Why good men go to hell?

[David1701]

2 hours ago, johnthebaptist said:

What robs us of our peace of mind? Answer: Sin. So Jesus told us t0 repent. This isn't rocket science.

What?  You think that sinners are to repent because it gives them peace of mind?

No!  Sinners are commanded to repent, because they are in wicked rebellion against God and must change their minds, to submit to him and his will.

Yes, changing our minds about sin and God leads to peace of mind; but that is the grace of God, to those to whom he has given repentance; it is not the reason why sinners are commanded to repent.

[johnthebaptist]

18 minutes ago, Blood Bought 1953 said:

Repenting Of Sin is a good Thing . It  will make you a  more Moral person....there is Certainly nothing Wrong with that ....However, Let me assure you—- Hell will be replete  with “ Moral” People....

If the Bible says “ repent of sins”..... by all means.....  Do it ! 

If the Bible ever says “ Repent Of Sins in order to be Saved—- do THaT too!

The Problem is the Bible NEVER says that.If you can find where it does  in the KJV .....provide the Verse and I will give you or anybody else in here $1000...

 MY BIBLE says the Way to get Saved is to Simply Believe in Paul’s Gospel —— Given to Him personally by Jesus Christ.This Gospel That God will JUDGE YOU BY ( NOT your ability to Repent) can be found in 1Cor15:1-4 ....

If and  when you discover this verse that can Save you, make sure you don’t ADD to It or you will “ Fall from Grace” ( Gal5)

Also , make sure you REST in IT and nothing else  for your Salvation, lest God  declare you guilty if “ Disobedience”and “ UNBELIEF”...

In closing....PREACH another Gospel ....one that God declares “ False” and “ Perverted” and you will find yourself “ Accursed”—- damned for Eternity....

The PERVERTED Gospel  most  promoted these days would be THIS ONE—- “ Sure, Jesus died   for your sins , but once you know “ that” , you must Reoent of  all of your sins  before you die , or you will go to Hell”...

Another popular PERVERTED Gospel says, “ Jesus died for your Sins, but not the “ Willful” ones”......This False, Perverted “Gospel” stems from a confused “ take” on Hebrews 10, where the True “,Willful” Sin being addressed is the Sin Of UNBELIEF .....The Jews of that day had heard the True Gospel Of Jesus Being the “ONE TIME SACRIFICE” for Sin......They Rejected That Truth and proved it by continuing to offer their worthless animal Sacrifices at the Temple That was still open for business......a “ Business” made obsolete by the Sacrifice Of Jesus on the Cross....God Bless.....

 

 

 

The Lord led me to repent of sin I was committing, and it brought me peace of mind. I have to believe he wants everyone to experience the same thing: 

From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Matthew 4:17 RSV

[Diaste]

49 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Those statements contradict one another. 

Every time we take a principle or precept from scripture and apply it where it was not originally and specifically applicable in scripture we are "gap-filling." Some of that is what we're supposed to do, and some of it is wrong. What are the guidelines or boundaries herein? Well, ironically, that would require us to.... fill in some gaps!  

Here are two examples, one straight out of scripture and another that takes some liberty with scripture but one with I think many if not most would agree. I'll close with an obviously wrong example. 

 

The first is the law against muzzling the ox while it threshes the grain. That verse, that law, is referenced at least three times in the NT and on none of those occasions does the NT passage have anything to do with oxen of grain threshing or muzzles. In fact, if we read just that verse in the Law (Dt. 25:4), we'd have no obvious reason to think this was about fair wages, as Paul describes to Timothy (1 Tim. 5:18). We could get there by possibly reading the Deuteronomy text through other scripture (like Pr. 12:10). I'm a big fan of using scripture to understand scripture  but as we've already seen through this and just about every other op in this forum that's executed imperfectly. The point is scripture itself teaches us to gap-fill, to apply principle or precept of God's word over the letter of God's word. Principle over precept. 

The second has to do with this issue of recreational drug use. If we use the concept just laid out of applying the principles of scripture rather then the letter of scripture we can speak to drug use but we must be cautious because if we are wanton with our "principles" we can make scripture say anything; we could even make scripture commend drug use. However, since drunkenness is condemned, and for the believer the body is the temple of God, and we are not to give indulgence to the flesh (and I could probably throw in a few more scriptural precepts to illustrate the point) we can reasonably infer recreational (not medicinal) drug use is prohibited, especially where the laws of a given society prohibit them (Rom. 13:1 ). I, personally, would add another concept: God gave us the state of consciousness He wanted us to have and aside from the possible states we can sometimes experience in deep meditation and prayer we should not be seeking to alter the state God gave us, but I will readily acknowledge that some gap-filling . 

The third example is the idea we can't dance. I assume you do not subscribe to the view; neither do I. This idea we cannot dance is justified many ways but all of the abuse scripture, which I assume is the underlying point you hope to emphasize when cautioning against gap-filling. I agree. Folks who argue we should never dance because it indulges the flesh are abusing scripture. AND there are clear examples in God's word of godly people dancing. This is one of the ways we can tell the gap-filling has exceeded...... scriptural precepts. 

 

So we do have business filling gaps and we have business doing so for many reasons, chief among which is the fact we do not live in ancient times. We live in much, much different times where many things are different yet scripture remains ture and relevant, applicable to all areas of life for all eternity. Most of us don't own ox but the verse didn't become obsolete because humans left agrarian economics behind. 

Psalm 19:8
"The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes."

A study of the word "precept" , starting with Ps. 119 will go a long way in promoting understanding. Do the same with the word "principle." 

1 Timothy 5:17-22
"The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.  For the Scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,' and  'The laborer is worthy of his wages.' Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.  Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.  I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.  Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin."

I do believe I mentioned these things by way of example of known concepts. Gap filling is not the same as using concepts as a guide. Gap filling is more like asking, "Who was Cain afraid of and where did those people come from?" and then make up various stories.

Or applying the kingdoms of the statue in Dan 2, relating them to Rev 17, realizing two are missing, then filling in names that are nowhere mentioned, using unsound methods and questionable logic. 

Nearly all behavior can be regulated under some spiritual and scriptural concept  well known and even generally agreed upon and is not gap filling. Some may be a bit lax, some may be a bit extreme. There's much more to it than what I care to talk about since the endless struggle of regulating human behavior is failure for all, even the divine.

 

 

[johnthebaptist]

21 minutes ago, David1701 said:

What?  You think that sinners are to repent because it gives them peace of mind?

No!  Sinners are commanded to repent, because they are in wicked rebellion against God and must change their minds, to submit to him and his will.

Yes, changing our minds about sin and God leads to peace of mind; but that is the grace of God, to those to whom he has given repentance; it is not the reason why sinners are commanded to repent.

I repented because God led me to do so. The prize: Peace of mind.

[johnthebaptist]

10 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Did you believe a God exists when you did so? 

Yes.

[Alive]

Scriptural repentance involves a relationship.

If I were to simplify it from a true Christian POV--that is how I would do it.

Sorry--I just jumped in and haven't read the last couple days posts.

:-)

[Your closest friendnt]

36 minutes ago, David1701 said:

What?  You think that sinners are to repent because it gives them peace of mind?

No!  Sinners are commanded to repent, because they are in wicked rebellion against God and must change their minds, to submit to him and his will.

Yes, changing our minds about sin and God leads to peace of mind; but that is the grace of God, to those to whom he has given repentance; it is not the reason why sinners are commanded to repent.

I cannot say anything against as this applies within a church setting. 

If that is what the church asks from those who want to be members, which church has the right to impose their perspective on their membership, to screen them out for membership eligibility. 

But how about if we look at the issues at hand objectively keeping the local church rules on check and discuss the issues objectively, if you can do that, and that what we should do in discussion groups and what we should not do is imposing to others our sets of beliefs, instant of seeking to establish our selves in some clarify by thorough examination and not by interpretation.  

This is your departure from the core basic Gospel. 

The invitation to the Gospel is: believe in Jesus Christ who died for the forgiveness of our sins.

The above strongly suggests the following: do you want your sins forgiven in the name of Jesus Christ, then you have to believe in him. 

At that moment let no one teach you to act the way the Israelites were acting before the sacrifice of their yearly atonement.  

Why they acted that way is obvious, their last years atonement it was about to finish in a day and they wanted to be included in the next years atonement. 

It's like from the old year to the new, the exchange happens instantaneously.

They did not want to find them selves out of the atonement not even one second as those were the instructions in the Law to beat up themselves and cry for mercy.

We are in Jesus Christ all the time because we believe, we rejoice in the Lord always. 

19 minutes ago, Diaste said:

I do believe I mentioned these things by way of example of known concepts. Gap filling is not the same as using concepts as a guide. Gap filling is more like asking, "Who was Cain afraid of and where did those people come from?" and then make up various stories.

Or applying the kingdoms of the statue in Dan 2, relating them to Rev 17, realizing two are missing, then filling in names that are nowhere mentioned, using unsound methods and questionable logic. 

Nearly all behavior can be regulated under some spiritual and scriptural concept  well known and even generally agreed upon and is not gap filling. Some may be a bit lax, some may be a bit extreme. There's much more to it than what I care to talk about since the endless struggle of regulating human behavior is failure for all, even the divine.

 

 

I am delighted to read your post, it is music to my ears and a burned offering in my heart.

I feel the same way the Lord felt when he accepted Abel's burned offspring.

Keep your crusade against speculative gaping alive. 

Edited January 9, 2021 by Your closest friendnt

[Alive]

3 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Absolutely 100% correct.

lol. Doing fine, commendably so. 

 

Point of clarification: unregenerate non-believers have a relationship with their Creator; it's simply one they do not acknowledge ad one that is qualitatively different from those in a regenerate state, characterized by things like their being "objects of wrath" and characterized by futile and foolish thinking, a darkened heart, and surrendered to lusts (among other not so warm and fuzzy things scripture describes). 

Agreed--to add a point that I often use in conversation with "unbelievers". I believe that every human born has an innate knowledge that God exists, but this is variable in conciousness and clouded with variable darkness.

But--the 'repentance' that we are concerned about involves that which occurs when Light is shone into that darkness and conciousness.

[Your closest friendnt]

9 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Absolutely 100% correct.

lol. Doing fine, commendably so. 

 

Point of clarification: unregenerate non-believers have a relationship with their Creator; it's simply one they do not acknowledge ad one that is qualitatively different from those in a regenerate state, characterized by things like their being "objects of wrath" and characterized by futile and foolish thinking, a darkened heart, and surrendered to lusts (among other not so warm and fuzzy things scripture describes). 

What do you intend to do with parts of this post? 

Do you intend to invite one of those you have label "as objects of God wrath" to advocate to their defense that they are not "objects of God's wrath as you have put it in a bold way and in their absence. 

And you have once more If I may say failed to list the grounds why and what you have considered to make this "bold statement " in their absence and if you could forgive me for that , it appears that your chest must have swelled with pride.

I am challenging your statement "they are objects of wrath" that is not in harmony with the Gospel and so I think and believe. 

[David1701]

48 minutes ago, johnthebaptist said:

I repented because God led me to do so. The prize: Peace of mind.

How did God lead you to repent?

Hardly anything you post is scripturally accurate, which is frustrating.  Where does the Bible say that peace of mind is the prize for repenting?