Mike 2 Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Mike 2 Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Walk Softly Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Neighbor Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Mike 2 Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Called Out One Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jostler Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jostler Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Jostler Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Called Out One Posted February 4, 2019 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 Share Posted February 4, 2019 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 More sharing options...
Recommended Posts