How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God

I get why.

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.

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).

What inference? When Jesus prayed, "My Father" was He "inferring" that He's not our Father?

You're just looking for an excuse to fight with someone, and I'm not going to be dragged down into a state of emotional instability, as state in which you appear to be a long time resident.

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

Amen...down here in the South, we use "saints" to refer to Christians, just as the NT does.

Like I said you have utterly no
Clue what we believe.
I turned you over to God

People get hunting licenses, but don't spend every waking moment hunting, right?

Come on mate.

Your response to me in a post If he was OUR FATHER why did you not say so?
BTW can you on this thread detail why you think why you are accusing me of emetional instability

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.

That would be like trying to explain to an insane person why he is insane. No thanks. Calm down and we can discuss whatever you want.

Please clarify the above please

@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.

his version of clarifying- " o s a s is a wicked deception which will land it's followers in hell. agree with me, everything i say, to avoid that fate."

that is his whole theology.

in particular, a specific human definition of 'righteousness' made up of outward self-willed and self-sustained behavioral modification.

Here is truth: No true Christian wants to sin. He fights against it and hates it and prays to God for assistance in overcoming his temptations. No true Christian wallows in sin.

And when he does wallow in it they are not happy.

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.