Jump to content
IGNORED

Should we pray for the souls of the people who abort babies, and does God still love them!


backontrack

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.19
  • Reputation:   277
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/06/2016
  • Status:  Offline

11 hours ago, pinacled said:

I was taught that murder is an unforgivable sin.

 

I don't know where that came from or which God's forgiveness they were talking about but the God of the bible says this....

Mat 12:31  So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.19
  • Reputation:   277
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/06/2016
  • Status:  Offline

6 minutes ago, pinacled said:

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22, KJV)

 

note the underlined.

and there is an unforgivable sin.

You missed the hilited part shall be in danger....

...that is to say you're walking a slippery slope towards turning completely away if you don't change your attitude

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  3
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  51
  • Content Per Day:  0.03
  • Reputation:   87
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/01/2019
  • Status:  Offline

12 minutes ago, pinacled said:

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22, KJV)

 

note the underlined.

and there is an unforgivable sin.

Let's cut to the chase, then. Please show me in scripture where it distinguishes which sins are forgiven and which aren't.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  940
  • Topics Per Day:  0.35
  • Content Count:  13,412
  • Content Per Day:  5.02
  • Reputation:   8,958
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/04/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  03/03/1885

1 hour ago, pinacled said:

Circumstantially David avoided the direct action of murdering the man. 

 

No he did not, he planned the murder, he ordered it. Can't get much more directly involved than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.19
  • Reputation:   277
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/06/2016
  • Status:  Offline

3 minutes ago, pinacled said:

No where ever has Yeshua or the tzadik ever instructed anyone that the son of perdition Judas or the murderer itself is to be forgiven.

How does that relate to the verse you were using below.....trying to understand what you are getting at....

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22, KJV)

what is the tzadik?

In regards to your staement and the verse I quoted that you are responded to

37 minutes ago, Mike 2 said:

Mat 12:31  So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

These are Yeshua's (Jesus) own words. When he says every sin will be forgiven I think there isn't much opportunity for misunderstanding that...... is there? To contradict that would require a very clear biblical staement.

Can you show me something difinitive that I can consider?

20 minutes ago, pinacled said:

"Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood."

What do you suppose abstaining from blood is meant here?

There is a particular meaning to this verse. I'm not sure what your interpretation of it is.

Would you be able to take a moment and explain your thoughts on it and what it means to you?

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  35
  • Content Per Day:  0.02
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/19/2019
  • Status:  Offline

4 minutes ago, pinacled said:

Abstaining from blood is an instruction that directly involves murder. For the Life is in the blood. Hence abstain from blood. The Hebrews clearly understand the meaning. Just as is taught by 1 yochanon(john 3 that quayin(Cain is of the evil ones and actions where evil and was condemned to destruction. 

Yeshua clearly stated that Satan is a murderer. The two precepts clearly taught by Yeshua and yochanon are very clear. Anger without cause is quayin. "Swift to shed innocent blood is the mark of the beast".

Proper exegesis is building on the words or instruction of two or three or more witnesses. Its Not a debate of interpretation.

Are you implying that I or any other is instructed in any form by the Lord to forgive what He himself condemned.

Blasphemy of the spirit is sin unto death. 

You can either heed what I was taught and receive the Truth or not. The finality of the son of perdition is already sealed.

Blessings Always

 

Here are just a few verses ... clearly it states that one is not to eat meat with the blood still in it ... it does not reference murder.

Quote

 

[Gen 9:4 KJV]
But flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

[Lev 17:14 KJV]
For [it is] the life of all flesh; the blood of it [is] for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh [is] the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

[Deu 12:23 KJV]
Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood [is] the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  25
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,679
  • Content Per Day:  1.41
  • Reputation:   3
  • Days Won:  16
  • Joined:  01/19/2019
  • Status:  Offline

I am pretty sure that passage refers to consuming blood, not murder :)   That apostolic council would surely not have needed to restate a prohibition against murder for even the dullest of Christians :)

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  25
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,679
  • Content Per Day:  1.41
  • Reputation:   3
  • Days Won:  16
  • Joined:  01/19/2019
  • Status:  Offline

6 minutes ago, pinacled said:

I understand what you are trying to convey. Personally I was appalled by David's plot. Though I still will not be deceived into a snare and say David committed murder. Think on what Yeshua is teaching here. The circumstances of battle where a champion of Yisrayl is a known warrior with many valiant feats on the battlefield. He chose freely to go into battle.

And the commander didn't exactly follow David's plot. Read the entire account and walk with discretion.

"Pray for those who despisefully use you...."

 

Be vigilant readers.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.  I have no compunction whatsoever calling a conspiracy to take the life of an innocent man to cover up personal sins against that very man a murder no matter what the method was.

David set in motion a plan to kill him and Joab executed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  25
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,679
  • Content Per Day:  1.41
  • Reputation:   3
  • Days Won:  16
  • Joined:  01/19/2019
  • Status:  Offline

Just now, pinacled said:

Yes it is about a sin offering. And murder is not accepted as atonement.

oh baloney :) It's about whether or not gentiles were bound by Jewish law or not  :)

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  35
  • Content Per Day:  0.02
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/19/2019
  • Status:  Offline

2 minutes ago, pinacled said:

You are Imputing sin. The warrior was used. Despisefully yes. But illiciting a charge of murder is a case you will lose.

Actually, the Bible tells us that said warrior stayed home instead of going off to battle ...

Quote

 

[2Sa 11:1 KJV]
And it came to pass, after the year was expired, at the time when kings go forth [to battle], that David sent Joab, and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the children of Ammon, and besieged Rabbah. But David tarried still at Jerusalem.

[2Sa 11:2 KJV]
And it came to pass in an eveningtide, that David arose from off his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house: and from the roof he saw a woman washing herself; and the woman [was] very beautiful to look upon.

 

So no ... "the warrior wasn't used".  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...