The Dark Lord debating against Explorerdude.  The Dark Lord for false, Explorerdude for true.

Posts by anyone other than the two named above will be deleted.

The week starts now.

Another week has been added.

Views: 278

Replies to This Discussion

God would be grieved, but yes, I do. If they didn't go to heaven, then it would be a direct vilolation of (Ephesians 2:8) Not of works. This verse works both ways. You can't get into heaven by good works, and (once you're saved) get out by actions. Plain and simple. It's God's mercy and faithfulness that gives me reason to get up in the morning.

Repentance isn't a work.  It's not among the "good deeds" category, or any category of deeds for that matter.  Repentance is what we have to show for God to forgive us.  There is nowhere in the Bible where it says you can sin, and be like "oh, I sinned, but I don't feel like repenting, so I won't and God will forgive me anyway because He knows that I love him deep down.  Yeah, I'm breaking his express commands, but it's all good".  Sinning doesn't just make God sad.  It makes Him angry.  Time and again we can read about how God was filled with righteous wrath against the Israelites and sent them into slavery, from which he only rescues them when they have repented and come back to Him.  When did He save them from captivity before they repented?  Repentance is not an option.  Nowhere in the Bible does it say that you can sin, not repent, and still be all good with God.  It does, however, say all over the place that you must repent of your sins or you will fall short of the glory of God.

I never said repentance is a work. If I did, that's not what I meant. Sinning is the work. Yeah, it does make God angry, but God hates the sin, loves the sinner. And as far as not repenting goes, if those are your veiws on the matter (As a hypothetical situation, that is) then you have to ask your self "If God can forgive me for all my wrongs, and I can't forgive Bobby for taking my LEGOs, am I really a Christian if I can't forgive Him? It should bother me if I don't forgive Him. I shouldn't just be all, "Oh, I don't feel like forgiving you right now, try again later" It should bother me that I haven't forgiven Him"


We don't sing "Great is My Faithfulness" every week at church, nor, "You are faithful Bob, forever" in Chris Tomlin songs. It's God who is faithful. He could care less about the human race, but He doesn't. He is a faithful God.

He is also a jealous God, and we were created in His image.

Yes, God will forgive us our sins.  Again and again He will forgive us.  But we HAVE to repent.  Forgiving someone of a sin without them first repenting would be like releasing a rapist/murderer slated for death without any guarantee, or even any indication that he wasn't going to go right back out there and rape and kill another girl.  It simply doesn't work that way.  If you blatantly sinned against me and did not repent, yet I forgave you, sure we could continue in friendship, but it wouldn't be the same.  Because that saying "forgive and forget" only works if the issue was resolved.  If I'm like "It's all good, I forgive you" and you're just like "Whatever man", it's not going away.  It will stay a factor in our friendship until it gets resolved. 

How is it any different with God?  It's called a relationship with Him for a reason.  What you're describing to me is ever person's dream relationship.  One in which your partner doesn't do anything and basically doesn't care if you break the rules.  Which is what you're saying.  Yes, you've said it makes God sad, but if nothing else happens, if we're just hurting God's feelings but we still get to heaven, then that doesn't mean a single, solitary thing.

If repenting can make or break your ticket into heaven, then what in the world was the whole Jesus dying on the cross thing for? Using your analogy, that murderer on trial just had it's debts paid in full by the blood of Christ. You CANNOT let somebody go without making them pay for their actions. So, we SHOULD all go to hell, but we don't. We have Jesus. The same Jesus who set the captives free is calling us all by name, beckoning for us to take His perfect gift. HE is the one who paid the way out of that metaphorical court room. Yes, we need to ask forgiveness for our sins, but if I sin just a moment before the rapture happens, I'm not gonna go, "Oh poop, I didn't repent quick enough before He came back" It's kind of the same category as baptisim. It is a command to do it, but you will still get into heaven if you haven't done it. Baptisim is just a symbol of the old things being washed away. It doesn't hold the key to salvation.

Jesus paid the price for those ready and willing to accept and follow him.  His death did not send out a wave of love that said "Be merry, ye murders and thieves, for I hath saved your souls!  Now continue as you were!"  Jesus died so that murders CAN be free of their sin.  Not so that they automatically are.  And not so that they can be no matter what other sins they might commit. 

Repentance is not symbolic.  You absolutely have to repent of your sins before Jesus can become Lord of your life.  Why should it be any different afterward?  Now it's "Oh I repented when I started this thing so I don't have to do that anymore, it's just symbolic now"?  If you sinned right before the Rapture, then I'd say it depends.  If it's something that you would, under normal circumstances, fix shortly after (such as something said in anger), all good.  But if it's something that is direct defiance of God (using murder as my continued example) then yeah, you're screwed.  Either way it's bad, because you don't want your last act on earth to be a sin, seeing as how God is going to hold us accountable for EVERYTHING we've ever done.  All in all, if you basically flip God off right before the Rapture, I think you're in trouble.  Obviously I can't say for sure, because no one knows what happens in that time for sure.  What we do know is that we need to live every day for the glory of God like it's our last chance, because no one knows the day or the hour, which is pretty much the only solid thing about the Rapture.

First off, I honestly don't know on what basis one could come up with an hypothosis like that. I don't think I've heard a theory like that before. But that's just me. Nevertheless, I need to adress it.


ALL SIN IS EQUAL IN GOD'S EYES. Stealing a piece of gum is just as bad as rape and murder. James 2:10
 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. See, on earth, we set standards for a basis of our wrongdoings. You won't get put in jail for talking back to your mom. You will, though, for robbing a bank. In God's eyes, those are equally sinful. C.S Lewis put it this way in Mere Christianity: (With a bit of my own adaption) imagine a bridge that spans a very large drop. On the other side is heaven. When Adam and Eve sinned, they tore down that bridge, leaving a massive 50 foot pitfall in between us and Christ. We all run and jump as far as we can to get to the other side. Some make it farther than others. We all fall short of the glory of God. When we accept salvation, God makes a bridge for us and us only. His bridge NEVER falls down. Others have to accept salvation to make their own bridge. My point being, once God has made our bridge, and we truely keep our eyes on the straight and narrow path, we WILL make it into glory.


Take David for example, he was a man after God's own heart. But he messed up real big time. He committed murder and adultry (more or less) in the same motion. But he was sorrowfully grieved at what he had done, and in the end, loved God and wanted to do His will. 

You keep saying that if we're "truly" committed to God we'll be dandy.  Have I ever argued that?  No.  In fact, I keep saying that again and again.  If we follow God's will for us, s'all good. 

Your examples back up my arguments better than anything.  Take the bridge.  That is exactly what I've been talking about this entire time.  We have a narrow path to stick to, and on either side of that path is a bottomless pit.  Until we reach the end (die, Rapture, whatever) we can always fall off.  Once we fall off, we keep falling until one of two things happens.  We either hit the bottom (die, Rapture, whatever), or we repent before the bottom, God catches us and sets us back on that bridge.  If we don't repent before we hit the bottom, we're screwed.

Because as you pointed out with David, he didn't just say "Oh, sorry God, my bad, let's start again".  No.  He was, and I quote, "sorrowfully grieved", unquote, before he went back to God.  That is the very definition of repentance.  It's not the words "I'm sorry", it is the heartfelt sorrow over the sin and the desire to change. 

And I'm sorry to destroy the age old Christian belief, but all sin is not equal in God's eyes.  There is an unforgivable sin.  And it's not something that can possibly be misinterpreted.  Jesus himself tells us of the unforgivable sin.  He even uses the word (or words, depending on your version) "unforgivable".  All other sins can be forgiven, he says, except that one.  Therefore, not ALL sins are equal in God's eyes.  Because if they were, then that would mean either all sins are unforgivable (which we know is not true) or Jesus was lying (which we also know is not true).

I feel like we are going in circles...


Okay, let me get something straight here. I already adressed blastpheming the Holy Spirit a few posts back. I'm too lazy to re-explain it, so here it is pasted:

"First off, I'd like to clear something up here. 'Blastpheming the Holy Spirit' is described as simply rejecting the Gospel. Saying, "I think all that God stuff is lame" and living out the rest of your life as so, THAT is blastpheming the Holy Spirit. Even though you shouldn't do it anyway, saying "the Holy Spirit is lame" is NOT what they are reffering to. So, me and you are physically incapable of commiting that sin. Just thought I should say that if you didn't already know. If you did, good for you"


See, we are, originally, God's children. Adam and Eve broke that bond, permanatly, thus making us sojourners from heaven. When He died on the cross, He made it possible for us to be brought back into Glory. He adopted us (that is, us who believe) Ephesians 1:5 blatantly proclaims this point: Having predestened us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ, to Himself, according to the riches of His grace. Once you have adopted somebody, you cannot un-adopt them. Now, the crux of my lecure: I may disapoint, I may mess up big time, but it is physically impossible to be un-adopted from God-- just like on earth. God chose His words well in that verse. I (not speaking metaphorically) may go into drugs and join a gang, but my parents will still love me no matter what. The have told me just that. They cannot say, "You're an idiot, were officially not your parents" it is physically impossible. I don't obey my parents so I can stay their son, but because I love them, and want to honour them. Not because it gets me something.

Yes, we are going in circles.  Because you keep contradicting yourself over and over.  Not only that, but you sidestep the arguments that you don't want to address.  No matter how many times I bring them up, you still focus on some other, mostly irrelevant point.  This is not about whether God will always love us or not.  I have NEVER disputed that point and I never will.  But that does not, in any way, mean that we are going to be in His presence when we die.  Because the one and only thing that you've been saying over and over is that if we accept and love God, it doesn't matter what else we do, we'll still be with Him when we die.  By that standard, the rapist/murderer who was killed in a hate crime is still going to heaven because he was strong Christian for the first twenty years of his life.  So is the mega church pastor who died of old age, after embezzling church funds for the last twenty years of his life (before which, though, he was very strong in his faith). 

I don't care how you classify blaspheming the Holy Spirit.  How YOU classify it doesn't matter.  What does matter is that Jesus says that it is a sin.  Not only a sin, but an unforgivable one.  That is what Jesus tells us.  He DOES NOT tell us "blaspheming the Holy Spirit is this process you have go through during your life.  But if you really love me you're incapable of doing that".  Because NOTHING is impossible.  I could, right now at this very moment, do that.  And the reason I don't is because I'm not willing to go to hell to prove a point.  But I COULD.  There is nothing stopping me from doing so.  God did not set up mystical boundaries that would prevent me from blaspheming the Holy Spirit.  It is possible for any and every human being on this planet to blaspheme the Holy Spirit till the day they die. 

Apparently you've never heard of someone being disowned. 

The crux of your lecture is broken.  It is invalid.  Because after all that messing up, all that disappointment, it is completely possible to, as you put it, be "unadopted".  Just take a quick glance as Judas Iscariot.  Jesus personally picked this guy to be one of this twelve disciples.  Jesus spent practically the entirety of his documented life on earth in the company of Judas.  He sent Judas out to bring the good news to the ignorant masses.  He trusted Judas to do his work as he would do them.  And what did Judas do?  He betrayed Jesus, and after he betrayed the Son of God, he hanged himself.  Why did he hang himself?  Because he couldn't face the shame of what he had done.  He couldn't live with the weight of the sin.  He couldn't ask for forgiveness.  He couldn't repent. 

So unless you think we'll be seeing Judas in heaven, I'd advise you to rethink that crux.

I'm not trying to avoid anything, I've adressed most (if not all) of these points and I found no reason to bring them up again. If I am missing something, by all means, tell me.


Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but your whole 'Judas' argument is invalid. In Matthew 26:34 Jesus says that Peter will deny Him three times before the rooster crows (or morning). Peter (obviously) claimed otherwise. But, Jesus never tells falsehoods, and, Peter most definitly did give false witness to Jesus. But did Peter hang himself? No! He went on to write several books of the new testament, and brought many to Christ! Judas certainly did mess up big time, but he thought his sin was too great to live with it, so instead, he commited another sin and hanged himself. Peter realized what he did wrong, but still loved God. He changed and went on to make disiples of nations. And yes, I do think I'll see Peter in heaven.


Okay, the 'physically incapable' phrase wasn't posed in the bestway. We are not (currently) commiting that sin because we are saved. Am I making myself clear? And It's not just my opinion. (Espesially look at the bottom part) (Again, importaint part at the bottom)


I personally think that is pretty substantial evedence of my point. I have yet to find one for yours.


I don't care to adress your last point for the third or fourth time, so please look at my previous posts.




"Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but your whole 'Judas' argument is invalid. In Matthew 26:34 Jesus says that Peter will deny Him three times before the rooster crows (or morning). Peter (obviously) claimed otherwise. But, Jesus never tells falsehoods, and, Peter most definitly did give false witness to Jesus. But did Peter hang himself? No! He went on to write several books of the new testament, and brought many to Christ! Judas certainly did mess up big time, but he thought his sin was too great to live with it, so instead, he commited another sin and hanged himself. Peter realized what he did wrong, but still loved God. He changed and went on to make disiples of nations. And yes, I do think I'll see Peter in heaven."

I don't understand your reasoning at all.  This doesn't invalidate my argument.  Rather, it strengthens it.  Because as I have said over and over, I fully believe that we can repent and come back to Jesus after committing sins.  Why do you keep ignoring that and arguing points as though I'm saying if you sin you're doomed to hell?  I have never said that, and I never will. 

In what area do you think Peter and Judas are comparable to each other after Jesus' death?  They are two completely different stories with two completely different lessons to be drawn.  Yeah, Peter denied Jesus, just as Jesus said he would and just as Peter denied he would.  Yeah, Peter later REPENTED of this sin and went on to live his life for the glory of God.  This, in no way, helps or hinders either side of the argument.  It is simply an example of a man walking with Christ, having a relationship with God, something I have never is impossible.  Something I've actually said is exactly what happens when we walk with God.  Peter fell off the bridge, repented, and God put him back on the bridge. 

How you take this to mean my argument with Judas is invalid I have no idea.  Because this has absolutely nothing to do with Judas.  In fact, if anything, this simply strengthens my argument.  Before Judas betrayed Jesus, and before Peter denounced Jesus, they were the same.  They were both trusted disciples of the Son of God.  Cue betrayal and denouncement.  Now they are still the same, for both have sinned against God.  And here is where their paths diverge.  Judas, unable to live with his sin, hanged himself, thus condemning himself to hell.  Peter saw his sin, knew that God could forgive, repented, and went on to live a long and fruitful life furthering the kingdom of heaven. 

Please pay careful attention now.  Peter, we will see in heaven.  Judas, we won't.  For very simple reasons.  Peter repented, thus allowing God to wash away his sin, opening the gates of heaven for him.  Judas did not repent.  He did not believe it was possible to be forgiven the sin he committed, and so he hanged himself and plummeted to hell.  

Now I'm pretty sure we're both agreed on the point that we won't be seeing Judas in heaven.  But, by your definition of once saved always saved, we should see him there.  Because Judas lived an incredibly devout life.  He actually lived with Jesus.  He was personally chosen by Jesus to be a disciple.  Something we can only dream about.  There was not a single person you could ask who would say that Judas was not saved.  Yet he still betrayed Jesus and he still hanged himself. 

So the only way "once saved always saved", as you have defined it, can be accurate is if we find Judas in heaven. 

Okay, so that first link is basically just saying what you've said.  That we can't commit it, without an actual verse saying we can't.  All the verses that it does give don't prove anything.  Just because someone is given something doesn't mean it can't be taken away.  My boss can take away my job just as easily as she gave it to me.  We are given eternal life, so long as we live for God.  If we stray, we will lose it.  And the verse about not being able to be snatch away is great and all, but it's being taken out of context.  It's being taken to me that we CANNOT IN NO POSSIBLE WAY be separated from God.  But that's not what the verse says.  It says that nothing can "snatch" us away.  As in, nothing can take us away.  Nothing can forcibly remove us.  Nowhere does it say that we are incapable of walking away ourselves, of our own will.  Which is exactly what sin does.  Sin never forces us to do anything.  In fact, God promises to never let us be tempted by anything that we cannot resist (I don't have the verse, but I'm sure you know it).  So we can walk away.  At any point.  God gives us the choice, every second of every day.  He, in no way, binds us to Him. 

The second link I have never disagreed with.

The third link actually brings up some interesting points.  Reading it, I find that I actually do disagree with the second link.  The unforgivable sin is not a lifestyle.  It is a specific sin to committed, after which you are condemned to hell.  That sin being an act directly against God, with full knowledge of what's at stake.  Thus, I am much more capable of committing the unforgivable sin than some person who isn't a Christian.  The sin, as described, was seeing Jesus performing miracles with full knowledge of old testament scripture that shows Jesus as the Messiah, and yet saying that he was of the devil.  So both denying God's power and also attributing it to Satan at the same time. 

As for their reasoning as to why we cannot commit that sin anymore, I think they're invalid.  Because they base it on the fact that miracles are no longer happening.  Something I disagree with.  People simply think miracles don't happen anymore because the amount of faith required to perform a miracle, such as Jesus and the disciples of old did, is sadly lacking, making the occurrence of miracles much less.  And the fact that we can no longer commit this sin against Jesus himself doesn't matter.  Because Jesus said right there that any blaspheme against the Son of God can be forgiven.  So it didn't matter that they were doing it to Jesus. 

Because of the third link, I must now disagree with the fourth link.  Duh, if you die unbelieving your going to hell.  But that isn't a sin.  Lifestyles aren't sins.  Your whole life is not either a sin, or not a sin.  Sin is something that we live with, and something that we either commit, or don't commit.  Saying that the unforgivable "sin" (singular, mind you) is living your entire life in unbelief is just stupid.

And I don't feel like putting in the time to argue the last one, because it's pretty much saying the same thing, just a little differently.  The basic point being that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is not a lifestyle.  It's not just living each day unbelieving.  That's called simply not believing and it's what everyone is before they accept Jesus.  Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is saying something, with full knowledge and intent, that throws the Holy Spirit in God's face with complete sincerity.  Basically.  Probably not put the best way, but I'm running short on time here. 


© 2022   Created by Christopher Miller.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service