Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You keep mentioning having the "sin nature dealt with".
I was always of the impression that the "sin nature" has to do with the sanctification of believers, once they ARE believers -- not with forgiveness for sin and reconciliation with god. Paul certainly went on at length bemoaning his own "sin nature" and his inability to do the things he ought or refrain from the things he oughtn't. And he certainly was not an unbeliever.
Or are you of the Holiness persuasion and think that once "saved" it is either impossible to sin, or possible to get to a place where you are impervious to it?
Or perhaps you are just using the term a little more loosely than I used to, IDK.
He is using the term to justify his belief in eternal punishment. His theory is that as long as the "sin nature" has not been dealt with by belief in what he believes, they would keep sinning forever, therefore deserving punishment forever. He refuses to accept that our "sin nature" is a function of our animal bodies and our spiritual ignorance. Once we are free of them we are free of our "sin nature."
Every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:11); every tongue shall confess their sins (Romans 14:11-12).
As for Isaiah 45:23, the kjv:
Isa 45:23, I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
He is using the term to justify his belief in eternal punishment. His theory is that as long as the "sin nature" has not been dealt with by belief in what he believes, they would keep sinning forever, therefore deserving punishment forever. He refuses to accept that our "sin nature" is a function of our animal bodies and our spiritual ignorance. Once we are free of them we are free of our "sin nature."
"filthiness" as concerning morality is not only of the flesh; it can also be of the spirit (2 Corinthians 7:1).
He is using the term to justify his belief in eternal punishment. His theory is that as long as the "sin nature" has not been dealt with by belief in what he believes, they would keep sinning forever, therefore deserving punishment forever. He refuses to accept that our "sin nature" is a function of our animal bodies and our spiritual ignorance. Once we are free of them we are free of our "sin nature."
Exactly. Although he will deny it, he is justifying himself with belief.
He is using the term to justify his belief in eternal punishment. His theory is that as long as the "sin nature" has not been dealt with by belief in what he believes, they would keep sinning forever, therefore deserving punishment forever. He refuses to accept that our "sin nature" is a function of our animal bodies and our spiritual ignorance. Once we are free of them we are free of our "sin nature."
Yeah I have never heard the term "sin nature" use in that fashion nor have I ever heard anyone say that people would "keep sinning forever" if not sent to hell. The reason normally stated for people not being admitted to heaven is not some future sin but their past sin. And we never claimed that Christians would no longer sin except in the afterlife, where presumably this propensity to sin is finally excised.
Every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:11); every tongue shall confess their sins (Romans 14:11-12).
As for Isaiah 45:23, the kjv:
Isa 45:23, I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
Clearly, the NASB is adding to the word!
The word is added as clarification of the meaning of 'to swear', meaning to swear an oath, as in an oath to follow or for allegiance.
Here is another translation
CLV(i) Isa 45:23 By Myself I swear. From My mouth fares forth righteousness, and My word shall not be recalled. For to Me shall bow every knee, and every tongue shall acclaim to Elohim."
Every tongue shall acclaim. By the way, none of this contradicts the KJV version.
Do you think God is literally forcing people's mouths to move so they swear to him? You think God needs to operate in such a manner, and this would somehow be glorious? Or is this like some sort of torture scene where people are forced to acclaim His name, before the real torture session starts?
No. Nothing can be more glorious than actual legitimate & honest acclamation to the name of God.
The word is added as clarification of the meaning of 'to swear', meaning to swear an oath, as in an oath to follow or for allegiance.
Here is another translation
CLV(i) Isa 45:23 By Myself I swear. From My mouth fares forth righteousness, and My word shall not be recalled. For to Me shall bow every knee, and every tongue shall acclaim to Elohim."
Every tongue shall acclaim. By the way, none of this contradicts the KJV version.
Do you think God is literally forcing people's mouths to move so they swear to him? You think God needs to operate in such a manner, and this would somehow be glorious? Or is this like some sort of torture scene where people are forced to acclaim His name, before the real torture session starts?
No. Nothing can be more glorious than actual legitimate & honest acclamation to the name of God.
Lego: Every knee bows, every tongue acclaims in union with the Name of Jesus, in every dimension of the heavens earth and underworld. This wonderful consummation of His Lordship is not by perfunctory genuflections but in/en His majestic Name!
Today's word is not Hebrew or Greek, it's Inuit!
The word is issumagijoujunnainermik.
When missionaries first shared the gospel with the Inuit tribes in Alaska, they couldn't find any word in the Inuit language for forgiveness. So, they took a number of Inuit words and joined them to form a new word -- Issu-magi-jou-jun-nai-ner-mik -- and it became the Inuit word for forgiveness.
The individual words are Not-being-able-to-think-about-it-anymore."
denying justification by faith is not the same thing as denying Jesus.
Of course Jesus knows us better than we know ourselves.
Peter, before he had the Holy Spirit, said that he would never deny Jesus but later denied Him.
Once he had the Holy Spirit, he never denied Him again.
So, the difference is the Holy Spirit.
Are we trusting in our own faithfulness or in God's?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
