Jesus Is Our Truth, Reward, And Faithfulness So We Can Lie, Steal, and Fornicate?

[throughfaith]

Please, 1 John 2:3-4 KJV and James 2:24-26 KJV do not teach salvatoin by works: they expose OSAS as unable to stand the test of Biblical scrutiny.

OSAS insists that salvation covers deliberate, known, habitual, impenitent sins, saying salvation either changes God's opinion of its continued practice, that grace covers it, or that eternal security makes the guilty one immune to the penalty of it.

Read the verses I present just as they are written without the constant bias with which you view them. They are clear: for the Just Man who falls 7 times but rises out of it there is mercy, but for the OSAS Presumptuous Man who climbs down to it, gets comfortable, swats away the uplifting hand of Jesus, and waves his OSAS License to Sin in His face -- that man is going to the Lake of Fire.

There are verses which do teach loss of salvation. But not to the Church ( the body of christ )

 

[throughfaith]

Why do you think people were saved differently in the OT? Don't you realize the blood of bulls and goats never covered anyone's sin? It was what the blood REPRESENTED that covered their sin: the faith in the shed blood of Jesus that had yet to be shed is what covered their sin, just like Abraham's faith was the faith of the circumcision, "him being not circumcised".

//Don't you realize the blood of bulls and goats never covered anyone's sin?// Why do you keep quoting it this way? What does the verse say?

 

[throughfaith]

We know the people to whom Jesus will say "depart" are sinners who thought they were Christian because He specifically mentions them prophesying, casting out, and doing miracles "IN MY NAME"- what's His name?

"Christ".

There are no 'Christians 'present in Matthew 7 , and its before Jesus dies for the sins of the world . Its before the DBR and giving of the Holy spirit . Everything that's different from OT salvation . Who had their sins Redeemed prior to the cross ?

 

[throughfaith]

Pretty sure I said the same thing as Hebrews 10;4

You keep using the word covered. Why ?

 

[throughfaith]

I think you're the one who's confused. Read Isaiah 8:16 KJV and find out what the disciples of Christ are sealed with.

It is astounding how blind people are to the truths of Scripture because all Christianity is today is an endless round of false pulpit prophets preaching a false OSAS gospel that is no Gospel at all "and My people love to have it so."

There are no Christians in Isaiah 8.16 And not all Christians hold to eternal security.

 

[throughfaith]

You don't realize that the Saints will be judged in the future?

Did you never read Daniel 7? Don't you know that "judgment must begin at the house of God"?

Do you agree with Paul that "we all shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ"? in the future?

Yes, we are saved by grace but judged by our works because our works are the evidence we've been or not been saved by grace.

I can only conclude you haven't read the bible yourself without the influence of ' SDA ' Have you considered doing so ?

 

[throughfaith]

Pretty sure I said the same thing as Hebrews 10;4

4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should TAKE AWAY sins.

Why do you change it to covered?

 

[throughfaith]

We know the people to whom Jesus will say "depart" are sinners who thought they were Christian because He specifically mentions them prophesying, casting out, and doing miracles "IN MY NAME"- what's His name?

"Christ".

With respect and I would rather say this in the hope that it may help. Let go of the SDA garbage. It has you in a fog where you can't see past it . Wake up !!

 

[Phoneman-777]

Hey you don't have to break the Law of God habitually for one to have broken the law they can keep punishment is due for the first time and only once.

Punishment is due...but not for those who "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit

The Bible certainly makes a distinction between the Just Man who falls 7 times and rises again, and the Presumptuous Man who habitually, impenitently sins and is guilt of the "great transgression" -- between the sin that is "not unto death" and the sin that is "unto death".

If we're willing to recognize the distinction, then the fact that we've all broken the Sabbath (or any other laws) in the past is inconsequential, right or wrong? What matters is, "Are we convicted by the Holy Spirit of our guilt and sought repentance -- or -- are we in danger of grieving away the Holy Spirit Who seals us unto the day of redemption with the "Seal of God", which is His law (Isaiah 1:18 KJV) ?

 

[Phoneman-777]

4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should TAKE AWAY sins. Why do you change it to covered?

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." Psalms 32:1 KJV
" And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity?" Job 7:21 KJV

 

[Phoneman-777]

We received God's free gift of eternal life you are preaching a contradiction in terms.

Have you ever returned a gift to a store or to someone because you didn't want it anymore?

You are preaching the "P" of Calvinism's TULIP: "Preservation of the Saints", which is a false idea.

 

[Phoneman-777]

There are verses which do teach loss of salvation. But not to the Church ( the body of christ )

Here's a text that proves beyond question the Saints can wind up lost:

"And because iniquity shall about, the LOVE of many shall wax cold, but he that shall endure to the end,
the same shall be saved." - Matthew 24:12-13 KJV​

The "love" of the many is "agape" of which only the Saints can partake, according to 1 John 5:4 KJV.

Therefore, Jesus clearly contrasts these two classes of Saints with two obviously different futures before them: the one class who "endure to the end" and are "saved" with the other class whose "agape" turns cold through widespread iniquity and (dare I say it?) are LOST.

Now, if you're going to argue that both classes will be saved regardless when all laws of hermeneutics, vocabulary, syntax, and just plain common sense demand otherwise, you'll have proven yourself unreasonably stubborn beyond acceptable limits and we'll have to terminate our discussion.

 

[gb9]

Here's a text that proves beyond question the Saints can wind up lost:

"And because iniquity shall about, the LOVE of many shall wax cold, but he that shall endure to the end,
the same shall be saved." - Matthew 24:12-13 KJV​

The "love" of the many is "agape" of which only the Saints can partake, according to 1 John 5:4 KJV.

Therefore, Jesus clearly contrasts these two classes of Saints with two obviously different futures before them: the one class who "endure to the end" and are "saved" with the other class whose "agape" turns cold through widespread iniquity and (dare I say it?) are LOST.

Now, if you're going to argue that both classes will be saved regardless when all laws of hermeneutics, vocabulary, syntax, and just plain common sense demand otherwise, you'll have proven yourself unreasonably stubborn beyond acceptable limits and we'll have to terminate our discussion.

........says the dude who flatly refuses to accept that one is saved by faith and trust in Christ only, and keeps insisting more is needed....

 

[throughfaith]

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." Psalms 32:1 KJV
" And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity?" Job 7:21 KJV

Is that the same verse ? Looks like a different one ?

 

[throughfaith]

Here's a text that proves beyond question the Saints can wind up lost:

"And because iniquity shall about, the LOVE of many shall wax cold, but he that shall endure to the end,
the same shall be saved." - Matthew 24:12-13 KJV​

The "love" of the many is "agape" of which only the Saints can partake, according to 1 John 5:4 KJV.

Therefore, Jesus clearly contrasts these two classes of Saints with two obviously different futures before them: the one class who "endure to the end" and are "saved" with the other class whose "agape" turns cold through widespread iniquity and (dare I say it?) are LOST.

Now, if you're going to argue that both classes will be saved regardless when all laws of hermeneutics, vocabulary, syntax, and just plain common sense demand otherwise, you'll have proven yourself unreasonably stubborn beyond acceptable limits and we'll have to terminate our discussion.

Matthew 24 is tribulation passage. The church is raptured prior to it.

 

[throughfaith]

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." Psalms 32:1 KJV
" And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity?" Job 7:21 KJV

Hebrews 9
15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

 

[throughfaith]

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." Psalms 32:1 KJV
" And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity?" Job 7:21 KJV

Sins were covered but not redeemed until Jesus redeemed them on the cross .

 

[CS1]

Punishment is due...but not for those who "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit

The Bible certainly makes a distinction between the Just Man who falls 7 times and rises again, and the Presumptuous Man who habitually, impenitently sins and is guilt of the "great transgression" -- between the sin that is "not unto death" and the sin that is "unto death".

If we're willing to recognize the distinction, then the fact that we've all broken the Sabbath (or any other laws) in the past is inconsequential, right or wrong? What matters is, "Are we convicted by the Holy Spirit of our guilt and sought repentance -- or -- are we in danger of grieving away the Holy Spirit Who seals us unto the day of redemption with the "Seal of God", which is His law (Isaiah 1:18 KJV) ?

the Spirit is free from the Law

 

[Blade]

So, if the fact that Jesus is our truth, reward, and faithfulness does not permit us to lie, steal, or fornicate...why do so many claim that since Jesus is their spiritual rest, they may freely break the fourth commandment?

Hi can I ask you.. are you their/mans God? No why does it or would it bother you? Its written we are not here to please man. The "many" you used answer to Him not you or me so what they do praise GOD. You post this knowing the debate about the Sabbath, its been going on way before I was even born. We listen to a preacher and we go home thinking.. you know.. I don't do that.. maybe I should. See what you're doing here Christ never does. He will not judge us nor condemn us. Its always our choice. He will whisper something by that sweet holy Spirit where you will never feel guilty or condemned.

Now I am thinking in this day and age God might be saying "you've been RESTING WAY to much" haha

 

[posthuman]

Here's a text that proves beyond question the Saints can wind up lost:

"And because iniquity shall about, the LOVE of many shall wax cold, but he that shall endure to the end,
the same shall be saved." - Matthew 24:12-13 KJV​

The "love" of the many is "agape" of which only the Saints can partake, according to 1 John 5:4 KJV.

Therefore, Jesus clearly contrasts these two classes of Saints with two obviously different futures before them: the one class who "endure to the end" and are "saved" with the other class whose "agape" turns cold through widespread iniquity and (dare I say it?) are LOST.

Now, if you're going to argue that both classes will be saved regardless when all laws of hermeneutics, vocabulary, syntax, and just plain common sense demand otherwise, you'll have proven yourself unreasonably stubborn beyond acceptable limits and we'll have to terminate our discussion.

Elijah's love waxed cold, yet he endured in faith, and is saved.

Next