10 Reasons Sin Confession Is Questionable!!!

[7seasrekeyed]

There are some believers, however, who live in absolute constant anxiety about 'keeping short accounts with God', trying to keep every current sinful thought and action confessed so that if they were to get hit by a bus or suffer other sudden death they would not die in an unforgiven state. They live in perpetual fear that they may have missed one, because just one sin can separate them from God! That is no way for any believer to live, and not at all how God intended!

The Cross WORKED. We can REST in that. There is PEACE in that. And in His Grace, God teaches us to say no to ungodliness (Titus 2:11-14). I believe that God is FAR more patient with us than we are with ourselves and with others.


-JGIG

well those believers then need encouragement and study and to understand that we are no longer under condemnation

but it is the entire package of ignoring instruction regarding forgiveness on a horizontal level that has been addressed more than once at CC with some people insisting it is not necessary

that, and stating Jesus was old school and now it's all different

the people who have said this here and tried to teach that here, know who they are

so really, while your immediate post contains truth and I agree some people are consumed by guilt, it in no way address the bigger problems many of us have been addressing and concerned about during your absence

you would have an awful lot of reading to catch up

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Looks to me from all these questions that you would rather treat this subject in a farcical way than deal with it properly.

What if I did this and forgot, what it I did that and forgot, what if I did something else and could not recall?

So what exactly is your point?

the point is the same point it always is

create a diversion, through dust in the air, make a lotta noise...anything really to get out of addressing why we should pay attention to anything difficult in scripture when Jesus did it all and we now 'rest' in Him

Did you read my reply to Nehemiah6? In case you missed it, here it is:

I ask legitimate questions — no farce on my part.

It appears to me that you believe that we must confess our sins in order to be born again. I showed you straight from Scripture that we confess Jesus Christ is Lord and believe in our heart that God has raised Him from the dead (Romans 10:9-10).

Read the whole chapter of Rom 10. There is no mention that we confess sin.

The moment we are born again, we are made righteous in the sight of God (for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation — Rom 10:10).

From and after the time we are born again, then confess when we realize we are no longer close to Father. Turn to Father ... talk to Him ... lay our hearts bare before Him ... ask Him to help us in our time of need. He is faithful. He is just. He sits on a throne of grace. We obtain mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

And sometimes we don't understand exactly what we've done to break fellowship. We just know that we have stumbled and we've strayed from the path.

And we know this because we don't have the peace that passes understanding, or we miss the joy that comes with close fellowship with Father. Somehow we've turned and we might not know exactly what occurred to cause us to turn. We just know we're not in sync with Father.

What "sin" do we confess when we don't know what we've done to break fellowship?

Nehemiah6 has yet to reply.

What do you think 7seasrekeyed? Do you really believe I am trying to "get out of addressing why we should pay attention to anything difficult in scripture when Jesus did it all and we no 'rest' in Him"?

 

[JGIG]

It's impossible to turn to GOD without turning from sin.

Good thing the thief on his cross didn't believe that. He had no chance to change his behavior, did he . . .

-JGIG

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Good thing the thief on his cross didn't believe that. He had no chance to change his behavior, did he . . .

-JGIG

HE had a big change of heart and mind, admitted his guilt, asked for mercy and confessed Jesus was lord.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Did you read my reply to Nehemiah6? In case you missed it, here it is:



Nehemiah6 has yet to reply.

What do you think 7seasrekeyed? Do you really believe I am trying to "get out of addressing why we should pay attention to anything difficult in scripture when Jesus did it all and we no 'rest' in Him"?

ummm

I was not addressing you so why ask me that question?

as it is, my questions are handily ignored by the one I addressed them to

obviously though, they are there to be read

most people here know what I addressing

 

[Shamah]

Good thing the thief on his cross didn't believe that. He had no chance to change his behavior, did he . . .

-JGIG

Actually we do not know.

The thief could have been caught and had a change of heart and action from the moment he was caught until the moment he met Yahshua.

He could have kept a evil heart and deed until that moment.

Fact is we really dont have any info on him other than the little that is written. We can not assume anything.

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Revelation 22:11-15, “He who does wrong, let him do more wrong; he who is filthy, let him be more filthy; he who is righteous, let him be more righteous; he who is set-apart, let him be more set-apart. And see, I am coming speedily, and My reward is with Me, to give to each according to his work. “I am the ‘Aleph’ and the ‘Taw’, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last. Blessed are those doing His commands, so that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree of life, and to enter through the gates into the city. But outside are the dogs and those who enchant with drugs, and those who whore, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and all who love and do falsehood.”[/FONT]



[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ezekiel 18:20-32, “The being who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the crookedness of the father, nor the father bear the crookedness of the son. The righteousness of the righteous is upon himself, and the wrongness of the wrong is upon himself. But the wrong, if he turns from all his sins which he has done, and he shall guard all My laws, and shall do right-ruling and righteousness, he shall certainly live, he shall not die. All the transgressions which he has done shall not be remembered against him – in his righteousness that he has done, he shall live. Have I any pleasure in the death of the wrong?” declares the Master יהוה[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. “Is it not that he should turn from his ways, and live? But when a righteous one turns away from his righteousness and does unrighteousness, according to all the abominations that the wrong one has done, shall he live? All his righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered. For his trespass which he has committed, and for his sin which he has committed, for them he shall die. And you said, ‘The way of [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהוה [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]is not right.’ Hear now, O house of Yisra’yl, is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right? When a righteous one turns away from his righteousness, and does unrighteousness, and he dies in it, it is because of his unrighteousness which he has done that he dies. And when the wrong turns away from the wrong which he has done, and he does right-ruling and righteousness, he keeps himself alive. Because he sees and turns away from all the transgressions which he has done, he shall certainly live, he shall not die. And the house of Yisra’yl have said, ‘The way of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהוה [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]is not right.’ Are My ways not right, O house of Yisra’yl? Is it not your ways that are not right? Therefore I judge you, O house of Yisra’yl, every one according to his ways,” declares the Master [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהוה[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. “Repent, and turn back from all your transgressions, and let not crookedness be a stumbling-block to you. Cast away from you all the transgressions, by which you have transgressed, and make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. For why should you die, O house of Yisra’yl? For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies,” declares the Master [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהוה[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. “So turn back and live!”

I dont know about anyone else but I dont want to act as a "thief" until the last minute even if it did work out for that one, I want to walk in His ways no matter what my eternal future is.
[/FONT]

 

[BillG]

It's impossible to turn to GOD without turning from sin.

No it's not.

What we need to do is to turn to God in the first instance.

You have come across as saying we must stop sinning before we can turn to God.
If that is what you meant then it is not true.

 

[BillG]

John 9:31, "“And we know that YHWH does not hear sinners. But if anyone fears YHWH and does His desire, He hears him."


Hebrews 10:19-24, “So, brothers, having boldness to enter into the Set-apart Place by the blood of יהושע, by a new and living way which He instituted for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the House of יהוה, let us draw near with a true heart in completeness of belief, having our hearts sprinkled from a wicked conscience and our bodies washed with clean water. Let us hold fast the confession of our expectation without yielding, for He who promised is trustworthy. And let us be concerned for one another in order to stir up love and good works,”

Who said that in John 9:31?

Was it Jesus?

 

[BillG]

When I got saved I had to ask for forgiveness and I was forgiven for all my sins. But that didn't mean I never had to or will have to deal with sin again. God made the way to overcome sin and that is Jesus. That don't mean when I sin I can say thank you Lord for Jesus I'll just keep on doing what I'm doing and rest in my sins knowing Jesus died for them.

We have to get up and go to the throne in the name of Jesus and ask him for the help to overcome sin. And yes, I ask God to forgive me and help me when I sin...Is there something wrong with that?

Yes I agree.

However if you don't mind I just want to ask a question based on your last sentence.

"How many of us after asking for forgiveness truly believe we have been forgiven?

How many of us actually thank God we have been forgiven?

 

[Angela53510]

Oh boy....
Bauer doesn't know Greek?

He disagrees; from the BDAG
μετάνοια, ας, ἡ (μετανοέω) prim. ‘a change of mind’ (Thu. 3, 36, 4; Polyb. 4, 66, 7; Appian, Mithrid. 16 §57; pap [s. New Docs 4, 160; Spicq II 475, 17]; TestSol 12:3 C; JosAs, ApcSed; ApcMos 32; Jos., C. Ap. 1, 274, Ant. 16, 125; Just., Tat.), also w. the nuance of ‘remorse’....

Primarily a change of mind. But with the nuance of 'remorse'.

A noun is a state of being. In other words; The change of mind rather than the verb which is to change the mind.

Anyway....
Not can be; is. But you are right in that you say, in the Bible, it means so much more!" Amen to that!

Mainly the NT is comprised from Hebrews speaking Greek. So through the Spirit they chose a Greek word that best fit their Hebrew understanding of repentance.

Let's take a look at how the Hebrews around the time of Christ understood these words shall we. Since the LXX was commonly used then we will look at that. The Noun μετάνοια was only used once in the LXX.

The guileless believe every word; but the astute one comes to repentance. ( Prov. 14:5 ABP)

Here is what it looks like in the KJV. "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going."

I assume that it was used to translate, "looketh well to his going". However this seems to be a bit of a stretch to me. What do you think?

The verb μετανοέω usage is less ambiguous. It is used 19 times in the Old Testament. Here are the two words it is translated from.


H5162 נָחַם nacham (naw-kham') v.
1. (properly) to sigh, i.e. breathe strongly
2. (by implication) to be sorry
3. (hence, in a favorable sense) to pity, console
4. (reflexively) to rue
5. (hence, unfavorably) to avenge (oneself)

H7725 שׁוּב shuwb (shoob) v.
1. to turn back (hence, away) transitively or intransitively, literally or figuratively (not necessarily with the idea of return to the starting point)
2. (generally) to retreat
3. (often adverbially) again

meta noeo H7725 * שׁוּב (šûḇ) shuv hi.

If I am not mistaken in Ancient Greek culture the mind was the center of one's being whereas in the Hebrew eye the gut (heart) was through GOD.

So if one is to repent it comes from GOD's working on the heart. In this we sigh from our inner most being. Our conscience being guided by HIM; that still small voice getting louder and louder. So in that, we retreat turning back to HIM having THE change of mind that can only come from HE THAT WORKS IN US BOTH TO WILL AND DO HIS GOOD PLEASURE.

I don’t think that you read all of what I read, and you certainly didn’t look at the copy and paste from Bauer. You pulled this out of context from Bauer.

He disagrees; from the BDAG
μετάνοια, ας, ἡ (μετανοέω) prim. ‘a change of mind’ (Thu. 3, 36, 4; Polyb. 4, 66, 7; Appian, Mithrid. 16 §57; pap [s. New Docs 4, 160; Spicq II 475, 17]; TestSol 12:3 C; JosAs, ApcSed; ApcMos 32; Jos., C. Ap. 1, 274, Ant. 16, 125; Just., Tat.), also w. the nuance of ‘remorse’....

I read the exact thing as I was writing my last post. I said exactly what you posted here. I said in ancient Greek texts, metanoia does mean “a change of mind.” I said that it meant more because of the Hebrew mindset of the Jews.

I also noted, as you did not, that this copy and paste does not have a single Bible verse in it. In fact, neither metanoia nor metanoeo have a single Bible verse meaning “change of mind.” Look carefully at what you posted in the quote just above. Just Greek texts. No Bible verses, as Bauer highlights them all. And a dirty trick to just paste this, when the rest of the entry is the BIBLICAL MEANING of the word. That is eisegesis, and that is why hypergrace and Word Faith always end up wrong. Because they cut and paste what they want the Bible to say, and leave the parts they don’t like

Which in this case, means leaving out EVERY SINGLE BIBLE QUOTE.

Also very subjective to leave all the quotes about what metanoia means in the Bible. You know, the Christian/Jewish meaning. I didn’t even get into the LXX, that is a whole study in itself.

And yet, you went onto say the exact thing I said.

My point is that this redefined version of metanoia that Word Faith is engaged in, is merely going away from the Bible, into Ancient Greek texts. The connotations in the Bible are much more important that the old Greek denotations. Hypergrace is lying, when it claims over and over that metanoia “merely” or “only” means “change of mind” - a simple compound word.

And this discussion is about the lies of they hypergrace people. So what motive do they have for changing the definition of metanoia to an unbiblical definition? Well, they don’t want to examine themselves, confess their sins as part of their Christian walk. They just want happiness, and sunny ways, never understanding that they are not yet sancitified, certainly not glorified, and they are missing an essential part of their walk with Christ. They are always going to be stymied in their Christian walk, because they have lost the Biblical meaning of metanoia, to say nothing of so many other words.

I find that both tragically sad and appalling. Sad for the hypergracers, and appalling that they keep preaching this lying doctrine, pulling things out of context, redefining the Biblical definition, and trying to seduce even the very elect.

 

[UnderGrace]

[FONT=&quot]While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Romans 5:8

Turning from sin is not an exercise of humility,

Recognizing we cannot stop sinning is where humility begins this is what the thief on the cross came to understand.

Amen BillG!!!
[/FONT]

No it's not.

What we need to do is to turn to God in the first instance.

You have come across as saying we must stop sinning before we can turn to God.
If that is what you meant then it is not true.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

ummm

I was not addressing you so why ask me that question?

as it is, my questions are handily ignored by the one I addressed them to

obviously though, they are there to be read

most people here know what I addressing

You replied to a question Nehemiah6 asked me (Post #61). I replied to Nehemiah6 in post #69.


Your response to Nehemiah6's question to me was:

the point is the same point it always is

create a diversion, through dust in the air, make a lotta noise…anything really to get out of addressing why we should pay attention to anything different in scripture when Jesus did it all and we now ‘rest’ in Him

I wanted to clarify that it is not my intent to "create a diversion" or "through dust in the air" or "make a lotta noise" or "get out of addressing why we should pay attention to anything different in scripture".



I figured you had read through all the pages of the thread before you replied to Nehemiah6 and that you had taken into consideration what I had posted in response to Nehemiah6. That is why I asked you that question.

 

[Angela53510]

I have not written about Catholics, I have written about Church history prior to the Reformation and the etymology of words which is easily researched.

Etymolgy is essential in any language because as you know the meaning of words changes over time.

I look for the facts trying to be free from bias and one can know a language well and still miss the historical meaning of a word.

Historically speaking, Treadwell Walden, who was a pastor in California wrote a book titled "The Great Meaning of Metanoia" in 1830.

His research is scholarly, he looks at the etymology and the word in context with citations to support his writing.

I love this quote and because it really speaks to the whole meaning of metanoia.....


"The Christian faith is constructive and positive not destructive and remedial" (from the preface)

I would encourage all to read it, he makes excellent connections.


https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc2.ark:/13960/t0dv1fk2g;view=1up;seq=5

Pretty desperate, aren’t you? You drag in something some guy (what are his scholarly creditials? what church or denomination did he belong to?) from 1830, to settle the definition?

Are you kidding me? Do you know how much more we know about Greek in nearly 200 years since he wrote that. How much the English language has changed? How many new manscripts of the Bible, but also contemporaneous non-biblical manuscripts have been found in 200 years?

The world of Greek scholars has new changes and ideas coming up daily.There are fierce debates over words/grammar being published all the time. I got a real glimpse of this, when I was taking Greek with Bill Mounce. Because he writes commentaries, has been on numerous translation committees, and knows all the other scholars. At times, he phoned some of these people to resolve a question or something that came up in class discussions.

Which this man you linked to does not. His material is at best, out of date, at worst, wrong. I’m not going to bother to read it, I have too much I need to do.

As for Catholics, that is exactly what the last post I quoted by you was about. Nothing to do with etymologies, just you dredging up data that is incorrect, and some strange assumptions.

Please look up scholarly sources, instead of this kind of stuff and nonsense. Based on stuff and nonsense.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

My point is that this redefined version of metanoia that Word Faith is engaged in, is merely going away from the Bible, into Ancient Greek texts. The connotations in the Bible are much more important that the old Greek denotations. Hypergrace is lying, when it claims over and over that metanoia “merely” or “only” means “change of mind” - a simple compound word.

Saying metanoia only means change of mind aligns more with the gnostic view of metanoia than it does with the bible.

 

[Laish]

No it's not.

What we need to do is to turn to God in the first instance.

You have come across as saying we must stop sinning before we can turn to God.
If that is what you meant then it is not true.

I don’t believe that exactly what he is saying. I could be wrong. I got something different from what he posted .
You know I look at it like this BillG ( great name by the way) It’s like this if we were looking at a map sin due south and God is North . We turn north and start our walk . Yea we stumble or trip but as we continue north ( turning to God ) we have turned away from sin . Yes we still will need correction . It’s not a perfect analogy ,but I think gets the point across.
Blessings
Bill

 

[Angela53510]

Saying metanoia only means change of mind aligns more with the gnostic view of metanoia than it does with the bible.

Exactly! Thank you for putting it this way!

 

[Nehemiah6]

Nehemiah6 has yet to reply.

Why should I respond to posts which simply dance around issues?

 

[BillG]

I don’t believe that exactly what he is saying. I could be wrong. I got something different from what he posted .
You know I look at it like this BillG ( great name by the way) It’s like this if we were looking at a map sin due south and God is North . We turn north and start our walk . Yea we stumble or trip but as we continue north ( turning to God ) we have turned away from sin . Yes we still will need correction . It’s not a perfect analogy ,but I think gets the point across.
Blessings
Bill

Hi Bill.
Are you a Bill?
My real name is William but from an early age I always asked to be called Bill.

I agree with you.

I look at it this way.

To start with Jesus said that the Holy Spirit must come to convict the world of its sin and that sin is unbelief in him,

John 16:8-9
8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me;

Jesus also said the only work

John 6:29
29 Jesus told them, “This is the only work God wants from you: Believe in the one he has sent.” (NLT)

John 6:29


29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” (NKJV)

Slightly different but the result is the same.

So to me that is the starting point.

We repent of the sin of unbelief.

Having done so then we also repent of our sins that manifest in the flesh and in the heart.

We want to be like Jesus.
Walk in the ways he has asked us to.

It's a walk and a process, one which we walk in and seek as a result of faith in Jesus.

I think today there are problems in the way that the gospel is preached.

Firstly being, say the sinners prayer and leave it at that.

Secondly saying stop sinning or you are out.

Part of the great commission was also to make disciples.

That is severely lacking in churches today.

Correct discipleship will address this.

Following Jesus does have a cost.
Grace is not a licence to sin.
When we do sin we can bring it before God.
Know his forgiveness and walk in it.

 

[BenFTW]

I want to be clear. I wanted to write this last night, but it was extremely late. I don't want people to feel as if I am going to pounce on them with the truth. I want us to reason together and come to an understanding. Share your critiques and criticisms and let me address them. As it is, I don't see a failure in logic but an upholding of God's word. We are forgiven, and being forgiven, we obviously do not seek it. We received it. We give thanks for it.

That we are forgiven doesn't eliminate the need for repentance, forgiving others, being open with the Lord (sin confession), and so on. People are saying that what I am teaching is that we don't have to make amends? Where have I said this? That is not love, that is wrong. In God's word the apostle Paul said that if we are able to seek peace with all men do so. This then means amends are important. Forgiveness is important.

I don't know why people keep bringing up Hyper Grace and Word of Faith. I have presented through scripture that we have total forgiveness. If you feel otherwise, then show me where I am wrong. Stop with the ad hominem attacks (personal attacks) and lets learn together. Is that too much to ask?

 

[UnderGrace]

I have no need to be desperate. I believe in dispassionate discourse.

It would seem to me that when remarks become personal there is some desperation there, sadly, I am trying to discuss something objectively and free of bias and look at the historical record as much a bible discussion board can allow.

My husband is Greek speaking a retired Minister so I know all about the debates.

My reply was in response to this....

And what I know is that this nonsense of metanoia meaning "change of mind" was invented by people who don't know Greek at all. Like Joseph Prince, and Paul Ellis, and Bruce, who used to constantly peddle this false definition which I confronted him on numerous times, and he never had an answer.

Point being Reverend Walden Treadwell (Presbyterian) (published initial by Harvard Press) examined the the word and wrote about the great meaning of the word "metanoia"

By your argument below we would have to discount all the great reformers as well.

There is more I would share about the history of Rev. Walden but obviously there is no interest. I am totally fine with that.

Pretty desperate, aren’t you? You drag in something some guy (what are his scholarly creditials? what church or denomination did he belong to?) from 1830, to settle the definition?

Are you kidding me? Do you know how much more we know about Greek in nearly 200 years since he wrote that. How much the English language has changed? How many new manscripts of the Bible, but also contemporaneous non-biblical manuscripts have been found in 200 years?

The world of Greek scholars has new changes and ideas coming up daily.There are fierce debates over words/grammar being published all the time. I got a real glimpse of this, when I was taking Greek with Bill Mounce. Because he writes commentaries, has been on numerous translation committees, and knows all the other scholars. At times, he phoned some of these people to resolve a question or something that came up in class discussions.

Which this man you linked to does not. His material is at best, out of date, at worst, wrong. I’m not going to bother to read it, I have too much I need to do.

As for Catholics, that is exactly what the last post I quoted by you was about. Nothing to do with etymologies, just you dredging up data that is incorrect, and some strange assumptions.

Please look up scholarly sources, instead of this kind of stuff and nonsense. Based on stuff and nonsense.