Sin disguised as Virtue?

[Desopixi Seilynam]

10 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Not a single word about the devil repenting for the sake of his salvation from sin and the wrath of God. 

The devil had the opportunity to say, "hey, wow, ok I get it, you've humbled yourself and let me contend with you like this, wow, I get it, and I give up, please forgive me for trying to fight you" But he held onto his pride and tried to trick Christ into dying prematurely.

[Desopixi Seilynam]

16 minutes ago, Josheb said:

God showing humanity their inability is not evil. God showing humanity their dependency upon Him is not evil. 

"God commands all men everywhere to repent" The context of that verse is to people who were worshiping idols. Do you  think that the people that understood the follow up preaching from Paul went back to worshiping those idols? Or would they have been led to understand that they can pray to the real God wherever they are?

That's what Paul was saying to them, that they should actually repent away from their idolatry, God commands it. And it is indeed because His Son was sent into all the world, for all men to pray to Him through!

The verse is about actuality, actual repentance, not about God showing humanity their inability, but about God giving humanity ability and knowledge of Him, via His Son.

 

God commands all men to repent, and has therefore given all men the ability to repent, beginning at belief that Christ died and rose from the dead.
God is love.

[JTC]

This topic is a pet peeve of mine. I've been trying to ignore it but I'm putting my 2 cents in.

Sin is never okay even when it looks like it may be. Hate and anger harden men's hearts and nothing godly comes from that.

[FrankIeCip]

3 hours ago, Desopixi Seilynam said:

The devil had the opportunity to say, "hey, wow, ok I get it, you've humbled yourself and let me contend with you like this, wow, I get it, and I give up, please forgive me for trying to fight you" But he held onto his pride and tried to trick Christ into dying prematurely.

Whoa. You are just making up stuff in your mind. I’m sorry but that is one of the strangest things I’ve ever heard. It’s dangerous to you and possibly those new to or weak in the faith. Stick with the scriptures please. ??

[FrankIeCip]

3 hours ago, Desopixi Seilynam said:

The devil had the opportunity to say, "hey, wow, ok I get it, you've humbled yourself and let me contend with you like this, wow, I get it, and I give up, please forgive me for trying to fight you" But he held onto his pride and tried to trick Christ into dying prematurely.

Whoa. You are just making up stuff in your mind. It’s dangerous for you and possibly those new to or weak in the faith. Stick with scripture please. ??

[David1701]

18 hours ago, Desopixi Seilynam said:

What your saying is that those born again are predestined to be so and it can't be any other way, and so therefore there are those predestined to go to hell and it can't be any other way?

What I posted was about the distinction between those who merely claim to be Christians and those who are actually born again.  You were, in effect, lumping them all together.

It is those who are not born again who depart from the faith.

In the Bible, predestination is not mentioned often and is always positive (i.e. for salvation, not damnation).

Those who are not predestined for salvation are left in the condition in which they desire to be (bond-slaves of sin) and they are given justice.

Quote

 

No one who has been born of God practises sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. 

 

"He that does not take care of his own, especially they of his own household, has denied the faith and is worse than a non-believer."  1 Timothy 5:8

 

Therefore he that has sincere faith, though at one point choosing to not take care of his own, to sin, can by the word of God be corrected, and thereby it would be evident that he is a child of God, because he did not keep on sinning, even though he did sin, for a while. We have free will, we make mistakes, we sin, but our goal is not to keep on sinning. For we have sincere faith.

 

You know, it's quite amazing that someone can quote two Scriptures, then immediately post something from his own imagination, as if it were drawn from those Scriptures.

He who has denied the faith is, by definition, an apostate, not a genuine Christian.

1 Tim. 5:8 (VW) But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

The part I've made bold is perfect tense, meaning something that happened in the past, with the effect continuing in the present.  This is not a one-off event but a continuing condition of denying the faith.  His evil heart has been revealed and his profession of being in the faith found to be a sham, which is why he is "worse than an unbeliever".

Quote

And dear one, if God commands all men everywhere to repent,
that means that all men everywhere can repent, otherwise God is evil in commanding them to do what they cannot do, and I do not believe that there is any evil in God at all.

This is complete and utter nonsense; and blasphemous nonsense at that!

In the ten commandments, Israel were commanded to love the Lord their God, with all their heart, soul, mind and strength and their neighbour as themselves.  This was, of course, impossible for fallen men to do.

The law of Moses was given partly to show men their INABILITY to keep God's commands, their guilt before God, and their consequent need of a Saviour.

Far from a command from God necessarily implying the ability to obey it, often it was precisely to show the lack of ability to obey it!

Your claim that this is evil is accusing GOD of being evil, whether you realise it or not; in fact, your claim is a good example of evil disguised as virtue.  You need to repent of this, because it's serious sin.

Edited December 1, 2020 by David1701

[David1701]

8 hours ago, Unit 11 said:

 

I'm going to jump in here and note these kind of hair-splitting, long-winded legal-type arguments are one thing that's put me off church & Bible study groups.

Your insulting description ("hair-splitting", "long-winded", "legal-type") of countering error point-by-point, is one of the things that can put Christians off from dealing with false teachers.  Thankfully, those of us who are able, are usually given grace not to be weakened by such condescending mockery.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Quote

 

There was one time when my group at a restaurant for dinner after attending a crusade. One guy was in my face arguing about something the whole time I was eating. 

Another time I let myself get pulled into a spat about the end times/rapture where it was me against everyone else in the room (no, I won't say what my position on that is). A couple of times I asked, "Where in the Bible does it say that?"

Well. From then on, even months later, I could never seem to make a point about anything without someone smirking at me and mimicking "Where in the Bible does it say that?"

Who needs this? Not me.

 

I make sure that what I post is taken from Scripture (you might not have noticed, but I quoted or cited several, in the post that you insulted). 

"Where does the Bible say that?" is one of my favourite questions, often directed to freewillers, who don't have a clue, yet feel free to spout their ignorance dogmatically.

Edited December 1, 2020 by David1701

[Marathoner]

@Unit 11 raises a valid point, one that should not be brushed aside because it offends. There is a time and a season for everything. 

If I enter a house and the master of that house is a wolf in sheep's clothing, am I called upon to contend with him? Or should I leave his house before the roof collapses upon his misbegotten head? I should leave with haste. 

If a wolf approaches my Master's house and I'm keeping watch at the gate, shouldn't I sound the horn?  The assembly will be warned of this predator and the sheep will be spared; if I am slack in my duty their blood will be on my hands. I will sound the horn. 

If a contentious brother accosts me am I called upon to respond to him in kind? No, remembering the words of the apostle: "never repay evil for evil to anyone" (Romans 12:17). The wrath of man doesn't serve the righteousness of God. If he thrusts himself in my face then I will leave... nothing worthwhile is borne by a poisonous tree. I should pray for him because he has been overcome by his flesh. 

Finally, there is a way to correct a brother in meekness and humility. Speak the truth and then keep the peace. Such a place doesn't involve the bopping of heads and ceaseless argumentation.    

[Unit 11]

54 minutes ago, David1701 said:

Your insulting description ("hair-splitting", "long-winded", "legal-type") of countering error point-by-point...

??? Well, how am I to say this in a way that's not "insulting?" They were hair-splitting, they were legal-type (how's that an insult, anyway?), and they certainly were long-winded. You'll just have to take my word that no offense was meant.

This just reminds me that a person is only responsible for what he says, not for what other people hear. 

I'll also ask a question you don't have to answer, but I hope you'll consider: How often do you take things as insults? 

 

[David1701]

3 hours ago, Unit 11 said:

??? Well, how am I to say this in a way that's not "insulting?" They were hair-splitting, they were legal-type (how's that an insult, anyway?), and they certainly were long-winded. You'll just have to take my word that no offense was meant.

Do you know what an opinion is? 

Do you understand how that differs from objective fact?

Do you understand that what you expressed was opinion?

Do you not realise that, if you are going to use pejorative expressions like "hair-splitting", you need to provide evidence for this and not merely assume that your opinion is objectively true?

Do you not realise that, if you express pejorative opinions, then reiterate them, while still not even attempting to providence evidence for your claims, this is offensive?

Quote

This just reminds me that a person is only responsible for what he says, not for what other people hear. 

Hopefully you now understand that what you posted was insulting, especially without the slightest effort on your part to provide evidence.

Quote

I'll also ask a question you don't have to answer, but I hope you'll consider: How often do you take things as insults? 

Now you are trying to shift the blame.  You really take the mick, don't you?