How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God
- Thread starter Phoneman-777
- Start date
-
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.
This post IS about agape, and exposing what it is NOT: love for God that is co-mingled with presumptuous sin.
You absolutely believe you can sin all you want - maybe that "all you want" is a very small amount, but it's "all you want" nonetheless.
I'm telling you zero amount of presumptuous sin gets covered by God's mercy: grace is proferred only to the Just Man, never the Presumptuous Man, which is exactly the kind of man for which the OSAS License to Sin was invented.
You absolutely believe you can sin all you want - maybe that "all you want" is a very small amount, but it's "all you want" nonetheless.
I'm telling you zero amount of presumptuous sin gets covered by God's mercy: grace is proferred only to the Just Man, never the Presumptuous Man, which is exactly the kind of man for which the OSAS License to Sin was invented.
The day you overcome a particular sin is not the day you are saved. Purification, rather sanctification, is not the same as justification. We ARE redeemed, we are forgiven. God doesn’t need to make you overcome a particular sin (purify you) in order for you to be saved. Jesus died for your sins. He will sanctify, most assuredly, but that is not the means to salvation.
“Sainthood” (are you guys Catholics? Lol) is just a matter of title, being bestowed to those who believe in the Son of God. When people are referred to as saints, it is not a term of self-righteousness (“look how good I am”) but instead refers to the righteous (who believe in Jesus, and are righteous because of the Lord).
“Sainthood” (are you guys Catholics? Lol) is just a matter of title, being bestowed to those who believe in the Son of God. When people are referred to as saints, it is not a term of self-righteousness (“look how good I am”) but instead refers to the righteous (who believe in Jesus, and are righteous because of the Lord).
Rubbish and rubbish and you are full of it.
This thread has nothing to do with AGAPE because if it did you would not have accused me of what you have done above.
You have accused me "You absolutely believe you can sin all you want"
So in post 323 I said
I then said
You have now have proven yourself wrong with AGAPE, and the pretens of this thread
This thread has nothing to do with AGAPE because if it did you would not have accused me of what you have done above.
You have accused me "You absolutely believe you can sin all you want"
So in post 323 I said
I then said
You have now have proven yourself wrong with AGAPE, and the pretens of this thread
No, it's just the OSAS crowd is too cowardly to admit what I'm saying's true.
OSAS teaches once a person becomes a saint, his actions or thoughts cannot cause him to cease from being a saint. Therefore, he may sin all he wants to and remain a saint.
I'm just hanging some meat on this disgusting theological skeleton to demonstrate how unBiblical it is, like it or not.
OSAS teaches once a person becomes a saint, his actions or thoughts cannot cause him to cease from being a saint. Therefore, he may sin all he wants to and remain a saint.
I'm just hanging some meat on this disgusting theological skeleton to demonstrate how unBiblical it is, like it or not.
@posthuman
See, this is revealing. He is basically asking, “Why do you need God’s grace when the commandments are not burdensome?” It helps you understand where he is coming from. Adherence to righteousness is necessary for salvation, sums up his belief.
See, this is revealing. He is basically asking, “Why do you need God’s grace when the commandments are not burdensome?” It helps you understand where he is coming from. Adherence to righteousness is necessary for salvation, sums up his belief.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
The issue here is not my understanding of what a "saint" is...it's the OSAS crowd's understanding.
I've shown you that agape is only attributed to the righteous, because it's demonstrated by keeping the Ten Commandments, which the Bible says the wicked cannot do...AND...not one time in Scripture is the word ever attributed to the wicked.
Therefore, the "many" -- whose fate is contrasted with those which "endure to the end" and are "saved" -- allow widespread iniquity to cause their agape to grow "cold", which is even more hopeless a condition than the "lukewarm" Laodiceans who are rejected by God (unless they repent, that is).
So, OSAS now finds itself arguing the wicked are capable of receiving agape from God so the "many" can be wicked...OR...it must argue that the "many" are saints and that "cold" agape is no threat to a saint's salvation (though lukewarm is cause for rejection) which totally renders the passage incredibly unnecessary because, "WHO CARES, Lord Jesus, if agape grows cold or stays hot if in the end, all wind up saved???"
Of course, we've got this other idea that the "many" refers to "physical tribulation-period bodies" that endure to the end and saved, although Jesus spent 3 1/2 years telling us we need spiritual salvation, not to worry what man does to this body, and that if we're faithful unto death, we get a crown of life....and ZERO time telling us about "physical salvation".
All of these redonkulous ideas would not be necessary if people would just believe the Bible: a saint is a saint as long as his will is surrendered to Jesus as his Lord and Savior (a purely cognitive, non-works, thought process) and continuously abides in the Vine, period.
I've shown you that agape is only attributed to the righteous, because it's demonstrated by keeping the Ten Commandments, which the Bible says the wicked cannot do...AND...not one time in Scripture is the word ever attributed to the wicked.
Therefore, the "many" -- whose fate is contrasted with those which "endure to the end" and are "saved" -- allow widespread iniquity to cause their agape to grow "cold", which is even more hopeless a condition than the "lukewarm" Laodiceans who are rejected by God (unless they repent, that is).
So, OSAS now finds itself arguing the wicked are capable of receiving agape from God so the "many" can be wicked...OR...it must argue that the "many" are saints and that "cold" agape is no threat to a saint's salvation (though lukewarm is cause for rejection) which totally renders the passage incredibly unnecessary because, "WHO CARES, Lord Jesus, if agape grows cold or stays hot if in the end, all wind up saved???"
Of course, we've got this other idea that the "many" refers to "physical tribulation-period bodies" that endure to the end and saved, although Jesus spent 3 1/2 years telling us we need spiritual salvation, not to worry what man does to this body, and that if we're faithful unto death, we get a crown of life....and ZERO time telling us about "physical salvation".
All of these redonkulous ideas would not be necessary if people would just believe the Bible: a saint is a saint as long as his will is surrendered to Jesus as his Lord and Savior (a purely cognitive, non-works, thought process) and continuously abides in the Vine, period.