Are Ananias and Sapphira in heaven?

1 John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
DHK


HP: First, no one is saying that all men have not sinned, past tense. That is what this verse directly speaks to, past sin, not present sin as a believer. Have you read 1John in it’s entirety? If you have, let me ask you a question. How many times can you find a verse that might in some way indicate that a believer has present unrepented sin? How many times can you find a verse that implies a believer has no sin, or does not sin, or should not sin?

I made a list one time. I will try and count them again myself. Count them for yourself and then give us your report. Let’s compare notes. I believe you will be shocked.

I will just quote one at this time. “He that sayeth he loveth me and keepeth not my commandments, is a liar and the truth is not in him.”

 

HP
I suggest you read through First John again and see how many verses are in the present tense.
1John 1:8,10 surround verse 9 which says:

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

The Apostle John includes himself in the "we." We sin. We confess our sins on a daily basis. That is a must for continued fellowship (not salvation) with the Lord.
What else does it say:

1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
--John knew that we would sin. We therefore have an advocate--Jesus Christ our advocate. Certainly it is not God's will that we sin. But we have not reached heaven yet. We still have a sin nature. No one on this world has attained to sinless perfection. If you say you have then you have deceived yourself and you call Jesus Christ a liar. John is very clear on that. Sinless perfection is not attainable in this life.
DHK

 

same

Heavenly Pilgrim,

I believe DHK are not contradicting each other at all. We are in agreement regarding Ananias and Saphiras eternal security.

If they were born again they are "saints", not "liars". But they would be saints who still sin, just like all of us. And in this particular case they would be saints who told a lie. Thats different than being a "liar".

They are not seen by God as "liars" because God sees only Christs rightiousness when he looks at His "saints".

Hope you can see this now, its so very important.

Mike

 

Well said. Amen!

 

DHK is right on when talking about the present tense. The flesh will always be capable of sinning until it dies and in fact does sin even today. That's why current sin must be dealt with.

However, once a person's spirit is saved (saved by grace through faith that not of works lest any should boast) that person's spirit is incapable of sinning, because it has passed from death to life from darkness to light. That is why a person is eternally secure, because there is no more sin committed by their spirit.

Also if Christians were incapable of sinning there would be no need for Jesus to be acting as our Advocate before the Father, and there would be no need for Him to be acting as our High Priest. But He is doing those things, becuase Christians still can and still do sin.

 

Hi DHK,
Present tense statements do not prove present tense sin. Authors often use the present tense, not to indicate a present reality in their life, but to set forth the distinct ‘possibility’ or simply to relate to their audience, placing themselves for instruction and communication sake on the same level.
You seem to have no understanding of the word ‘if.’ IF we sin, does not mean anyone in particular has or even will sin. “If we confess our sins’ does not mandate sin in the life of the believer either. It simply means ‘if’ there is sin, we can confess, forsake and repent of that sin and the blood of Jesus Christ will atone for it.
My wife and I made a quick survey of the verses in 1John as I suggested we all do. We found no more than four possible verses where it could be seen to suggest that sin was a present reality in a believer’s life, and approx 26 that stated or implied that a believer either should not sin, will not sin, cannot sin. etc.
Be fair in your understanding of 1 John. Why don’t you address the numerous clear passages that refute your position, and try and harmonize them with the ones that seem to support your contentions.

DHK: We still have a sin nature. No one on this world has attained to sinless perfection. If you say you have then you have deceived yourself and you call Jesus Christ a liar. John is very clear on that. Sinless perfection is not attainable in this life.

HP: You bring to the table numerous issues in this statement. The problem is that we most likely do not agree on what is sin, what this ‘sin nature’ involves, how we got it and what impact it has on us as we walk with the Lord, or what constitutes ‘sinless perfection.’ Sinless perfection, more often then not, is simply a paper duck thrown into the air by those promoting a sinning religion, without any real basis for doing so other than to throw mud on their opponent. I have heard no one expound very much so far as to what they mean by ‘sin’ in definable terms on this list, and I have heard no one promote ‘sinless perfection’ either. Your statement is unfair ‘if in fact’ it is aimed at anyone here that I have read.
In all my life as a believer, speaking to hundreds of individuals from many denominations, I have never heard one individual preach ‘sinless perfection’ in the way you appear to suggest it is to be understood.
If you feel that one cannot live and walk with the Lord to the degree God calls the man ‘perfect,’ tell that to God. God called Job a perfect man. How will you inform God differently? Job is not the only character in Scripture that received like testimonies concerning their character either. Possibly we need to do a little research and examine the Scriptural testimony of a few saints before we get too fixed in our positions. In the meantime, why don’t you tell us what God really meant concerning the character and life of that giant of the faith Job? Was God overstating the case of his character?

 

This does not agree with scripture.

For example, "My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins." - James 5:19-20

James was writing to Christians. Non-christians were never in the truth therefore, they could not wander from it.

James had already addressed sinning and death. "But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death." - James 1:14-15

Does anyone really think he is talking about physical death??? If so, then anyone who remains in the truth will never die physically, because they would be "saved" from death.

Of course he is talking about spiritual death. Notice, when he wanders from the truth, his sins are no longer covered. The result of bringing him back is to save his soul from death (covering a multitude of sins). If OSAS were true, his sins would already be covered, seeing he is addressing christians who are in the truth. Don't fall for the mental gymnastics required to explain away this clear passage.

II Pet 2:20-22 also completely destroys the position of OSAS. Someone please explain to me how in this world it could even be remotely possible for one who has "escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" and it would have been better for them to have never known the way of righteousness, with OSAS being true. Under OSAS, the person who knows the way of righteousness and escapes the defilements of the world through the knowledged of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is always better off, since they remain saved. Again, the mental gymnastics required to explain this away would be astounding, to say the least.

 

mman as always you are comparing apples and oranges and therefore you can't see what is plainly laid out in Scripture.

I was talking about the salvation of the spirit and then you bring back verses that are talking about the salvation of the soul, which is clearly pointed out by you in a bold and underline of James 5.

 

You need a Greek lexicon to look up the word "telios" or "perfect.' It is the same word used in 1Cor.13:10, over which there is so much debate. In Old English, as well as in the Greek it does not have the same modern day meaning of our word perfect. It means complete. I have used this example before. I will use it again.

Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Be honest. Are you as perfect as God is perfect? Are you just as holy and perfect as God is? Are you??
You would be a fool to answer yes, wouldn't you? Only God is perfect. Only God is perfectly holy. Only God is perfectly sinless. Only God is perfect in all his ways. Satan said he was perfect and was cast out of heaven. Are you making the same mistake as Lucifer did? Are you saying that you are perfect? Really? Then it is a satanic lie.

However if we take that Old English word "perfect" and translate it the way it should be translated (check other translations), as "complete," brought to maturity," then the verse begins to make sense. I will never be perfect, but I can be made complete in Christ. I can have the "complete" evidence of the fruit of the Holy Spirit in my life as a mature Christian ought to have. Completeness and maturity are the idea behind the verse, not perfection in our modern understanding of the word. You are taking a modern-day word and forcing its meaning into an archaic meaning of the word. That is not good hermeneutics, and it is the reason that you have so much problem understanding these verses. You are not perfect. But you can be complete. You need to understand what the Bible is teaching in these verses.

Job was not a perfect man. No one is. He was complete in all his ways. He was a mature man. Study the Bible. Find out what these words mean. No man is perfect.
DHK

 

Some true believers say that they were not saved and therefore their true aspects were revealed, other True believers say that they were saved but were not honest in their behavior and that God wanted to show the authority of the church and the discipline of the believers.

I personally believe they were saved and therefore they were accepted by the Early church.

How many of us are honest in donating today?

How many of us can sell the field and house if their church decide to establish a common living community and ask them to sell their properties and donate them to the church?

I may not have the faith even to sell the properties. I just live by His Grace and Mercy even now.

 

Is that the mental gymanstics you perform to explain this away?

Surely you are not suggesting that one's soul can be lost with his spirit being saved, are you? That certainly has no scriptural basis.

Jesus said, "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" - Matt 16:26

From this passage we can see the importance of not losing your soul. Jesus also said, "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." - Matt 10:28

You soul will end up in either heaven or hell. If your soul ends up in hell, it is there because of uncovered or unforgiven sins. James 5 states that one can wander from the truth and the result is spiritual death with uncovered sins. Bringing that person back results in saving his soul from death and covering a multitude of sins.

 

I cannot recall where Scripture says that no liars will enter heaven unless you are a lying saint."

One for the books!

 

mman you did it again. You quote Scripture that talks about your soul and you even talk about the importance of not losing your soul. Then you get to the last paragraph and you talk about spiritual death. Those are apples and oranges. It has nothing to do with mental gymnastics.

If your soul goes to heaven or hell then it would be soulical death not spiritual death. Spiritual life or spiritual death deals with exactly that - the spirit, not the soul.

How can you even write these things and still be blinded to it?

The spirit and the soul are not the same thing.

 

JJ: The spirit and the soul are not the same thing.

HP(to the list): I am sorry I have not had the time to respond to DHK’s last post. It deserves a thoughtful response. I will try and get to it this weekend. In the meantime JJ, explain to us, from Scripture, this separation of the soul and spirit. Define each using Scripture to back up your claims. Don’t show us where God, far beyond our abilities, can separate something, we desire to know OF the separation, not just that there is one, if any. Illuminate our understandings as to the nature of each. Tell us to what mental phenomena or states apply to each as distinguished from the other. Thanks.

 

HP you know that we have already had this conversation and you didn't want to listen to Scripture the last time, so I will not waste my time pointing out Scripture to you again. Mman has done a good enough job pointing out with his Scriptural references that the two are not the same, but you will continual with your nonsense of defining words and what not. But if that's what you want to do that is up to you. I will not play your silly games.

Bottom line is the spirit and the soul are not the same thing. Scripture clearly teaches this and if you and others don't want to see it then that is on you and others.

 

Did I ever say they were the same? No, I freely admit there is a distinction, however, at times the terms are used interchangably.

God's word is so sharp, it can distinguish between the two (Heb 4:12). The soul is not physical, therefore it is spiritual. Jesus soul was in Hades (the all receiving realm of the dead, however, he was on the side of paradise), but his body was in the grave. There were only 8 souls on the ark (I Pet 3:20). Were there not 8 spirits also? God breathed into man the breath of life and he became a living soul (Gen 2:7), yet the body without the spirit is dead (Jas 2:26, Luke 8:55).

What I strongly disagree with is that one's soul can be lost yet the spirit saved or vise versa. That is without any scriptural basis whatsoever!

 

Nope and I never said you did. The response that you quoted was clearly directed to Heavenly Pilgrim.

That is entirely untrue as you have proved it out yourself by the number of verses that you have quoted just on this thread alone, not to mention the ones that haven't been quoted. If you don't want to see the difference that is clearly taught in Scripture that is up to you.

 

No, I was referencing your comment that the soul and the spirit are not the same thing, in your reply to me.

I was simply stating that I never said they were

Show me one passage that indicates that soul can be lost and the spirit saved or vise versa.

None of the scriptures I listed alluded to this nonsensical premise.

 

Sure it did. Every verse that you brought up talked about the soul and the danger of losing the soul. The soul was the thing that was in play during the Gospels. That's why everything that is written is about the soul, because they had already experienced spiritual salvation.

James talks about the soul being saved in the first chapter. This is written to believers whose spirits have already been saved. I Peter talks about the saving of the soul in the first chapter. It was written to believers whose spirits were already saved. Hebrews talks about the salvation of the soul. It was written to believers whose spirits were already saved.

The biggest reason people can't see or understand this Biblical teaching is because they fail to see that the nation of Israel had already experienced God's grace through faith. They were spiritually alive people.

People equate the Jews to unsaved individuals because we are/were unsaved individuals and if we are/were in that state they must have been too.

 

JJ: Bottom line is the spirit and the soul are not the same thing. Scripture clearly teaches this and if you and others don't want to see it then that is on you and others.

HP: Just what I thought. It’s one thing to post Scriptures, quite another to show how they prove or support your unfounded presuppositions.