I use commentaries to augment the Scripture, not as a means of injecting a meaning into it.

The notion of entire sanctification cannot be found in any biblical texts. It is an extrabiblical doctrine and as such, I am not under obligation to accept it.

Ok thanks. Just a note though, i do not use any commentaries and im not sure how you can say entire sanctification is unbiblical, when those who prove it to be so use scripture that specifically say it is.

How are you sure of the authors intent anymore than those who disagree with you?

Do you agree that the powers of reasoning are not and cannot be set aside for the purpose of finding intent and that Gods commands are not unreasonable ?