Vote on Obsession with confession(1st John 1:9,sin confession)

  • 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.

Do we need to confess continuously,or Is once enough.

  • We need to confess our sins one time and be righteous conscious

    Votes: 7 17.5%
  • We need to confess our sins continuously to be In right standing with GOD.

    Votes: 17 42.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 16 40.0%

  • Total voters
    40
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
.
The Sermon on the Mount was part of the gospel that Christ came to proclaim to Israel (and to the world through them).
I will raise up to them a prophet of their brethren, like thee; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them as I shall command him. And whatever man shall not hearken to whatsoever words that prophet shall speak in my name, I will take vengeance on him. Deuteronomy 18:18-19

Yet this guy says that it was pure unadultered law? This is just the new.modern.hyper grace version of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism that says one gospel was proclaimed to those under the old covenant, and another gospel was proclaimed to gentiles.
If you think we are MAD, then you are mad.
 
O

oldthennew

Guest
we must never nullify our gift of 'choice'....

it is an act of choice to love, hate, to be kind or unkind, to be contrary or be cooperative and
not to dig or search for other's faults or mayhaps mis-understanding...

somehow, when see each other lying-in-wait to pounce upon an opposing view or perhaps
dislike of another, then we see the 'principle-of-choice' in action and being worked-out
in every day life....
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
No that would do-do pseudo Christianity, not Christian faith. "Acting" IS pretense.
What [is] the benefit, my brothers, if someone says [that he] has faith but does not have works? That faith [is] not able to save him. If a brother or a sister is poorly clothed and lacking food for the day, and one of you should say to them, “Go in peace, keep warm and eat well,” but does not give them what is necessary for the body, what [is] the benefit? Thus also faith, if it does not have works, is dead by itself. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe, and shudder! But do you want to know, O foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works [when he] offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was working together with his works, and by the works the faith was perfected. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And likewise was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works [when she] welcomed the messengers and sent [them] out by a different route? For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. James 2:13-26
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
Why does the true Christian life always have to come back to what Jesus did for us in His finished work on the cross and in His resurrection?
I would say it's our standing before God that always comes back to His finished work....because it's finished. And there is nothing that can be added to "finished". And that our life always comes back to His life. The Christian life is Christ and only He can live it.

"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me." Galatians 2:20
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Did James Understand Grace? 6 Reasons to Say Yes!

Your opinion of James matters a great deal. If you think James was confused about the gospel of grace that Paul preached, then you might as well throw your Bible away. If James is preaching a different message from Paul, then the NT writers are a house divided. And if the writers of the Bible do not agree with each other on basic issues of salvation, then the Bible cannot be trusted.
The good news, though, is that the Holy Spirit did not make a mistake when He inspired James to write his letter to the twelve tribes. As we saw in our study of the Book of James last year, his message is the same as the one Jesus lived and Paul preached.

But what of James the man? Why are Christians so divided on James himself?

In Part 1 of this study I identified three different opinions that you can have of James. Either (1) he didn’t understand the gospel of God’s grace, (2) at least not initially, or (3) he did. Before you read on, ask yourself, which of these has been my opinion of James?

The common view seems to be that James preached works while Paul preached grace. In other words, they did not agree. Paul said “faith alone” but James said “faith plus works.” You’ve probably heard clever people try to reconcile these statements. Usually they do so by adding to Paul’s words. Well of course Paul meant faith plus works, they say. There are always works associated with faith. Yet on many occasions Paul clearly said it was faith or works (see Rms 9:32 and Eph 2:8-9 for starters). It can’t be both, so which is it?

I addressed the works issue in my earlier study. Today we’re taking a different angle. We’re going to play the man rather than the ball, and my question is this: Did James understand the gospel of grace that Paul preached? Did he personally stand on the radical, pure, unalloyed grace of God? For 2,000 years the answer has been “probably not” or “no” or “maybe a little bit.” I have not read a single commentary that says James fully understood grace.

My view is that James has been misjudged. I admit the evidence is thin, but here are six reasons why I believe James probably did understand grace:

1. James, like Paul, had a one-on-one encounter with the resurrected Christ (1 Cor 15:7)

Prior to seeing the risen Lord, both James and Paul had been opposed to Christ (Jn 7:2-5). Paul tried to take Christians by force, while James tried to take Christ by force (Mk 3:21).

Paul had been an enemy of Christ but became one of his greatest followers. He spent the rest of his life testifying to the gospel of God’s grace (Acts 20:24). We know little about James’ encounter, but why do we assume his transformation was any less remarkable than Paul’s? Think about it: James had a divine encounter with Grace personified! Give God a little credit for the effect He probably had on James.

2. Paul vouched for James

Only one person in the New Testament called James an apostle and it was Paul (Gal 1:19). After their respective encounters with the risen Lord, Paul became known as an apostle to the Gentiles, while James, like Peter, became an apostle to the Jews (Gal 2:9). Paul and James were long-term friends.

On Paul’s first visit, James extended the “right hand of fellowship.” On a later visit James referred to Paul as a “dear friend” (Acts 15:25). Can you really imagine Paul being a long-term friend with a self-righteous grace-killer? Do you think it was possible to be friends with Paul and remain unaffected by his message of radical grace?

3. Paul never blamed James for Peter’s back-step
Peter withdrew from the Gentiles after “certain men came from
James” (Gal 2:12). This makes it sound as if the men were representing James. But Paul clarifies that these men “belonged to the circumcision group” (Gal 2:12) which James opposed in Acts 15. We should not confuse the certain men from James with James himself. Yes, they were in his church, but they held to a different message.

James distanced himself from these men when he wrote that “some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said” (Acts 15:24). Paul was not one to shy away from a confrontation. When Peter got a little muddled, Paul opposed him to his face. If James had been preaching mixture, Paul would’ve said so. Yet Paul never says a bad word about James.

4. James was intimately familiar with Paul’s message

Some have written to me saying that James was ignorant of the gospel of grace that Paul taught, but the Bible says otherwise (see Gal 2:2). Unlike those of us who’ve merely read Paul’s gospel, James heard it straight from Paul’s mouth! And he glorified to God when he learned of its fruit (Acts 21:20).

5. James did not compel Titus to be circumcised (Gal 2:3)

Yes, James asked the Gentiles to do three things in Acts 15 (more on this in Part 3), but circumcision was not one of them. For any law-abiding Jew, circumcision was the key issue. What was the point of obeying only parts of the law if you refused to be circumcised? Nowhere does James preach circumcision.

6. Paul submitted to James’ counsel

Paul said if anyone preached a gospel different to his, that person should be condemned to hell (Gal 1:9). If James preached a different gospel from Paul, there’s no way Paul would have gone along with the purification vow in Acts 21. Paul, like any grace preacher, was highly sensitive to mixture. He smelled it out in Galatia from hundreds of miles away. Yet when James says, “go shave your head,” Paul does it!

People have said to me that James was still learning about grace, but Paul wasn’t. Acts 21 comes near the end of Paul’s life. It is inconceivable that Paul would’ve done anything to send a mixed message about the cross. His motive for doing go through with the rite must have been the same as James’ motive for suggesting it: he wanted to win Jews. (More on this in Part 4.)

As we will see in the final two parts of this study, there is actually no evidence to suggest James preached mixture, but considerable evidence to suggest he held to grace. This is a radical departure from the traditional view, so let me ask you: are you yet convinced that James understood grace?

Of course it’s perfectly fine to hold a different view from me as long as you are prepared to accept the consequences. The fact is we don’t know for sure what James was like. But one day we will know and if it turns out that I have been wrong about James – that he was, in fact, confused about grace – then he may thank me for thinking the best of him. Afterall that’s what love does – it thinks the best of others (1 Co 13:7).

But if I’m right about James, then those of you who have dismissed him as irrelevant or confused might be embarrassed when you finally meet him.

Just something to think about.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
God is Love. It is only as we live in receptive faith that we share the love of God with others. You cannot conjure up love as an act of your will.
It takes our will to love. GOD doesn't overpower us and usurp our will and act through us like a puppeteer. Godliness is when our will is conformed to his will through the work of the cross through the spirit.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
The cross was the death. The death of a sacrifice didn't mean anything until the blood was applied to the altar and the throne (mercy seat). Christ's blood is currently on the throne atoning for the sins of his people. To state otherwise is to contradict
But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 John 1:7

but [Christ], because he continues forever, holds the priesthood permanently. Therefore also he is able to save completely those who draw near to God through him, [because he] always lives in order to intercede on their behalf. For a high priest such as this indeed is fitting for us, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and having become exalted [above] the heavens, Hebrews 7:24-26
What you have missed is that the Cross changed everything. Christians are under a new and better program, based on better things. The old is gone the new has come, get onboard or risk being left behind.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
What [is] the benefit, my brothers, if someone says [that he] has faith but does not have works? That faith [is] not able to save him. If a brother or a sister is poorly clothed and lacking food for the day, and one of you should say to them, “Go in peace, keep warm and eat well,” but does not give them what is necessary for the body, what [is] the benefit? Thus also faith, if it does not have works, is dead by itself. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe, and shudder! But do you want to know, O foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works [when he] offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was working together with his works, and by the works the faith was perfected. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And likewise was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works [when she] welcomed the messengers and sent [them] out by a different route? For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. James 2:13-26

Thanks, but I already have a Bible.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
It takes our will to love. GOD doesn't overpower us and usurp our will and act through us like a puppeteer. Godliness is when our will is conformed to his will through the work of the cross through the spirit.
Well, you ain't God and God IS love, so.......
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
we must never nullify our gift of 'choice'....

it is an act of choice to love, hate, to be kind or unkind, to be contrary or be cooperative and
not to dig or search for other's faults or mayhaps mis-understanding...

somehow, when see each other lying-in-wait to pounce upon an opposing view or perhaps
dislike of another, then we see the 'principle-of-choice' in action and being worked-out
in every day life....
Nope. Our choice is to live by faith in Christ or to go off on our own and try to do and be what only He can do and be.

do be do be do.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
.
It's hilarious to watch you constantly use the words of a man who wants to sell a lot of books, while I rely on the words of the fathers of the faith.

Do you get some sort of remuneration from the author of that escapefromreality website for all of the traffic you direct his way?

Did James Understand Grace? 6 Reasons to Say Yes!

Your opinion of James matters a great deal. If you think James was confused about the gospel of grace that Paul preached, then you might as well throw your Bible away. If James is preaching a different message from Paul, then the NT writers are a house divided. And if the writers of the Bible do not agree with each other on basic issues of salvation, then the Bible cannot be trusted.
The good news, though, is that the Holy Spirit did not make a mistake when He inspired James to write his letter to the twelve tribes. As we saw in our study of the Book of James last year, his message is the same as the one Jesus lived and Paul preached.

But what of James the man? Why are Christians so divided on James himself?

In Part 1 of this study I identified three different opinions that you can have of James. Either (1) he didn’t understand the gospel of God’s grace, (2) at least not initially, or (3) he did. Before you read on, ask yourself, which of these has been my opinion of James?

The common view seems to be that James preached works while Paul preached grace. In other words, they did not agree. Paul said “faith alone” but James said “faith plus works.” You’ve probably heard clever people try to reconcile these statements. Usually they do so by adding to Paul’s words. Well of course Paul meant faith plus works, they say. There are always works associated with faith. Yet on many occasions Paul clearly said it was faith or works (see Rms 9:32 and Eph 2:8-9 for starters). It can’t be both, so which is it?

I addressed the works issue in my earlier study. Today we’re taking a different angle. We’re going to play the man rather than the ball, and my question is this: Did James understand the gospel of grace that Paul preached? Did he personally stand on the radical, pure, unalloyed grace of God? For 2,000 years the answer has been “probably not” or “no” or “maybe a little bit.” I have not read a single commentary that says James fully understood grace.

My view is that James has been misjudged. I admit the evidence is thin, but here are six reasons why I believe James probably did understand grace:

1. James, like Paul, had a one-on-one encounter with the resurrected Christ (1 Cor 15:7)

Prior to seeing the risen Lord, both James and Paul had been opposed to Christ (Jn 7:2-5). Paul tried to take Christians by force, while James tried to take Christ by force (Mk 3:21).

Paul had been an enemy of Christ but became one of his greatest followers. He spent the rest of his life testifying to the gospel of God’s grace (Acts 20:24). We know little about James’ encounter, but why do we assume his transformation was any less remarkable than Paul’s? Think about it: James had a divine encounter with Grace personified! Give God a little credit for the effect He probably had on James.

2. Paul vouched for James

Only one person in the New Testament called James an apostle and it was Paul (Gal 1:19). After their respective encounters with the risen Lord, Paul became known as an apostle to the Gentiles, while James, like Peter, became an apostle to the Jews (Gal 2:9). Paul and James were long-term friends.

On Paul’s first visit, James extended the “right hand of fellowship.” On a later visit James referred to Paul as a “dear friend” (Acts 15:25). Can you really imagine Paul being a long-term friend with a self-righteous grace-killer? Do you think it was possible to be friends with Paul and remain unaffected by his message of radical grace?

3. Paul never blamed James for Peter’s back-step
Peter withdrew from the Gentiles after “certain men came from
James” (Gal 2:12). This makes it sound as if the men were representing James. But Paul clarifies that these men “belonged to the circumcision group” (Gal 2:12) which James opposed in Acts 15. We should not confuse the certain men from James with James himself. Yes, they were in his church, but they held to a different message.

James distanced himself from these men when he wrote that “some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said” (Acts 15:24). Paul was not one to shy away from a confrontation. When Peter got a little muddled, Paul opposed him to his face. If James had been preaching mixture, Paul would’ve said so. Yet Paul never says a bad word about James.

4. James was intimately familiar with Paul’s message

Some have written to me saying that James was ignorant of the gospel of grace that Paul taught, but the Bible says otherwise (see Gal 2:2). Unlike those of us who’ve merely read Paul’s gospel, James heard it straight from Paul’s mouth! And he glorified to God when he learned of its fruit (Acts 21:20).

5. James did not compel Titus to be circumcised (Gal 2:3)

Yes, James asked the Gentiles to do three things in Acts 15 (more on this in Part 3), but circumcision was not one of them. For any law-abiding Jew, circumcision was the key issue. What was the point of obeying only parts of the law if you refused to be circumcised? Nowhere does James preach circumcision.

6. Paul submitted to James’ counsel

Paul said if anyone preached a gospel different to his, that person should be condemned to hell (Gal 1:9). If James preached a different gospel from Paul, there’s no way Paul would have gone along with the purification vow in Acts 21. Paul, like any grace preacher, was highly sensitive to mixture. He smelled it out in Galatia from hundreds of miles away. Yet when James says, “go shave your head,” Paul does it!

People have said to me that James was still learning about grace, but Paul wasn’t. Acts 21 comes near the end of Paul’s life. It is inconceivable that Paul would’ve done anything to send a mixed message about the cross. His motive for doing go through with the rite must have been the same as James’ motive for suggesting it: he wanted to win Jews. (More on this in Part 4.)

As we will see in the final two parts of this study, there is actually no evidence to suggest James preached mixture, but considerable evidence to suggest he held to grace. This is a radical departure from the traditional view, so let me ask you: are you yet convinced that James understood grace?

Of course it’s perfectly fine to hold a different view from me as long as you are prepared to accept the consequences. The fact is we don’t know for sure what James was like. But one day we will know and if it turns out that I have been wrong about James – that he was, in fact, confused about grace – then he may thank me for thinking the best of him. Afterall that’s what love does – it thinks the best of others (1 Co 13:7).

But if I’m right about James, then those of you who have dismissed him as irrelevant or confused might be embarrassed when you finally meet him.

Just something to think about.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
What you have missed is that the Cross changed everything. Christians are under a new and better program, based on better things. The old is gone the new has come, get onboard or risk being left behind.
I know it changed everything. There is no longer daily sacrifice and yearly atonement for sin. The blood was shed once and now abides continually in heaven atoning for sin.
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
These teachings are not for you..... we have told you these truths at least over 20 times....we are not trying to persuade you in the faith....it's for other people to read and judge by the Holy Spirit inside of them..

It's a sure sign of having a Pharisee mindset when people start to attack the person speaking when they can't refute the truth being given.....just like they did to Jesus...

Actually most of his books you can get for free if you want. I find it hilarious that you say " you rely on the words of the fathers of the faith".

..just repent and start to believe in the gospel of our Lord! His work is done....stop "kicking against the goads"...Jesus loves you deeply and He has a great salvation for you but you have to believe in Him and what He has done.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
I know it changed everything. There is no longer daily sacrifice and yearly atonement for sin. The blood was shed once and now abides continually in heaven atoning for sin.
The wages of sin is death, and the wage that needed to be paid is death. We are not forgiven by blood-letting, but by the shedding of His blood unto death.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
These teachings are not for you..... we have told you these truths at least over 20 times....we are not trying to persuade you in the faith....it's for other people to read and judge by the Holy Spirit inside of them..

It's a sure sign of having a Pharisee mindset when people start to attack the person speaking when they can't refute the truth being given.....just like they did to Jesus...

Actually most of his books you can get for free if you want. I find it hilarious that you say " you rely on the words of the fathers of the faith".

..just repent and start to believe in the gospel of our Lord! His work is done....stop "kicking against the goads"...Jesus loves you deeply and He has a great salvation for you but you have to believe in Him and what He has done.
Funny how you always slip into ad hominem (It's not for you... pharisee mindset...attacking the person... kicking against the goads...etc) when the attacks against what you teach persist.

btw, you didn't answer my question if you get some form of material benefit from directing traffic to that website that you CONSTANTLY link to.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
The wages of sin is death, and the wage that needed to be paid is death. We are not forgiven by blood-letting, but by the shedding of His blood unto death.
Blood on the altar and mercy seat was the proof of death. Blood on the throne in heaven is proof of Christ's death.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
Blood on the altar and mercy seat was the proof of death. Blood on the throne in heaven is proof of Christ's death.
It signifies His once for all death for the remission of sins.
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Oh brother....I know you don't like it because it goes against your religion but that is in keeping with things........no I do not get anything from sharing the truths of grace...lol..just saves a whole lot of typing and as I say..it is for other people.....:)


Funny how you always slip into ad hominem (It's not for you... pharisee mindset...attacking the person... kicking against the goads...etc) when the attacks against what you teach persist.

btw, you didn't answer my question if you get some form of material benefit from directing traffic to that website that you CONSTANTLY link to.
 
F

FreeNChrist

Guest
Funny how you always slip into ad hominem (It's not for you... pharisee mindset...attacking the person... kicking against the goads...etc) when the attacks against what you teach persist.

btw, you didn't answer my question if you get some form of material benefit from directing traffic to that website that you CONSTANTLY link to.
Your kidding, right? You're gonna play the ad hominem card when that is your favorite card of choice? Hypocritical much?
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
Oh brother....I know you don't like it because it goes against your religion but that is in keeping with things........no I do not get anything from sharing the truths of grace...lol..just saves a whole lot of typing and as I say..it is for other people.....:)
You avoided my question. I asked, do you receive some sort of material benefit for directing traffic to that website that you constantly (almost exclusively) link to?