Not By Works

[dcontroversal]

d"
I don't think so.

I haven't got a single example.
Does that mean that God doesn't get offended?
I don't think so.
Pretty good list of synonyms though, don't you think?
Let's try...transgress: shall we?
"Israel hath sinned, and they have also transgressed my covenant which I commanded them: for they have even taken of the accursed thing, and have also stolen, and dissembled also, and they have put it even among their own stuff." (Josh 7:11)

"And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors." (Mark 15:28)
Don't you think transgressors offend God?

Look...you posted that God gets offended and cannot cite one verse which states it....you also embellished what JESUS said and change the wording to fit your narrative concerning those who are WITHOUT SIN to those who DO NOT COMMIT SIN.......seeing how you seem to embellish and or twist the word of God to prove your false points....nothing you say carries any weight.....so.....no need for me to engage you......

 

[dcontroversal]

I wouldn't expect you to believe it.
You probably don't even think God hates sin.
It is written..."The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity. (Psalm 5:5)
1 Peter 3:12
For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.

Actually there are 7 things that God hates....you should read Proverbs 6.......a false witness is one on the list.....embellishing and changing the word to fit your narrative falls under that grouping....

 

[dcontroversal]

Don't you mean "born again spirit and unborn again spirit"?
Those born of God cannot bring forth evil fruit. (1 John 3:9)


I recognize all the pre-resurrection examples, but not James' two soul man.
Care to elaborate?

No, I mean exactly what I said.......

 

[VCO]

Actually there are 7 things that God hates....you should read Proverbs 6.......a false witness is one on the list.....embellishing and changing the word to fit your narrative falls under that grouping....

OH, DC, you forgot to point the one HE hates the most, is one who sows DISCORD among brethren.

Proverbs 6:16-19 (ESV)
[SUP]16 [/SUP] There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him:
[SUP]17 [/SUP] haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[SUP]18 [/SUP] a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil,
[SUP]19 [/SUP] a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

 

[dcontroversal]

PHart if u wanna be consistent in what u are saying u need to throw out writings of Paul, because he contradicts what u say.
u say works of righteousness, he says not by our works in righteousness.

do u really have to wake up every morning and force urself to keep believing? why doesnt it come naturally? whats going on

AMEN....his left over half baked lasagna analogy and failure to trust Christ speaks volumes.....

 

[dcontroversal]

Very simple. If in your heart you believe the work is earning you salvation
..you're wrong

If you believe that you have faith in Christ but have. O works to back it up..you're also wrong

Have faith in Christ... Stop sinning. Both go hand in hand

Thread closed.

OK....define works of wood, hay and stubble as opposed to gold silver and precious stones...both saved and believers......

 

[dcontroversal]

It is written..."Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" (Heb 10:29)
Not all will benefit from Jesus' sacrifice, as some will continue to work evil deeds thinking they will not ever be judged.

Another cherry picked verse with no context......which is....FORSAKING the assembling oneself together and counting the blood of JESUS a common ordinary base thing....NOT SALVATION.......

 

[dcontroversal]

I understand that perfectly.
Perhaps you should view post #42493 to see what I was responding to?



I thank God that we don't have to walk in the "flesh" since it's death with Jesus. (Rom 6:3-6)

Who are you really.......a previously banned member used to say the exact same thing......and a few other things you say as well?

 

[dcontroversal]

That's the whole point... PJ wasn't outraged, stayed calm, and cool tempered, and he still got canned.
You know there HAD to be a huge amount of bearing false witness to kick him out. That's sad, very sad.

He broke the rules......maybe your bias does not allow you to see that..........what is sad is one who will ignore the facts and then make statements like you made.....now that is sad!

 

[followjesus]

why does Romans 7 exist in the bible then? Paul is speaking in present tense.

Paul is making a point from romans 6- the fuirst part of chapter eight. its dangerous to divide it into One verse applies while one doesnt it forms a context and He is actually delivering a message rather than making a bunch of points.

paul is explaining How the commandment produces sin in man in chapter 7. " Once I was alive apart from the Law, but when the commandment came , sin revived and I died...what was ordained unto Life, actually became death to me. for sin ceizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment deceived me."

in chapter 6 he explains what the crucifixion means to the believer and chapter 7 He goes into why it had to be that way, chapter 8 is Him explaining the soulution toi the double nature that keeps us a prisoner to " the Law of sin within our members" if you remove chapter 6 and 8, its Hard to see the message of whats Being said. chapter 7 is not about pauls own self alone its about mans sinful nature, and chapter 8 is the solution to that issue.

 

[CS1]

Thanks for clarifying and thanks for moderating.
Its something I wouldn’t want to do.

But can I ask a question though?
If a person has been banned how can we ask them why?

thank you for your question. it is for privacy to the person who was banned. They may gust in here and see a mod telling other why they were banned that is not cool. but what I can tell you is many do not know why some do leave. and ask for their member ship to be closed.

1. they were warned by a Mod one time
2. no longer wanting to be here.
3. come back under a new name
4. banned by for only a short time then able to come back.
5. No one will agree with me.

Mod's are not to provide that info on former members. I hope you understand that .

 

[dcontroversal]

Evening Seohce,

I hope all is well with you.

You have posted a lot of verses.

I have read them all.

Can I ask that you do this simple man a favour.

Would you mind summing up in a nutshell what it is you are trying to say.

Ta

He has consistently pushed a sinless working for blend for salvation.....

 

[Snoozy]

Absolutely NOT.
They don't believe we can walk without sin.
They misuse 1 John 1:8 to imply that the obedient are liars.

seems like they are using it rightly. what does it mean then?

 

[posthuman]

seems like they are using it rightly. what does it mean then?

He wants it to say "they" instead of "we"

 

[preacher4truth]

Romans 3:23 - you said i 'changed the words' and that it should read all 'have fallen short' - specifically past tense - of the glory of God ((your argument being that you no longer fall short of His glory)).
That is clearly not true; the scripture definitely says 'all fall short' - present, ongoing, passive tense.
i showed you that, and you accused me in return of making Christ a sinner and therefore God a liar.

So who is the one actually trying to change the words of scripture and who is the one using it improperly, and who is making God out to be a liar?

You didn't think a person deceived of being sinless would receive correction from the word of God, right?

 

[preacher4truth]

Isn't it of interest a deceived person who thinks he is sinless is re-writing scripture to suit himself?

 

[dcontroversal]

Isn't it of interest a deceived person who thinks he is sinless is re-writing scripture to suit himself?

Yep....His verbiage speaks volumes...such as

Jesus-->Let him who is WITHOUT SIN cast the first stone

HIM-->Who ever does not COMMIT SIN cast the first stone

 

[preacher4truth]

Yep....His verbiage speaks volumes...such as

Jesus-->Let him who is WITHOUT SIN cast the first stone

HIM-->Who ever does not COMMIT SIN cast the first stone

Yes, I saw this. PJW needs to be brought to light, Scripture clearly teaches those who claim to be sinless are deceived. I pray God sets him free.

 

[posthuman]

The first few verses of Ro 7 clearly show that it is speaking of a former time. Verse 5..."For when we WERE in the flesh..."
The entire middle of Ro 7 is about Paul's former life as a Pharisee; trying to live the Mosaic Law, but failing. And again, a reference to the past in verse 18; (that is, in my flesh).
And the end, especially verse 23; "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to THE LAW OF SIN which is in my members."...points again to a former time. Because....
we read in Romans 8:2...."For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from THE LAW OF SIN and death.
Why would Paul be subject to something he is free of?
If you could see the truth of Ro 7, and its proximity to Ro 6, which speaks of baptism and the death of the flesh, you would see that Paul is making the past-present transition, and Ro 8 continues on into the life walked in the Spirit.

This interpretation sounds great, and is certainly the one you want to swear by if you consider yourself to be perfect ((Paul didn't, btw)) - that is, it sounds great until you notice that the whole chapter is in present tense apart from the cherry you picked contextlessly out of verse 5.
Then this interpretation falls apart completely.

If you move on to 8:1, which begins 'therefore..' and realise that Paul reaches a conclusion based on everything he has said just prior to this, in particular being summarised in the last verse or two of chapter 7, which immediately precedes 8:1, you find a radically different understanding which blows works-based salvation apart and gives the believer an amazing reason to praise God in such a way that it is impossible to hold any amount of pride or self righteousness while doing so, and provides a blueprint of a profound basis for the thankfulness we are commanded to give in all things.

 

[dcontroversal]

This interpretation sounds great, and is certainly the one you want to swear by if you consider yourself to be perfect ((Paul didn't, btw)) - that is, it sounds great until you notice that the whole chapter is in present tense apart from the cherry you picked contextlessly out of verse 5.
Then this interpretation falls apart completely.

If you move on to 8:1, which begins 'therefore..' and realise that Paul reaches a conclusion based on everything he has said just prior to this, in particular being summarised in the last verse or two of chapter 7, which immediately precedes 8:1, you find a radically different understanding which blows works-based salvation apart and gives the believer an amazing reason to praise God in such a way that it is impossible to hold any amount of pride or self righteousness while doing so, and provides a blueprint of a profound basis for the thankfulness we are commanded to give in all things.

AMEN..................!!