Does God forgives sins

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

brighthouse98

Senior Member
Apr 16, 2015
619
297
63
70
#21
The reason unbelief cannot be forgiven is because NO ONE has an excuse not to believe!! Please read Romans 1:20!! from verse 18-to verse 32 the Lord talks about unbelief and its consequences.
 

Deuteronomy

Well-known member
Jun 11, 2018
3,218
3,546
113
67
#22
Still, continually rejecting God is forgiven since it's not the unpardonable sin.
Hello Cameron et @brighthouse98, rejection of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior is a forgivable sin (obviously), until the moment someone dies. The "unpardonable sin", on the other hand, cannot/will not be forgiven from the very moment that it is first committed.

As the Lord told us (about the "unpardonable sin"),

Matthew 12
32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
Mark 3
29 Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.

That's how I've come to understand it anyway :)

Blessings to you both in Christ!!

~Deuteronomy
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#23
Hello Cameron et @brighthouse98, rejection of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior is a forgivable sin (obviously), until the moment someone dies. The "unpardonable sin", on the other hand, cannot/will not be forgiven from the very moment that it is first committed.

As the Lord told us (about the "unpardonable sin"),

Matthew 12
32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
Mark 3
29 Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.

That's how I've come to understand it anyway :)

Blessings to you both in Christ!!

~Deuteronomy
The argument that I was discussing was the one concerning the atonement. Some believe Jesus paid for everyone's sin universally. Some believe in a limited atonement.
As I know you are well aware, this is an ongoing argument on this site between those with Calvinistic and Armenian bents. I'm neither. My argument has to do with God's claim to being just.
Some believe that Jesus has indeed paid the sin debt for every person...past, present, and future. If this is the case, there are people in hell whose sins have been paid for. Not only are they paid for, but God has accepted Jesus blood as payment for their sins. Thus, there are people in hell whose sins are paid for and whom God accepted payment for their sins and still required another payment.
God is sovereign and can do as He pleases. But He cannot require a payment, accept a payment, and require a second payment and still be just.
If one doesn't believe God is just there is no quandary. But if God is just, how can He require payment, accept payment, and still require more?
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#24
The argument that I was discussing was the one concerning the atonement. Some believe Jesus paid for everyone's sin universally. Some believe in a limited atonement.
As I know you are well aware, this is an ongoing argument on this site between those with Calvinistic and Armenian bents. I'm neither. My argument has to do with God's claim to being just.
Some believe that Jesus has indeed paid the sin debt for every person...past, present, and future. If this is the case, there are people in hell whose sins have been paid for. Not only are they paid for, but God has accepted Jesus blood as payment for their sins. Thus, there are people in hell whose sins are paid for and whom God accepted payment for their sins and still required another payment.
God is sovereign and can do as He pleases. But He cannot require a payment, accept a payment, and require a second payment and still be just.
If one doesn't believe God is just there is no quandary. But if God is just, how can He require payment, accept payment, and still require more?
A payment of "respect" toward the honor of the payment in question comes to mind. That is, I can offer you a dollar, but if you don't honor the American dollar and will only except the British pound as legal tender, what can I do about it?
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#25
A payment of "respect" toward the honor of the payment in question comes to mind. That is, I can offer you a dollar, but if you don't honor the American dollar and will only except the British pound as legal tender, what can I do about it?
God accepted the payment...blood for sins. So I don't understand your point.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#26
God accepted the payment...blood for sins. So I don't understand your point.
Salvation is a personal transaction in regard to each individual where Jesus is the payment, who faithfully forgives me for comparing him to the dollar, and God, on His part, accepts Him as good tender sufficient for payment in full yet, if I, of the other relevant party in this personal transaction question the legitimacy in regard to the power to pay, shall we say?, I would think that takes the offer "off the table," somehow...
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#27
Salvation is a personal transaction in regard to each individual where Jesus is the payment, who faithfully forgives me for comparing him to the dollar, and God, on His part, accepts Him as good tender sufficient for payment in full yet, if I, of the other relevant party in this personal transaction question the legitimacy in regard to the power to pay, shall we say?, I would think that takes the offer "off the table," somehow...
So God rescinds the offer? Or the actions of the individual negates what God has done?
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#28
So God rescinds the offer? Or the actions of the individual negates what God has done?
Something like that. Hence, without faith we cannot please God. Fiat likewise works by faith as two have to agree to the value of the fiat (payment) as equal weight to the value of the good purchased, and many do not agree that the exchange is of "fair value."
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#29
For instance, what is one way the devil robs you? If your house is paid in full? He tells you that you still have an outstanding balance and continues to collect rent from you.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#30
Something like that. Hence, without faith we cannot please God. Fiat likewise works by faith as two have to agree to the value of the fiat (payment) as equal weight to the value of the good purchased, and many do not agree that the exchange is of "fair value."
In my opinion, what the individual does has nothing to do with the equation. My only concern is whether or not requiring a debt, accepting payment for the debt, and then having done so requiring more is just.
Let's say you borrow 10 bucks from me. You agree to pay it back or do my laundry for a week. You don't pay it back but Magenta agrees to pay it for you and I accept her payment on your behalf. Would I be just at that point if I still required you to either pay me back the 10 bucks or do my laundry for a week?
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#31
In my opinion, what the individual does has nothing to do with the equation. My only concern is whether or not requiring a debt, accepting payment for the debt, and then having done so requiring more is just.
Let's say you borrow 10 bucks from me. You agree to pay it back or do my laundry for a week. You don't pay it back but Magenta agrees to pay it for you and I accept her payment on your behalf. Would I be just at that point if I still required you to either pay me back the 10 bucks or do my laundry for a week?
Another option is when Magenta pays me back for you, but you view it as just Magenta getting an extra 10 bucks credited to her account. Even though she intended it to go toward your account, you protested claiming that you didn't need her help...
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#32
Another option is when Magenta pays me back for you, but you view it as just Magenta getting an extra 10 bucks credited to her account. Even though she intended it to go toward your account, you protested claiming that you didn't need her help...
But that's not what God did according to those who believe that Jesus for the sins of the world. And again, I'm not concerning myself with what people do. I'm concerning myself to what God has done and what it means in light of His justice.
 

Deuteronomy

Well-known member
Jun 11, 2018
3,218
3,546
113
67
#33
The argument that I was discussing was the one concerning the atonement. Some believe Jesus paid for everyone's sin universally. Some believe in a limited atonement. As I know you are well aware, this is an ongoing argument on this site between those with Calvinistic and Armenian bents. I'm neither. My argument has to do with God's claim to being just. Some believe that Jesus has indeed paid the sin debt for every person...past, present, and future. If this is the case, there are people in hell whose sins have been paid for. Not only are they paid for, but God has accepted Jesus blood as payment for their sins. Thus, there are people in hell whose sins are paid for and whom God accepted payment for their sins and still required another payment. God is sovereign and can do as He pleases. But He cannot require a payment, accept a payment, and require a second payment and still be just. If one doesn't believe God is just there is no quandary. But if God is just, how can He require payment, accept payment, and still require more?
Thank you for the additional clarity, brother :) And now I understand what you meant by the following statement in one of your earlier posts too (y)(y) (see the text in bold both above and below).

Still, continually rejecting God is forgiven since it's not the unpardonable sin. You still have people in hell whose sins are forgiven. My argument isn't that God cannot do this. He is sovereign and may do as He pleases. But I don't see how He can do it and remain just.
God bless you!!

~Deuteronomy
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#34
But that's not what God did according to those who believe that Jesus for the sins of the world. And again, I'm not concerning myself with what people do. I'm concerning myself to what God has done and what it means in light of His justice.
Yes, I understand. I've almost formed a solid defense of the justice of people in hell with their sins forgiven. I saw an edge of it crystalizing... and then I lost the thought in the discourse. It will certainly return when the conversation has moved onto another area but, I'll keep noting it's progress. Idk, it might've just been an observation of the extent of the (unnecessary?) tragedy in it.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#35
Ok, I'm back with the justice of people in hell with all their sins forgiven, all sins and blasphemies except for blasphemy of the holy spirit.
So then, everyone in hell must've committed the unforgivable sin.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#36
Ok, I'm back with the justice of people in hell with all their sins forgiven, all sins and blasphemies except for blasphemy of the holy spirit.
So then, everyone in hell must've committed the unforgivable sin.
That's plausible if true. But some would argue that isn't possible any longer since Jesus isn't on earth doing works that can be attributed to Satan and not the Holy Spirit.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#37
That's plausible if true. But some would argue that isn't possible any longer since Jesus isn't on earth doing works that can be attributed to Satan and not the Holy Spirit.
If it is possible, then the definition might be regarding the holy spirit as 'common,' rather than holy. And that ties in with the respect payment which would be required of the savee.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
14,553
5,272
113
62
#38
If it is possible, then the definition might be regarding the holy spirit as 'common,' rather than holy. And that ties in with the respect payment which would be required of the savee.
The unpardonable sin is attributing the works of Jesus to Satan and not the Holy Spirit. So I don't think it qualifies as common.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,936
1,683
113
#39
The unpardonable sin is attributing the works of Jesus to Satan and not the Holy Spirit. So I don't think it qualifies as common.
Satan is common, he certainly isn't holy.