Sorrow to Repentance

[LeBuick]

Acts 16:32-34 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.
They heard the word. They ate. They rejoiced. I see nothing of sorrow; only rejoicing.

Acts 8:35-38 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
--No sorrow. Just a straightforward confession of Christ. Philip accepted his testimony.

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
--The people that were saved were those that "gladly" received his word.
--Previous to this there was conviction of sin. There must be conviction of sin. But even then that doesn't necessarily mean an emotional response--a sorrow of sin. Sometimes there is, and sometimes there isn't. It is not necessary to have sorrow in order to be saved. Sorrow is not repentance. Sorrow is not involved in repentance. Sorrow does not save. Only Christ can save.

I understood your position. I fail to definitively say anyone who walks the isle or get's dunked is saved. Like in the Acts, we add them to the roll but by their fruits will you truly know. I consider salvation when one is baptized by fire or the holy spirit. That's why I questioned where they saved at this point or verbally commited to discipleship.

This is where we join back to the prevous discussion. Does man really know at what point a person is saved? Is it when I say I believe or possibly when I get a testimony? I think we agree dunking is not the absolute measurement? I think this is also what blurs into was one saved to begin with?

I personally believe there are some walking the strait and narrow but are not commited to the way or the road. I call them shore christians. Everyone believes in the captian while the boat is ancored at the shore, but let a storm arise in the deepness of the sea... Then you'll find out whose committed to not only the captian but also the ship. Remember, there will be two in the pew, one will go...

I don't want to hi-jack Bro Bob's thread so I will digress...

Edited to correct obvious spelling errors...

 

[EdSutton]

I understood your position. I fail to definitively say anyone who walks the isle or get's dunked is saved. Like in the Acts, we add them to the roll but by their fruits will you truly know. I consider salvation when one is baptized by fire or the holy spirit. That's why I questioned where they saved at this point or verbally commited to discipleship.

This is where we join back to the prevous discussion. Does man really know at what point a person is saved? Is it when I say I believe or possibly when I get a testimony? I think we agree dunking is not the absolute measurement? I think this is also what blurs into was one saved to begin with?

I personally believe there are some walking the strait and narrow but are not commited to the way or the road. I call them shore christians. Everyone believes in the captian while the boat is ancored at the shore, but let a storm arise in the deepness of the sea... Then you'll find out whose committed to not only the captian but also the ship. Remember, there will be two in the pew, one will go...

I don't want to hi-jack Bro Bob's thread so I will digress...

Edited to correct obvious spelling errors...

Language Cop: "May I?"

Ed: "By all means - please be my guest!"

Language Cop: "Thanks!"

"walk theisle" (you mean 'aisle')

"or get's dunked" (you mean 'gets')

"or the holy spirit" (you mean 'Holy Spirit')

"...I questioned where they saved..." (you mean '...I questioned whether they were saved...") It's a statement here, not a question.

"....when I get a testimony" (I don't even have a clue as to what this is supposed to mean!) BTW, your next two sentences are statements, not questions, thus should have a period, and not a question mark, for punctuation.

"walking the strait and narrow" (You really mean 'straight and narrow', here, for I sorta' doubt that you can "walk on water" all that well)

"shore christians" (you mean 'shore Christians') Well, maybe you actually did mean 'walking on water', above! {Sigh!}

"captian" (you mean 'Captain' - and two times, at that)

"ancored" (you mean 'anchored')

"whose committed to..." (you mean 'who's committed to...')


And considering you made the claim of:

"Edited to correct obvious spelling errors...",

may I make the suggestion of the proverb which says:

"Physician, heal thyself!"

:BangHead:

Signed, Language Cop

 

[LeBuick]

Language Cop: "May I?"

Ed: "By all means - please be my guest!"

Language Cop: "Thanks!"

"walk theisle" (you mean 'aisle')

"or get's dunked" (you mean 'gets')

"or the holy spirit" (you mean 'Holy Spirit')

"...I questioned where they saved..." (you mean '...I questioned whether they were saved...") It's a statement here, not a question.

"....when I get a testimony" (I don't even have a clue as to what this is supposed to mean!) BTW, your next two sentences are statements, not questions, thus should have a period, and not a question mark, for punctuation.

"walking the strait and narrow" (You really mean 'straight and narrow', here, for I sorta' doubt that you can "walk on water" all that well)

"shore christians" (you mean 'shore Christians') Well, maybe you actually did mean 'walking on water', above! {Sigh!}

"captian" (you mean 'Captain' - and two times, at that)

"ancored" (you mean 'anchored')

"whose committed to..." (you mean 'who's committed to...')


And considering you made the claim of :

"Edited to correct obvious spelling errors..."

May I make the suggestion of the proverb which says,

"Physician, heal thyself!" :banghead:

Signed, Language Cop

Well, if I'm going to get a ticket then I might as well get my money worth... or do you charge by the correction?(!)(.)

 

[Brother Bob]

Well, it seems to me that some on here are saying if they commit adultery against their wife, I am sure they would be "sorry" for it, but if they commit adultery against God, there would be no sorrow for that act. If I am understanding right, then I must say that I do not understand. But thats just me.

BBob,

 

[DHK]

Well, it seems to me that some on here are saying if they commit adultery against their wife, I am sure they would be "sorry" for it, but if they commit adultery against God, there would be no sorrow for that act. If I am understanding right, then I must say that I do not understand. But thats just me.

BBob,

Can you tell me the difference between the two?

 

[Brother Bob]

I doubt it for the scripture says, Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the Church, and He gave His life for the church. Are you saying you would be sorry if you committed adultery against your wife, but not sorry if you committed adultery against God?

Can you direct me to scripture where someone was gleeful over being lost, when they realized they were lost?

 

[Joe]

What????

 

[Brother Bob]

What????

????? is this directed at me Joe?

If you commit adultery against your wife, then it would also be adultery against God. (Thou shalt not commit Adultery).

Maybe DHK can enlighten me the difference.

 

[DHK]

????? is this directed at me Joe?

If you commit adultery against your wife, then it would also be adultery against God. (Thou shalt not commit Adultery).

Maybe DHK can enlighten me the difference.

Bob, here is your original statement:

Well, it seems to me that some on here are saying if they commit adultery against their wife, I am sure they would be "sorry" for it, but if they commit adultery against God, there would be no sorrow for that act. If I am understanding right, then I must say that I do not understand. But thats just me.

On the one hand you say one can commit adultery against their wife,
and then you diffentiate between,
Committing adultery against God (without sorrow).
You have just drawn a difference between the two. You can commit adultery against one without committing adultery agaisnt the other. How can that be>

Now in this post you write something contradictory: "If you commit adultery against your wife, then it would also be adultery against God."

Which post is the correct one?

 

[Brother Bob]

On the one hand you say one can commit adultery against their wife,
and then you diffentiate between,
Committing adultery against God (without sorrow).
You have just drawn a difference between the two. You can commit adultery against one without committing adultery agaisnt the other. How can that be>

Now in this post you write something contradictory: "If you commit adultery against your wife, then it would also be adultery against God."

Which post is the correct one?__________________
DHK

There is no difference, just a clarification to make it more easy understood by some. It would be impossible to commit adultery against your wife, without it being against God's commandment "thou shalt not commit adultery".

You just can't single your wife out. If you do it against her, it is also against God. I am sure you can understand that can't you? I do not know how much plainer I can put it.

The difference is not "actual" but in response to how you and others have posted on this issue on BB. You are the ones who make a difference in it, for you say that you can die in the very act of adultery and go to Heaven and sing with the angels. I just happen to disagree. IMO

 

[DHK]

There is no difference, just a clarification to make it more easy understood by some. It would be impossible to commit adultery against your wife, without it being against God's commandment "thou shalt not commit adultery".

You just can't single your wife out. If you do it against her, it is also against God. I am sure you can understand that can't you? I do not know how much plainer I can put it.

The difference is not "actual" but in response to how you and others have posted on this issue on BB. You are the ones who make a difference in it, for you say that you can die in the very act of adultery and go to Heaven and sing with the angels. I just happen to disagree. IMO

That, of course, has always been an illustration of the basic premise that we disagree with, that premise being:

That a believer who dies with unconfessed sin in his life will not go to heaven.

It doesn't matter whether the sin is great in man's eyes (adutery) or small (lying). Sin is sin. All sin is the same in God's sight. It is a transgression of God's law (1John 3:4). And you say that if it is unconfessed it will keep a person out of heaven, which again, is a doctrine that denies the sufficiency of the blood of Christ.

 

[Brother Bob]

That, of course, has always been an illustration of the basic premise that we disagree with, that premise being:

That a believer who dies with unconfessed sin in his life will not go to heaven.

It doesn't matter whether the sin is great in man's eyes (adutery) or small (lying). Sin is sin. All sin is the same in God's sight. It is a transgression of God's law (1John 3:4). And you say that if it is unconfessed it will keep a person out of heaven, which again, is a doctrine that denies the sufficiency of the blood of Christ.__________________
DHK

And you say it was covered at the cross regardless of what he does, but yet you say God will "chastise him" for sins, God might "take his life" for sins. I asked, if its covered then why does he have to pay again? I do not see how you can have it both ways. All sins are covered at the cross, past, present and future, but yet if you sin you shall be chastised, and if you sin bad enough, your life shall be taken, according to your belief. If I have understood you right in all this time. If all your sins were already covered, that should be the end of it.

 

[DHK]

If I have understood you right in all this time. If all your sins were already covered, that should be the end of it.

It is the end of it Bob. All our sins are covered. It is the perogative of God whether he wants to exercise his right to chastise that believer or not, or whether he wants to take that believer home to heaven or not. Who are we to say what God will do? Can we command God? Do we know his mind? Some would dare say that Jack Hyles was never saved because his life ended up in a tragic way. It is God that knows the heart. You don't. I don't. The one requirement to entrance into heaven is faith in Christ and his shed blood. Beyond that God only knows. The Bible says, "God knows them that are his." We don't.

Thus if a man dies with unconfessed sin on his heart who are we to judge? If he was saved, then certainly God will save him. He is saved on the basis that he has a righteous standing before God, and he got that the day that he was saved.

 

[Brother Bob]

Thus if a man dies with unconfessed sin on his heart who are we to judge? If he was saved, then certainly God will save him. He is saved on the basis that he has a righteous standing before God, and he got that the day that he was saved.__________________
DHK

It may surprise you to know when I preach a funeral of someone who died while yet a sinner, which is quite often. I tell the family that he is in the hands of a just God, who will do right by him. I can't preach him in heaven and neither can I preach him lost.
We are discussing on here on how we understand the scriptures, as you say, in the end, who are we who would judge another man's servant. I have my beliefs, but that is all they are, I can't save no one and I can't condemn anyone to be lost, and neither in the end would I try, but I do have my beliefs and base them on scripture the best God will give me guidance, for I must teach the "living" to live in a way that would be pleasing unto God.

BBob,

 

[Joe]

????? is this directed at me Joe?

If you commit adultery against your wife, then it would also be adultery against God. (Thou shalt not commit Adultery).

Maybe DHK can enlighten me the difference.

Thanks for the clarification.


Joe