Can a believer sin?

[jne1611]

Here are somethings that are never lost:
Our salvation.
Our glorification
Our being heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.
Our return to earth with Jesus Christ (Rev.19)
Our rule and reign with Christ during the MK.

This happens in spite of what happens at the JSOC.

Amen! Amen!

 

[Brother Bob]

I got a feeling I know why there will be tears in you two fellows eyes. Some are going to get many lashes and I figure you two will be in the front of the line. :laugh:

 

[Lacy Evans]

No, how can losing something be considered chastening. Read Heb.12 for more of a definition of chastening.

Hebrews 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

If I lose something then it is lost.

Chastening is something that is endured, unlike something that is lost.

Hebrews 12:13-17
13 And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way; but let it rather be healed.
14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;
16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.


Please explain this warning. To whom is it addressed? what is the "penalty" for not "making straight paths', not following peace", not looking diligently", etc.

How is God's taking away his blessing not an act of chastening? I ususlly cried when I got a whipping.

 

[jne1611]

I got a feeling I know why there will be tears in you two fellows eyes. Some are going to get many lashes and I figure you two will be in the front of the line. :laugh:

You may be right. Though I think you will be tied up together with us for punishment.





http://smiley.smileycentral.com/download/index.jhtml?partner=ZSzeb096_ZNxdm824MFUS&utm_id=7924

 

[Lacy Evans]

Here are somethings that are never lost:

How can conditional promises be unconditional? All of these promises have conditions attached. What if you fail to meet the conditions?

Our glorification

Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

Our being heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.

Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

Our return to earth with Jesus Christ (Rev.19)

Revelation 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

Our rule and reign with Christ during the MK.

Acts 14:22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

2 Timothy 2:11-12
11 It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

This happens in spite of what happens at the JSOC.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Will God just say, "Psyche! I was just kidding. What I meant to say is that everyone gets to enjoy the benefits of obedience, suffering, righteous living, etc. whether they really deserve it or not! And no one really gets 'judged' at the 'judgment seat'. No one gets reckoned with at the time of reckoning. It all hapened in this life during the age of grace."

1 Timothy 5:24 Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.

 

[DHK]

Hebrews 12:13-17
13 And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way; but let it rather be healed.
14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;
16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.


Please explain this warning. To whom is it addressed? what is the "penalty" for not "making straight paths', not following peace", not looking diligently", etc.

How is God's taking away his blessing not an act of chastening? I ususlly cried when I got a whipping.

I will gladly tell you, but you may not like my answer.
The Epistle to the Hebrews was written to...."the Hebrews" An astonishing fact!
A good many of this group of Hebrews were walking a fine line. They were unsaved, convicted about being saved, but thinking seriously about going back to their Judaistic roots, that is, returning to Judaism. Thus throughout the epistle you have a contrast of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant; a better covenant, a new covenant, etc. Throughout are contrasts between the OT and the NT. Most of these warnings are given to Jews thinking of returning to Judaism. For that reason they are often taken out of context and misunderstood by many.

If you remember the Jews were bitter against the Lord, and especially against Christianity. Just look at the life of Saul for an example. Thus Paul warns against this root of bitterness. It would cause them to return to what basically is a false religion now. Instead they must follow holiness--that is the Lord Jesus Christ. He alone can give one a holy standing, and cause one to grow in holiness (a process we call sanctification).
He then gives them an OT example that they can relate to--the example of Esau. Esau was a worldly man who sold his birthright for a morsel of bread. Salvation is far too important a matter then to trade it for an out-moded system of animal sacrifices. They wouldn't do them any good now. They would be selling themselves short. They would be allowing their bitterness to get in the way, just as Esau became bitter and allowed his bitterness to get in the way of repentance.

 

[charles_creech78]

2 Ti 3:16 All SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.

 

[jne1611]

2 Ti 3:16 All SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Right that is.:thumbs:

 

[Hope of Glory]

This is just a wild guess, since we don't really know what it will be like, but I'm betting we will not be sad.

Yeah. Those who are weeping and gnashing their teeth are ecstatic.

 

[npetreley]

Yeah. Those who are weeping and gnashing their teeth are ecstatic.

Speak for yourself. I won't be gnashing any teeth. That's not what happens to believers.

 

[jne1611]

Speak for yourself. I won't be gnashing any teeth. That's not what happens to believers.

Amen to that! That's for the damned!

Sounds real good. What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the lake of fire! That bunch of junk is not even worth considering!

 

[Lacy Evans]

I will gladly tell you, but you may not like my answer.
The Epistle to the Hebrews was written to...."the Hebrews" An astonishing fact!

Hebrews 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Hebrew Christians. Just like Ephesians was written to Ephesian Christians and Corinthians was written to Corinthian Christians. Very weak argument to get out from under the warnings in any of those books.

A good many of this group of Hebrews were walking a fine line. They were unsaved, convicted about being saved, but thinking seriously about going back to their Judaistic roots, that is, returning to Judaism. Thus throughout the epistle you have a contrast of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant; a better covenant, a new covenant, etc. Throughout are contrasts between the OT and the NT. Most of these warnings are given to Jews thinking of returning to Judaism. For that reason they are often taken out of context and misunderstood by many.

That's a nice story. Any evidence from the text? And even if you are correct, are you willing to live with the conclusions of such an argument?

That if you are a Hebrew, and "sorta saved" but maybe still a little Jewish, that you get saved by making straight paths for your feet, by following peace with all men, and holiness, or by looking diligently? That Esau's example only applies to Hebrew sorta-christians and the rest of us need not worry about being a fornicator or a profane person?

Does a Hebrew sorta-christian the only one who has to add all these things to the blood of Christ or are their some other groups that God also singles out like this?

 

[EdSutton]

I didn't even talk about another one you had on there that you used before Irenaeus who believe that Jesus lived to be an old man.

Sometimes we talk too much and get tripped up!!

And I posted this in reply, and debunked, along with the tektonics site, this caricature of Irenaeus, presented by an athiest, as well. And I quote, so as to try and not 'mess up' the fonts, but am editing a couple of words for spelling.

You first quoted this:

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Ed; I went to your site! You should be careful calling what I post as hogwash.

So, I went to your site and they too stated that Irenaeus taught that Jesus lived to be in His fifties and got it directly from direct apostolic succession.





Irenaeus is one of the main sources of how the early church thought, isn't it scary? Jesus lived to be fifty? This early witness to gospel authorship clearly wasn't talking about any gospel that YOU have ever read. It makes you wonder whether anything else the church fathers said was similarly way out in left field.

Irenaeus insisted his doctrine that Jesus lived into his fifties, not dying in his thirties, came by direct apostolic succession. That's an example of how the early Fathers "carefully preserved" their oral traditions, unfortunately for Holding.

I never searched for the first statement I made but will later. Being that the last statement seems to be true, makes it more likely the first statement I posted is true.




​

Quote by Irenaeus, Against



Heresies, 2:22:4-6)"So, likewise, he was an old man for old men … Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends

onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline

towards old age, which our Lord possessed while he still fulfilled the office of a teacher … those who were

conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information. …

Some of them [i.e., those who teach this, PS], moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard

the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. (Irenaeus, Against

Heresies, 2:22:4-6)

As I stated, before, this is only a partial quote from an athiest, who was wanting to cast a "bad light" on Irenaeus. Here is the tektonics site, that has some good information on this, and goes a long way to debunking the claims of the skeptic, who goes by the handle of " skepticbud".

http://www.tektonics.org/guest/irey50.html

And here is more of the actual quote of Irenaeus, from which "skepticbud" only took a part, for the purpose of casting a "bad light" on Irenaeus, as I mentioned, as well.

This is the actual quote of Irenaeus that is being spoken of: [(BTW, it is still somewhat out of context, as there is an ellipses in the cited quote; and as I did not hunt up what immediately precedes and follows, not wanting to stay up another hour just to find it.) my emphases are underlined] Quote:
Being a master, therefore, he also possessed the age of a master, not despising or evading any condition of humanity, nor setting aside in himself that law which he had appointed for the human race, but sanctifying every age, by that period corresponding to it which belonged to himself. For he came to save all through means of himself-all, I say, who through him are born again to God-infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age … So likewise he was an old man for old men, that he might be a perfect master for all, not merely as regards the setting forth of the truth, but also as regards age, sanctifying at the same time the aged also, and becoming an example to them likewise. Then, at last, he came on to death itself, that he might be 'the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence,' the Prince of life, existing before all, and going before all.
He (i Irenaeus) did argue against setting an exact age for the death of the Lord Jesus. I agree. 33 is an arbitrary figure, and is derived from a Scriptural statement that Jesus was "about thirty years of age", when he began His public ministry. My own idea would be when one is generalizing, as the Gospel writer here was, as he used a 'round number', in the exact same way that we do, I add, is that, generally speaking, Jesus could have been anywhere from His middle twenties to middle thirties, at that time. He could just as well have been 28 or 32, as 30, and have been "around thirty years", and the writer, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit did not choose to give us an exact age, here.
"Why?", you may ask. Here's why, IMO.
Jesus' exact birthday is inconsequential to His life and work. His being offered on Passover (Nisan or Abib 14) is precisely and specifically consequential (although the exact year of that is not, and is still debated vigorously in some areas), as He is "Christ, our Passover", and "the Lamb slain", "according to the Scriptures".

My (substantive) posts on this subject are on this thread (I'm starting to sound like Lou M., here ), and don't really intend to, but have to defend my position, IMO.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=40981&page=8

They are posts # 10, 29. 46, 47, 57, 67, 70, 72, 74, 75, and 78.

And as a matter of a few corrections, it was you and not I, who was the first one to bring both Augustine (post # 42) and Origen (post # 45) onto that thread. Last time I checked, #45 came before #72, numerically.
And I mentioned Origen in post # 46, which commented on the lineage of a-millennialism, as in this thread, from Origen to Augustine.

I will take the credit or blame for bringing Marcion, the Heretic, into the discussion.

Oh yeah, One final bit. Since I've had to, once again {Sigh!} , correct your history lesson (X), what was that you were saying about -

Sometimes we talk too much and get tripped up!!

????? Maybe you would like to repeat that (I know I loved hearing it! ), since it really does sound so good, and also sounded a bit like someone making a self-admission.

Ed

 

[charles_creech78]

Ro 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethen, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 2 Jo 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this DOCTRINE, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed; 2Jo 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

 

[DHK]

This thread can now be closed (thankfully) due to its length.