Future sins forgiven?
- Thread starter JayWalker
- 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.
We have many stories like this in Latin lore, but I think there may be a true basis to it from what I found....
Wikipedia recounts a story told by Martin Luther about Johann Tetzel. It goes a little something like this:
Tetzel was in Leipzig selling indulgences. After collecting a large sum of money, Tetzel was preparing to leave town for Rome. A nobleman approached him and asked if he could purchase an indulgence for a future sin. Tetzel sold him one. Outside of town, the nobleman beat and robbed Tetzel. He then told Tetzel this was the sin for which he bought the indulgence.
Although Wikipedia does not offer a source, it seems to come from Luther's Sämmtliche schriften, vol 15.
Never read anywhere in the New Testament about having a green light license to sin decree.
Luther was a false teachers and a drunk and as such will be ignored by True Christians who get their doctrine from the Word of the Lord through the Holy Spirit rather that from known drunks.
That's because the Lord does not teach this in His Word.
But in these modern times with so many ear tickling churches and preachers running around teaching what those with itching ears want to hear - they claim Christians can live in sin and grace automatically covers their sin so they think they are all good which is what the old devil wants them to believe
Romans 6:1,2
Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
That's the problem right there is people want to be saved an d miss going to hell but they don't want to die to self as in giving up their own carnal fleshly desires.
This is why so many gravitate to the once saved always saved message of the ear ticklers because they have itching ears and will only accept what they want to hear.
So the "green light license to sin decree" comes from doctrines of demons that satan is teaching through all the popular churches and preachers who are the tares Jesus warned about.
Gee I did not realize that you think the Apocrypha should be part of the Protestant bible. It was Martin Luther's study and conclusion that it should not be, and his opinion was accepted by the Protestant movement.
As for his being a drunk, it is not clear that he was any worse than most people of his day.
Long before Luther, the Apocrypha was never considered inspired.
The Jews have never considered these works to be divinely inspired.
The Apocrypha has always been rejected by the Jews as Scripture.
The earliest manuscripts that contain them date back to the 4th century A.D.
Jewish writer Flavius Josephus said that there were only twenty-two books divinely inspired by God. These books
are the same as our thirty-nine in the Old Testament. The books of the Apocrypha were not among these.
Oh wow
I'm delighted that you too are spiritually awake enough to hear this doctrine
It unfortunately appears to suggest something I sincerely hope it doesn't actually mean
It's not
Ok
Go ahead
Sin all you want
But if clearly explained says
Don't be afraid little one
I see you troubles
I understand your conflict
And just like the "mighty" Paul
You do what you don't want to do!!!
But
Take heart
There is no condemnation
Unfortunately
Modern day "teaching"
Fails to explain it's meaning
Well
At least that's my understanding
But I'm sure you'll probably come across with explanation more "wise" than I can provide
Just trying to shine the light into an apparently dark place
Perhaps you are unaware that the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, heavily used by the early church, included the Apocrypha. And before Luther's time, while it was not included, neither was it considered clearly not scripture. Rather it fell into a middle category, possibly scripture but also possible not.
Even well into the 19th century most Protestants felt it belonged in scripture and were upset when the ABS decided to cut it out.
rewriter, Magenta is correct. here's the explanation: 2nd Timothy 3:16 & 17: "ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD & IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, REPROOF, CORRECTION & INSTRUCTION, IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED UNTO ALL GOOD WORKS". it correlates with 2nd Peter 1: 20 & 21: KNOWING THIS FIRST, THAT NO PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION, FOR THE PROPHECY CAME NOT IN OLD TIME BY THE WILL OF MEN, BUT HOLY MEN OF GOD SPAKE AS THEY WERE MOVED BY THE HOLY GHOST".
Well Scripture has been defined by humans. The OT that the Protestants accept was selected by Jews after the Jerusalem temple fell. When 2nd Timothy was written there was no clear definition of scripture, and Paul would not have considered 2 Timothy to be scripture, not any books of the NT for that matter.
But I challenge you to find any listing of what constitutes scripture that clearly comes from a source other than humans.
you need a serious Christian teacher to assist you. you are incorrect. paul definitely would consider 2nd Timothy as scripture. God, Jesus & the Holy Spirit are the AUTHORS of the Bible. over 40 men wrote the Bible with the paper & ink of the day. they wrote what God, Jesus & the Holy Spirit told them to write. then you have 2nd Timothy 2:7 & 15 to consider
Gee, you mean like someone with a PhD in OT, NT and Biblical Theology who has been asked to serve on special investigations? Or perhaps someone who translates the sayings of Jesus from the Greek back to Aramaic without going through English?
Do you really think that Paul thought so much of himself that he thought he was writing scripture? Do you even know the Greek term used to describe how scripture came to be before Paul created a new term?
If what Paul wrote was dictated to him by the Holy Spirit, why does Paul say that he is expressing his opinion, not God's.
I might add that your understanding of 2 Timothy is YOUR understanding, not necessarily correct, just your opinion. Under my opinion, you need to find a good teacher to correct your errors, but I am wise enough to recognize what is my opinion and not view my opinion as fact. Nor do I expect anyone to fully understand my opinion without full details being provided. Most who have read what I have written to date find it insightful, those who haven't find it my views different.
Did you not know that God says in His Word that drunkenness is one of the sins that cause people to not be allowed in to Heaven?
it's one of the works of the flesh so being a drunk is something real Christians repent from because only those led by the Holy Spirit are the True sons of God and the Holy Spirit is not leading anybody to be a drunkard
Now, the fake "holy spirit" the catholics are led by is just demons and Luther was a catholic for years and years and being a drunk was something he kept even after leaving the catholic social club. (it's not actually a church, it's more like a cultic social club)
Yeah so that was simply a translation of Hebrew in to Greek
No, Jesus Christ decided what went in to His Canon as He influenced men to throw out what needed to be thrown out and put in what needed to be put in.
This is a common trick of satan to go around and claim men wrote the Bible as he deceives people in to rejecting God's Canon.
The biblical writers were not making stuff up and they were not writing their own thoughts.
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 1:21
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Revelation 19:10
for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (God's Word is what 2 Peter 1:16-21 is speaking of)
2 Peter 1:21 is referring to that which Jesus (God's Word) has to say to mankind thru the written Word which is the oracles of God which came thru the descendants of Abraham
Romans 3:2
because that unto them were committed the oracles of God
Hebrews 1:2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Jesus said the Holy Ghost would lead us in to ALL Truth (John 16:13), and Jesus said God's Word IS Truth (John 17:17)
Those that believe they don't need God's Word or believe there's no need to judge what they are getting in the Spirit to see if it agrees with God's Word are sadly deceived by the devil.
The devil's MO can be found in how he deceived Adam and Eve in to not believing God's Word.
Jesus is God's Word Who became a Human.
It is that HUMAN (Jesus) that decided what went in to God's Canon.
He is not called the WORD OF GOD for nothing ya know.
You cite NT writings to prove that NT writings, some of which post-date others, to prove that the NT is divinely approved scripture. Do you know what a circular argument is and what its logical value is? For the Jews, the OT at the time of the writing of the NT, their scripture was what we call the OT, possibly including works we do not include as some get referenced in the NT. We only know what one group of Jews, all Pharisees, decreed to be the scriptures in the late 80's or 90's CE.
Are you suggesting that Pharisees were inspired by the Holy Spirit?
And can you cite where Jesus spelled out which works were scripture? I doubt He knew about anything other than OT works pre-crucifixion, and he left earth before any post-resurrection works were written.
Care to try again?
Are you suggesting that Pharisees were inspired by the Holy Spirit?
And can you cite where Jesus spelled out which works were scripture? I doubt He knew about anything other than OT works pre-crucifixion, and he left earth before any post-resurrection works were written.
Care to try again?
So in your estimation Jesus did not have the Holy Spirit without measure as the scripture tell us He did?
John 3:34
For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him
Care to actually believe God's Word and refrain from saying Jesus was ignorant?
He was not ignorant of anything. Through the Holy Spirit there was nothing He did not know.