Can a man keep the law?

[Luke2427]

I pray everyone will notice something here.

The less one is for historicity and education the more they are like the great heretics of the ages.

Note: I did not call anyone a heretic. I am simply pointing out that this thread leans heavily toward Pelagianism.

The reason is, imo, that those who think the least of Christian education and put the least stock in their doctrines having some historicity tend to be the MOST like those great heretics like Pelagius.

 

[freeatlast]

Exactly. The Calvinists here continually deflect the subject of the thread. I never said any man can earn salvation and they know it.

This thread is about having the ability to obey God. Calvinism teaches that man is unable to obey God as it is impossible for a man to fly like a bird of his own ability.

A man cannot fly of his own ability like a bird, but man can obey God's laws.

Tell me, do you HAVE to lie? Do you HAVE to steal?

I agree with you on this. The reason that so many hold to the view that we cannot obey is that it makes their own sin more comfortable as they deny at least in part full responsibility for their sin. We can obey but our love of self choses not to. All sin is a personal choice.

 

[glfredrick]

Exactly. The Calvinists here continually deflect the subject of the thread. I never said any man can earn salvation and they know it.

This thread is about having the ability to obey God. Calvinism teaches that man is unable to obey God as it is impossible for a man to fly like a bird of his own ability.

A man cannot fly of his own ability like a bird, but man can obey God's laws.

Tell me, do you HAVE to lie? Do you HAVE to steal?

If you are speaking of keeping the ENTIRE Law, then you have to go much deeper than the 10 commandments! I suggest that you read or re-read the Pentateuch, then perhaps, list for us all the Laws that one must keep in order to fulfill your concept that says it is possible so to do.

 

[David Lamb]

Clearly "blameless" in Luke 1.6 cannot mean that they kept all God's commands perfectly. As you say, Winman, Zacharias was guilty of the sin of unbelief.

It seems that you believe that it is possible to sin without breaking God's commands. If so, I wonder how you would define sin.

Paul, speaking about his life before he became a Christian, said in Philippians 3.4-9:

4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. 7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. 8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;"
​

By his own admission there, he was "persecuting the church", and although he uses the word "blameless" of himself, he also says that he didn't have any righteousness of his own.

If we could keep God's commands perfectly, Jesus Christ came and died in vain, unless you believe that His death was just to save us the effort, and make getting to heaven easier (and I am sure you don't believe that! ).

Jesus said in Mark 12.30:

"And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment."
​

Can any human being do that?

 

[freeatlast]

There is a big difference between not being able to keep the commandments and choosing not keeping the commandments. It is no different then man's law. We can keep the law, but we choose not to. There is no state or federal law given that we cannot keep as such would be unjust yet we accuse God of doing that very thing. There is no part of the law of God that we cannot keep. We simply choose not to keep them.
Again the only reason that anyone holds to the idea that the commandments cannot be kept is because they are not taking full responsibility for their sins. As long as we can justify our sins either in part of the full we are not able to confess our sins as we have some excuse for why we sin other then the real reason. We sin because we choose to not because we have to, and not because God has given us standards so difficult that we simply cannot do them. Again this is why our sin is so sinful.

The scripture says this.

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

Yet today man teaches this is not true. They teach that temptation comes along and we cannot bear up and so we sin. We have a promise from God that nothing will ever come our way that is so tempting or difficult that we cannot bear the temptation and escape its prodding.

God did not give man commandments so burdensome and impossible to obey and then turn around and say, "see you are sinners." God gave men commandments that are able to be kept and when he choses to break them God says "see you ARE sinners." While we are born in sin we are also sinners by choice. I challenge anyone to name just one time, one sin in their life that they absolutely had to commit. I assure you there is none. All sin is a choice and no sin has to take place.

The commandments can be kept, but we choose not to. Until this is understood and accepted the sinfulness of man nor the grace of God cannot be understood for what each is.

What amazes me is that people who hold the view that no one can keep the commandments thinks more of themselves then they do God. They actually have a higher standard then God. Here is what I mean. What parent sets down a set of rules for their children that is impossible for the child to keep and then disciplines them when they fail? Yet this is exactly what most the church is claiming that God did. NOT SO! He gave law not above our ability to keep, but law that would prove our willful choosing to rebell against what is right and just. The church needs to stop falsely accusing God of being unjust in His requirements and accept that it is us who are the sinners by choice. We hold all the burden for our sins. They are not mistakes, they are willful choices to do it our way. Only when we learn this can we properly confess our sin.

Adam and Eve did not have to eat of the fruit, nor do we have to sin. There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].
All our sins are choices to do it our way because we do not believe and anything not of faith is sin.

 

[preacher4truth]

I pray everyone will notice something here.

The less one is for historicity and education the more they are like the great heretics of the ages.

Note: I did not call anyone a heretic. I am simply pointing out that this thread leans heavily toward Pelagianism.

The reason is, imo, that those who think the least of Christian education and put the least stock in their doctrines having some historicity tend to be the MOST like those great heretics like Pelagius.

I've pointed this out on several occasions in several threads.

It's plain for the eye to see, this error being propagated here.

Proof-text methodology coupled with the "Bible is simple" attitude leads to grave error. No one worth ones salt says the Bible is simple, and any decent Bible teacher/preacher abandons proof-texting altogether.

Sad really. This is what Baptist churches are teaching and preaching? I've not known one preacher, or any Baptist church to ever teach error such as this. Baptists? Seriously? If I were in a church and they preached this error from the pulpit I would address it.

 

[HankD]

I agree with you 100% here, but that is the point, man COULD maintain a proper relationship with God as Zacharias proves. Calvinism says a man can do no such thing. Cain could have given a proper sacrifice and God said he would have been accepted if he did so. The fact that he did not does not prove he could not as Zacharias and Elisabeth proves.

Calvinism falsely argues that a man CANNOT obey God as he is enslaved by his sinful nature. It is not that man cannot, it is that some WILL NOT. That is a very different thing.

There is another point here winman - Zacharias and Elizabeth were undoubtedly saved.

Only the saved have the God given means to maintain fellowship.

1 John 1:9 for us.

Personally I believe the lost are slaves to sin.

That does not mean that they commit every sin possible but being estranged from God they are powerless against the flesh and are overcome by their lust in one or more ways.

Neither does it mean they cannot be "religious" (obviously) and live a decent public life, as an upstanding without a blemish on their criminal record.

I believe here is a passage which shows a man who "obeyed" the scripture but had the emptiness of an outward profession without an inward conversion.

Luke 18

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.​

RE: Cain - yes, he prayed to God and He answered him.

HankD

 

[HankD]

Can you give scriptural reference that says it is impossible to keep the law? Also which part of it could not be kept?

Acts 15

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

HankD​

 

[glfredrick]

There is a big difference between not being able to keep the commandments and choosing not keeping the commandments. It is no different then man's law. We can keep the law, but we choose not to. There is no state or federal law given that we cannot keep as such would be unjust yet we accuse God of doing that very thing. There is no part of the law of God that we cannot keep. We simply choose not to keep them

I snipped the rest of your post because I want to deal with just this part for now.

You suggest that there is a big difference between not being able to keep the commandments and choosing not keeping the commandments, yet they are one and the same -- driven by our sinful rebellion against God.

Only Jesus FULLY (at all times, in all circumstances) kept His focus on the Father, thus passively satisfying the demands of the Law. Only Jesus resisted ALL temptation, even to death on the cross (and what a temptation to take up the chants of the priests and come down from that horrid tree!) so as to actively lead a perfect life. All the rest of us utterly fail, which means that "choice" or not, we have not and cannot keep the Law of God.

But, I suspect that you, nor Winman, will be swayed by my argument because in both of your hearts you harbor the notion that you HAVE kept all the Law. Funny that, because in so thinking, you have violated another Scriptural tenet that says that NO MAN ever keeps the Law or is without sin, which is in and of itself a breaking of the Law.

Try this on for size, then tell me if the Scriptures are lying or if you and Winman are mistaken about your idea:

1 John 1:8-10 (NASB)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

 

[freeatlast]

Acts 15

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.​

HankD​

hank
the passage is not suggesting that the commandments cannot be kept. The passage is saying that the law of Moses was a burden that required constant diligence with no results as the law could not save even if kept. The burden was all that effort of law keeping with no lasting result.
Those Pharisees were saying that yes Jesus came and died and rose but that was not enough for salvation and by doing so put the burden back on the back of men.

However now that we are under grace the burden is lifted because we are saved by grace and the keeping of the commandments is not a burden as we are not under the law. We are not keeping them to get saved or stay saved. We keep them out of love, not necessity.
1john 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous
The commandments can be kept, but they are a burden making them more then we can bear if kept out of law instead of out of love as the law keeping could not save.

 

[freeatlast]

I snipped the rest of your post because I want to deal with just this part for now.

You suggest that there is a big difference between not being able to keep the commandments and choosing not keeping the commandments, yet they are one and the same -- driven by our sinful rebellion against God.

Only Jesus FULLY (at all times, in all circumstances) kept His focus on the Father, thus passively satisfying the demands of the Law. Only Jesus resisted ALL temptation, even to death on the cross (and what a temptation to take up the chants of the priests and come down from that horrid tree!) so as to actively lead a perfect life. All the rest of us utterly fail, which means that "choice" or not, we have not and cannot keep the Law of God.

But, I suspect that you, nor Winman, will be swayed by my argument because in both of your hearts you harbor the notion that you HAVE kept all the Law. Funny that, because in so thinking, you have violated another Scriptural tenet that says that NO MAN ever keeps the Law or is without sin, which is in and of itself a breaking of the Law.

Try this on for size, then tell me if the Scriptures are lying or if you and Winman are mistaken about your idea:

1 John 1:8-10 (NASB)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

I cannot speak for another, but you are correct that I am not swayed by your argument. I do admit that if a person cannot or does not keep the law the end result is the same. Just like a person who cannot lift 300 pounds while another can. If the one who cannot move it does not move it and the one who can move it does not move it the result is the same. The weight does not get moved. However at the same time to not be able to keep it and willfully choosing not to keep it are not the same. One is from volition and the other is because of lacking ability.

Man is not a captive creature to his fallen nature alone. He also has a volition which he can exercise. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, but not because they have to. It is a choice, a willful choice on each mans part. If we had no volition then we all would sin the same sins in the same manner at the same frequency, but we don't. Each choses how often, and how serious a sin to commit. So some choose to rob banks and some choose to steal a pencil from their employers, both being a thief, but neither has to be a thief. They both make that volitional choice.

Lastly no one is suggesting that because we have the ability not to sin that we do not sin. Such would be a sin denier and the truth is not in them. The exact opposite is the point. We all sin because we choose to, making sin exceedingly sinful. Admitting that we sin willfully and purposely instead of claiming we are invalids so we must sin is accepting what is ours by responsibility. Suggesting that we cannot keep the commandment and then confessing the sin is rejecting our responsibility and is nothing but admitting that we sinned while denying our personal responisbility for our sinfulness. God requires both the admitting that we sinned and the accepting that the sin was a willful choice and not because we were overcome. All of our sin is personally and willfully chosen to be committed and until we accept this we are not confessing our sins as God requires.

 

[JesusFan]

This is the question you posed:



Let's say, for the sake of argument that we have an ability to keep the Law. But, even if we DID keep the Law perfectly, it STILL would not be salvific, because we ARE NOT SAVED BY WORKS, so I am unsure as to what your larger point would be.

Are you, once again, headed toward a Pelagian understanding of our own efforts to come to Christ?

Note:

No, the use of the term "Pelagian" is not intended to be a pejorative term to shut down the conversation -- if one goes in the direction of a human-centered salvation experience, then one gets to own the fact that he or she is indeed headed in a Pelagian direction; for neither Arminianism, nor Calvinism, nor the Baptist "no-name" theology stipulates that WE are able to come to Christ apart from the initial work of God.

Quick question, not to derail OP...

IF one holds that the Gospel ALONE is the Grace God extends to us for salvation, that there is no other Grace applying to us, is that Semi pel?

 

[JesusFan]

hank
the passage is not suggesting that the commandments cannot be kept. The passage is saying that the law of Moses was a burden that required constant diligence with no results as the law could not save even if kept. The burden was all that effort of law keeping with no lasting result.
Those Pharisees were saying that yes Jesus came and died and rose but that was not enough for salvation and by doing so put the burden back on the back of men.

However now that we are under grace the burden is lifted because we are saved by grace and the keeping of the commandments is not a burden as we are not under the law. We are not keeping them to get saved or stay saved. We keep them out of love, not necessity.
1john 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous
The commandments can be kept, but they are a burden making them more then we can bear if kept out of law instead of out of love as the law keeping could not save.

Do you hold that a Christian cannot 'freely choose" to disobey God, that ALL sin after salvation would be omission, not comission?

 

[glfredrick]

Quick question, not to derail OP...

IF one holds that the Gospel ALONE is the Grace God extends to us for salvation, that there is no other Grace applying to us, is that Semi pel?

One would have to have an anthropocentric view of soteriology in order to adopt the view you propose, for what you are saying is that the person who choses to see or hear the words is somehow effected without God's otherwise intervention.

There is a case to be made for the Word of God, but the Word of God is not always one and the same as the kerygma of the gospel shared one to another. In fact, in many a case, I have found that those "sharing the gospel" often share something other than the actual Word of God in their efforts (and that after my training in all of the evangelistic training programs from the past 40+ years, EE, FACT, FIRE, FAITH, Way of the Master, CWT, etc., etc., etc. I have over 50 books on evangelistic programs on my shelves.).

What I find in the true gospel of God's Word, is that without God's intervention, there is no actual sharing, and without God's regeneration, there is no hearing.

I soundly reject that WE have something within us that makes us able to respond to a "wholly other" (transcendent) God, save that He first makes Himself "God with us" (immanent). Unless or until He reveals Himself, we cannot even know that there is a God to whom we turn our attention and choice. Even the Arminian doctrines state this very clearly, though they invent another category of grace called "previnient" (akin to the Catholic concept that we are merely "sin-sick" and capable of sanctifying ourselves into justification).

 

[glfredrick]

I cannot speak for another, but you are correct that I am not swayed by your argument. I do admit that if a person cannot or does not keep the law the end result is the same. Just like a person who cannot lift 300 pounds while another can. If the one who cannot move it does not move it and the one who can move it does not move it the result is the same. The weight does not get moved. However at the same time to not be able to keep it and willfully choosing not to keep it are not the same. One is from volition and the other is because of lacking ability.

Man is not a captive creature to his fallen nature alone. He also has a volition which he can exercise. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, but not because they have to. It is a choice, a willful choice on each mans part. If we had no volition then we all would sin the same sins in the same manner at the same frequency, but we don't. Each choses how often, and how serious a sin to commit. So some choose to rob banks and some choose to steal a pencil from their employers, both being a thief, but neither has to be a thief. They both make that volitional choice.

Lastly no one is suggesting that because we have the ability not to sin that we do not sin. Such would be a sin denier and the truth is not in them. The exact opposite is the point. We all sin because we choose to, making sin exceedingly sinful. Admitting that we sin willfully and purposely instead of claiming we are invalids so we must sin is accepting what is ours by responsibility. Suggesting that we cannot keep the commandment and then confessing the sin is rejecting our responsibility and is nothing but admitting that we sinned while denying our personal responisbility for our sinfulness. God requires both the admitting that we sinned and the accepting that the sin was a willful choice and not because we were overcome. All of our sin is personally and willfully chosen to be committed and until we accept this we are not confessing our sins as God requires.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

You are saying, in essence, that God and His Word are the liars when it says plainly that whoever says he has no sin is a liar.

I find that we both sin because we WANT to and because we are IGNORANT. I find that we both sin because we are BORN sinners and because we CHOOSE to sin.
I find that we both sin because we are FORCED to by circumstances and because we LIKE to.
And, I find that our sin is rebellion against God in all cases, because He has told us otherwise.

Making attempt to say that we can somehow keep the WHOLE Law of God (and why has no one responded to my post above asking to name what is that WHOLE Law of God?) is in and of itself the same sin of Adam while standing at the tree in the Garden. "You can be like God if you just..."

I find that we can try to keep the Law perfectly, and are yet rebellious against God, for He has said that keeping the Law perfectly is NOT the way to Him (itself a sin of rebellion) but rather that He will accept us only by faith, and that even that faith is His gift, so the FIRST act of our totality in keeping the Law is to admit that we cannot!

 

[preacher4truth]

freeatlast says:

All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, but not because they have to. It is a choice, a willful choice on each mans part.

Is that what you tell folks? Perhaps this should now be preached?

"I want you all to know you can choose to live a sinless life. Now, if you haven't done this, just in case Christ died for you, but you can simply choose to not sin."

Christ didn't choose to not sin, He simply cannot sin, because He is perfect. Man on the other hand cannot "not sin" because his nature is corrupt. The above quote suggesting man can simply not sin if he wants to is in complete error and is unscriptural.

Doesn't work for me. There is only One way, and only one Gospel and it's not that man can make a choice and never sin. The Good News is the Gospel of Christ, not that we can simply just decide to not sin.

I have never heard anything of the like above preached in any truly Baptist Church. Ever.

Unbelievable folks.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Non-Cals often argue that God would not require of man what he is not able to do, such as believe. Non-Cals argue it would be unjust for God to punish a man for unbelief if it were impossible for him to do so.

Calvinists often respond that God gave man the law and it is impossible for man to keep the law, therefore it is not unjust for God to demand from a man what he is not able to do.

The question is, can man keep the law? Is he able? The scriptures say YES!

Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

The scriptures say that Zacharias and his wife walked in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESS.

I am not saying that Zacharias was not a sinner. In fact, we see in this story that Zacharias did not at first believe God's promise and was struck dumb, unable to speak because he did not believe.

Nevertheless, concerning the commandments and ordinances of God, the scriptures themselves say Zacharias AND his wife kept ALL of them BLAMELESS.

So, is it really true that it is impossible for man to obey God's laws?

Well, I'm delighted to tell you that God as Judge sees me exactly as he saw Zacharias- as walking in all His commandments and ordinances blameless. I am also pleased to inform you that likewise He sees no sin in me whatsoever. :saint:



1Cor 1:30; Heb 10:17. :godisgood:

Steve

 

[freeatlast]

Do you hold that a Christian cannot 'freely choose" to disobey God, that ALL sin after salvation would be omission, not comission?

No I don't believe that. All sin is a willful choice and even the sin of not doing something we should is still a choice to do a commission of sin.

 

[Winman]

There is another point here winman - Zacharias and Elizabeth were undoubtedly saved.

Only the saved have the God given means to maintain fellowship.

1 John 1:9 for us.

Personally I believe the lost are slaves to sin.

That does not mean that they commit every sin possible but being estranged from God they are powerless against the flesh and are overcome by their lust in one or more ways.

Neither does it mean they cannot be "religious" (obviously) and live a decent public life, as an upstanding without a blemish on their criminal record.

I believe here is a passage which shows a man who "obeyed" the scripture but had the emptiness of an outward profession without an inward conversion.

Luke 18

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.​

RE: Cain - yes, he prayed to God and He answered him.

HankD

This thread was not about salvation, it was about ability. I agree with you that Zacharias was a sinner, I said that in the OP. So, how folks are interpreting me to saying Zacharias earned salvation beats me, I never said such a thing.

All I am saying is that Zacharias proves that a man is ABLE to obey God, or at least he was able to keep all the commandments and ordinances of God. It cannot be denied, the scriptures say so.

I agree with Freeatlast, we are able to obey God, but none of us do. I have lied many times in my life, but I was never FORCED to lie. I could have told the truth. I have done many other wrong things in life I am ashamed to talk about here, but I was never forced to do any of them. I could have always done the right thing, but chose to do wrong. That is all I am saying in this thread.

I don't understand how a man can truly repent if he thinks he HAS to sin. Like Freeatlast said, that is a failure to take responsibility for our own actions. We are not really confessing we have sinned at all, we are blaming God because he made us a sinner.

P4T says I am saying MAN MAN MAN. He could not be more wrong. I am saying GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY. I am not a sinner because God made me a sinner and I could not help sin, I am a sinner and GUILTY because I chose to sin. I do not blame God for my sin, I take full responsibility for my own actions.

I am defending God against those who blame him for being sinners.

 

[freeatlast]

This thread was not about salvation, it was about ability. I agree with you that Zacharias was a sinner, I said that in the OP. So, how folks are interpreting me to saying Zacharias earned salvation beats me, I never said such a thing.

All I am saying is that Zacharias proves that a man is ABLE to obey God, or at least he was able to keep all the commandments and ordinances of God. It cannot be denied, the scriptures say so.

I agree with Freeatlast, we are able to obey God, but none of us do. I have lied many times in my life, but I was never FORCED to lie. I could have told the truth. I have done many other wrong things in life I am ashamed to talk about here, but I was never forced to do any of them. I could have always done the right thing, but chose to do wrong. That is all I am saying in this thread.

I don't understand how a man can truly repent if he thinks he HAS to sin. Like Freeatlast said, that is a failure to take responsibility for our own actions. We are not really confessing we have sinned at all, we are blaming God because he made us a sinner.

P4T says I am saying MAN MAN MAN. He could not be more wrong. I am saying GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY. I am not a sinner because God made me a sinner and I could not help sin, I am a sinner and GUILTY because I chose to sin. I do not blame God for my sin, I take full responsibility for my own actions.

I am defending God against those who blame him for being sinners.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: