Why would Paul tell Christians not to do sins they are incapable of doing?

Why does reading your posts somehow remind me of the Mac Davis song, that has these lyrics included in it;

?????????

Ed

 

Maybe cause you want to find fault?

Seriously Ed...

How can you say you've been convicted of a certain sin if you continue sinning the same sin?

 

I learned it from you. I haven't heard anyone else say it.

As far as adding to the scriptures that is just in your head. All I did was what I was called to do and that is preach the Gospel, which means to do as Jesus did. First He gave a parable, then He explained the parable. I don't think you have a right to question when a preacher of God explains scripture, that is His Job.
I have heard preacher and all they did was quote one scripture after another without any comment and when he was done, no one knew what in the world he was talking about for none of it made any sense.

You can deny all you want the "sin unto death", but if you are a born again Christian, that list is within you. I think you posted that you haven't did any of them, and if you did, then you are admitting that you do know what they are.

The scripture teaches me that you know, whether you are a Christian or not, or else how could you be judged on them. If you had never become a Christian, how could you be judged on them if God had not taught you. It is God's job to teach me what is right and what is wrong. It is God's job to teach you when you are sinning a sin that will send you to hell and He does not fail. So, put on the whole armour of God, not just part of it. If you don't know right from wrong then how can you teach others, and if you don't know then you should not condemn those who do.

 

2Ti 4:2Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
You got any idea what "doctrine" is Ed. Study on it and maybe you will come up with the answer.

You preach the "word".

You use the word to preach "the" doctrine.

get it??

 

RE: Why would Paul tell.....?

First of all, I have seen a lot of scripture from the Old Testament used in regards to someone falling from grace, but you can't use it to show your point. The Old Testament people lived a completely different lifestyle from us. Every year they made sacrifices for sin, if someone was caught in the act of adultery, they were stoned to death, and eye-for-an-eye, etc. We don't live that way nowadays. Remeber this, when Jesus went up, the Holy Ghost came down.

None of the apostles where saved until Jesus breathed upon them to receive the Holy Ghost.

Go to Matthew 7:24-25 and read about the WISE man who built his house on a ROCK.

Then read Matthew 7:26-27; it talks about the foolish man who built his house on the sand.

Big difference between building a house on ROCK and sand, huh? Thought so.

I have been to several different denominations here where I live at, and I think I know what causes people to not have what they think they have(salvation). A majority of the churches around here have alter calls and BEG people to come to the alter and pray. (If someone can beg them in, someone can beg them out, IMHO). They say all you have to do is cofess the Lord and you will be saved. I even had one preacher tell me that the bible doesn't say anything about a feeling when you get saved! I am not saying that they are being malicious in doing this, but everyone has to be fully persuaded in their own mind. People go to the water and aren't anchored in, so to speak. If you build your house on the ROCK, you will never fall.

One more point: Christian means "Christ"-like, right. Would Jesus Christ commit adultery, steal, lie, cheat, molest/beat children, watch pornography, swear, run the bars, etc. If you are a christian, these are things you won't do. I am saying you won't have the DESIRE to do these. If you do, you aren't "Christ"-like, nor a christian....and never were.

 

If your life was not altered at the altar, you surely will falter.

 

Actually, "Language Cop" was a title that was given me by another member of the BB, although he gave it to me in both our pre-BB days. Yes, a preacher has the job, right and responsibility to explain Scripture; No, he or she doesn't have thejob, right or responsibility to "wrest Scripture", to make it say something it will not say on its own. And I John 2:1-2 cannot say

without adding to the written verses, the words emboldened in parentheses, which is how you are explaining it, unless one adds one's own words in bold to the particular text. I happen to think that is "wresting the Scriptures", as another Scripture calls it.

I don't claim to have any idea of what is a particular sin or sins qualify as a "sin unto death". And you were repeatedly asked for a list by more than one. Finally, you made some allusion to "unrighteousness", in one verse. Since all unrighteousness is sin, I suggested that any sin could be "a sin unto death" in some instances.

And I noted that if one was still breathing, he or she had not committed this "sin yunto death", starting with myself. I did not claim to know of any "list". Lying to God was such a sin to Annanias. "Not discerning the Lord's body" at the Lord's table was such a sin to some at Corinth. And as I don't see this anywhere restricted to the NT, touching the Ark was for one in the OT, and Moses committed this sin by "striking the rock", although God did not impose the 'penalty' immediately.

In fact, God seems to have 'removed this penalty' in the case of Hezekiah, for it had been pronounced that "thou shalt die, and not live", and God rescinded this.

I just am not particularly impressed when one wants to read into Scripture, something that is not found there, and frankly, I doubt that God is much impressed either, in any positive way.

BTW, you are absolutely correct that Scripture tells us to put on the whole armor of God. But Scripture also tells us that one sin will send anyone to hell, absent faith.

Gotta' run and get ready for services.

Ed

 

They are in quotations to show they are not part of the scripture and I will continue to do so, with your permission or without it.

Look up doctrine and Jesus told me to preach not only the word but also the doctrine.

Yes you do have a list in your heart and mind for God put it there.
I gave some on the list but right away it was posted that a Christian could die in the act of adultery with an hearty "amen" from you and I feel if you shoot that one right out of the hat, why pull any more out, it would be useless.

You may not be impressed and frankly, I don't care, but God surely is.

1Cr 1:21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe



2Ti 4:2Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
You got any idea what "doctrine" is Ed. Study on it and maybe you will come up with the answer.

 

I believe the sin unto death is sinning away your day of grace.

Not heeding the call to the point that God just leaves you to your folly.

Or committing a sin that is so vile in God's eyes (abominable sins) that He gives you over to that reprobate mind that cannot even be reached with the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

A Child of God cannot commit this sin unto death.

 

Amen! :tonofbricks: :laugh: :smilewinkgrin: :laugh:

Somwhow this quote seemed to fit, today!

As the sheep said, "Baaa!"

Church time. 'Til later.

Ed

 

DuH! YeaH! Leastis AH ThinKs Ah ge=its it!

Ed

 

How about a really, radical suggestion? Quote Scripture and then add commentary, as opposed to quoting commentary, and then finding Scripture? Seems to me that the first was the way Jesus and the Biblical writers did it, and it seemed to work pretty well, for them.

The second seems to be the way the Pharisees and the scribes did it, and Jesus took them to task for it, if I read it right.

Me? I choose the first way; anyone else can do as he or she pleases, but I will not necessarily agree with the conclusions assumed, as opposed to drawn from Scripture, even if more than one Scripture, might seem confusing to some.

What did I miss, here? If one "explains", and the explanation doesn't make sense, what is the difference?

Ed

 

Lovely little ditty!

Uh- mind giving the chapter and verse where this is to be found?

Ed

 

As long as it gets the Job done without adding or taking away from the scripture itself. I see writers doing what I did all the time. Even the Bible itself has all those little reference numbers, I know you have seen them. Do you still read your Bible with all those little comment markers in there? They even put in "red" what Jesus said, do you use that kind of Bible or do you consider it wrong too?

 

I didn't say "capable". I said "incapable".

 

How can we lose our salvation?

On the foundation of Jesus Christ, which foundation are you building on? Peter, or Paul?

When we see the whole picture we see there is to be division from the Old to the New. The Old is not yet finished, and won't be until in Christ we are taken out of the world.

Are we to build on the foundation that Peter lays down, the "Kingdom Church"? Jesus tells us while on earth He is concerned only with His people. We get confused when we try to apply in specifics the "Kingdom gospel", with the "Body gospel". If we stick with the "Kingdom gospel", we must stick with the "great commission" gospel of repent and be baptized for the remission of our sins". This is specific with that "Kingdom gospel".

If Jesus' purpose was to come for His own, then what He speaks to His people is directed at them, and not we today. He speaks to us later from heaven.

Should we not take another look at this parable to the circumcised? We can start in Luke 1:68-72, "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,
69. And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;
70. As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
71. That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
72. To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant".
In these verses I can't see you, anyone, or me on this board, or in this world today.

Parables are directed to His people. We can make secondary meanings, but we cannot ascribe to the original meaning of specific words to His people. These people are still under the Old Covenant, and Jesus lived in the Old Testament under the "covenant" His people made with Him. We must ask Who is the Sower? Here is He not the Son of Man, the Messiah? Look in Matthew 13:37-38 for understanding to whom parables are directed.

It looks to me so many try to include the "conditional thoughts" into our salvation. We see this in the prayer so many pray, viz. If we will forgive men their trespasses, our heavenly Father will then forgive us. Something happened between Then and Now. Isn't our forgiveness brought about by the shed blood and bodily resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ? Only at the preaching of the gospel of the Cross do we move from conditional salvation (by faith) to unconditional salvation (through faith). It is no longer; if you will do this then I will do that.

He did it, and if we believe then we are born to good works. So now we can apply this parable if we wish, but not before we avail ourselves of the Cross. For by grace we are saved through faith for He did the works, and in Him we are forgiven and not by following the Lord's Prayer. This prayer was given to them for these earthly Apostle's were to go into the "tribulation period" that had to come before the "Kingdom that was Coming". That was the gospel of John the Baptist of the "Kingdom is at Hand". That is not the gospel we are to preach today, for we look for the "rapture" to see that "Kingdom" when it does "come".

John 3:16? We find Paul is first allowed to say such as this some 30 years before John. Jesus said in John what he said while on this earth, not from heaven. But who understood Him while on earth? Mark 9:32-Mary and Joseph could not understand this man - Luke 2:50. Then John 12:16, and other verses. Are we not to ask just what did the Apostles of Christ know at and after Pentecost? We see what they knew and understood before Damascus Road for they tell us in Acts 2:36-38, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
37. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
I personally cannot accept this as MY Gospel, for MY salvation. Even some in our own "churches" believe the "great commission" is for them. I DON'T.

 

As you wish, I shall here give some of what you said, and the post # where it was found to save anyone time who wishes to check.

I don't know that "anyone has said we can justify any sin?" and I did not make any statement to that effect, for I know I didn't, but do not know about any other. But what I do know, and have now commented on for the third time, is that Brother Bob (apparently) believes, for he says thus

Those are your words; YOU are the one who added the 'qualifier' to what John actually wrote, (in I John 2:1-2) and I disagree with what adding the qualifier to the verse attempts to make it say. I prefer to agree with John, as the Holy Spirit led him to write these verses viz.

(I seldom cite the NLT, but did here to show that even a version known for 'paraphrasing' does not do much of it here, and does not contradict the standard versions'.) And the major Greek texts are unanimous, here, as well. The subjunctive mood in the Greek, here, "ινα μη αμαρτητε και εαν τις αμαρτη" tells us that some will and some will not do this particular sin or sins, here, but all of them are addressed as "My little Children". But what the passage does not do, in any way, is 'qualify' sin, here as "a sin unto death".
Keep reading, folks.

Funny, the Bereans "searched the Scriptures daily to see whether the things said were so". Why should we be any different? But since you mentioned it, why is it not adding to Scripture when you add a phrase to what Scripture has declared, here "not a sin unto death"? Since I gave a direct quote from you, BTW, how is it "just in my head"? I was not the one trying to make this Scripture fit some pre-conceived theology.

You mind citing a chapter and verse to this effect of the "list"? I have certainly never denied there is "sin unto death" and in fact gave some examples of some that I believe to be from Scripture, including Annanias, the 'Corinthian 'gluttons'', and Moses, among others.

But I am not willing to consign any of these to "eternal death" as some seem to want, absent Scripture saying such, and it simply does not. "Tare pulling" is neither one of my talents, nor is it a job given me to do, as a Christian. I have previously commented on this in some thread, but will not hunt it up here.

Uh- ya' might want to rethink, re-word, or rephrase this, for Paul said in Scripture

Or maybe not re-word it, for some on the BB seem to somehow feel that their flesh is 'stronger' than Paul's, so if that shoe fits, wear it, I guess. Me? I kinda' like the idea that I got a "new heart", myself, one not made of 'flesh'.

 

It may help your theology, but it doesn't help mine at all, for that is not what Scripture says. What Scripture does say is:

Since verse I Jo. 5:16 calls the one "a brother", it is undoubtedly referring to one who is, in fact, "a Christian". Further, the only one who is capable of committing "a sin unto death" is a Christian, in the context spoken. One who is not a Christian is not "a brother" at all. And since this is the only place besides Rom. 6:16 where anything close to the Greek phrase "αμαρτιαν μη προς θανατον" is to be found, as HBSMN pointed out somewhere previously, I think we have to kinda' stick with these, don't you, for this? And since Rom. 6 is likewise referring to Christians (note Paul includes "we" among the "you" in this passage, in context.) So just in case someone missed it, I'll say it again, in case I haven't said it before.
Only one who is a Christian can commit a "sin unto death". And a Christian can likewise commit "a sin that is not unto death", as well. (I John 5: 16-17) And the death referred to is "physical death." And since all unrighteousness is sin (same verses), where do you get the insight to decide which 'unrighteousness' is that qualifying for one category or the other. Neither John nor Paul declare such, only that it was so.

One who is in Christ, redeemed, sealed, etc., cannot somehow now become UN-saved, by some sin he may commit. That is not to be found in any Scripture, that I know of. (One may 'claim' to be a Christian, and not be, but that is another question entirely, and not what this thread is about.)
The non-Christian or unbeliever is already (spiritually) dead - dead in tresspasses and sins. Hence, he cannot become any more spiritually dead than he already is, for he is separated from God, already. And absent faith he will remain "yet in (your) sins" (I Cor. 15:17), or in other words, and in another place as Jesus put it, "If you believe not that I AM, you will die in your sins." (Jo. 8:24)

I have to agree that God is impressed - so much that he said these things, among others, about His Word. (All NKJV, my emphases)

Think I'll go along with God and these writers. Looks like my main responsibility is to believe it, and honor it, not re-define it where it does not speak what I would like it to say.

Ed

 

All your hogwash and this one scripture proves you even started off wrong so how can you be right.

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
1Jo 5:16If any man see his brother sin a sin [which is] not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

2Ti 4:2Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.


We are on here debating what we feel the meaning of scriptures are. If we wanted to just post scripture we would refer you to the KJV of the Bible. If all you want is the Bible without discussion, you came to the wrong place.

I have proved everything I ever posted and have give indicators where I put in my understanding of that scripture, much like the Bible does. You know where some is in italic. You didn't answer if you use the Bibles with the "red" print, or you didn't answer if you use the Bible with the references, of which are all added by someone and are not the scripture itself, but yet I have never heard you complain about them. Again, this is a debate forum of what the scriptures mean and if you don't like it then if I was you I would not participate.

Did you add "as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. did you underline it and is that the orginal scripture"????

Here is the Scripture and it looks nothing like what you have. You even picked out what you wanted and left the rest off and underlined it. shame shame Ed.

16: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17: Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18: But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

If you did you speak both ways and we know what that is don't we? IMO

This in no way is just the scripture, again speak both ways. IMO

Should I go on or just let it go at that. You think you are on here to correct all but IMO, but I think you fail miserably.

 

Nice ad hominem attack!

And FTR, what difference is it whether or not my Bible is a "Red Letter" or a "Black Letter" Edition? I have previously said that I use an NKJV. The text is the same in both editions.

But since you think all the Scripture I posted is "hogwash", never mind your own quotes, nor my answers to them, I am through with responding to you in this thread.

Ed