1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Can a man sin a sin unto death after being born again.

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by charles_creech78, Jul 9, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    And who is to randlomly say what that sin is? I have been down this road with you before. Quite frankly Bob you set yourself up as a god (just like the Pope), and decide what sin is a sin unto death, and what isn't. So we all must bow down to your decision, just as the Catholics bow down to the decisions of the Pope on what is a mortal sin and what is not. Why do you get to decide? Who put you into that position?
    The Bible clearly states that all liars shall have their part in the lake of fire. Is lying a sin unto death. Have you, as a believer ever lied. The Bible also says: "Let God be true but every man a liar. Thus it says that all men have lied, and the liar will find his place in the lake of fire? It also says in the book of James:
    Whoso shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one point is guilty of all.
    Thus in God's sight telling a lie is just as bad as committing adultery. If you have told a lie, you have, in effect, broken all the commandments of God. You are just as guilty. Sin is sin. You are condemned. All sins are sins unto death. That being the case you have condemned yourself to the lake of fire. You cannot escape sin. If you can, there would have been no need for Christ to die and take the penalty of our sin, would there?
     
  2. charles_creech78

    charles_creech78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  3. charles_creech78

    charles_creech78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK you said he was writing this to the believers.This is the law witch this is writen in an't it. 1 timothy 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the Law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. But we know that the Law is good,if a man use it Lawfully, Know you said the law was writen to the believer . Let us hear what sayeth the law 1Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the LAW is NOT MADE for a RIGHTEOUS MAN, but for the lawless and DISOBEDIENT, for the UNGODLY and for SINNERS, for UNHOLY and PROFANE, for MURDERERS of FATHERS, and MURDERERS of MOTHER, for MANSLAYERS, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars for perjured person, and if ther be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.
     
  4. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry you feel that way DHK, when I just quoted scripture.
    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.

    1Jo 5:17All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

    The above scripture are the word of God, not mine. I judge no man, the Lord said the words He speaks shall judge us in the last day.



    Romans, chapter 3


    1: What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
    2: Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
    3: For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
    4: God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

    This scripture was to the Jews concerning the Law of circumcision. If a man don't believe the Laws that God give to the Jews, then let every man be a liar and God be truth.

    This scripture is not saying, "every man is a liar", why would God say that you were a liar, and then say if you lie ,you will have your part in the Lake of Fire. It don't make sense.

    You misread that scripture DHK, "let God be truth and every man a liar". It is saying you are a liar, if you say something against what God said.

    No, I am just a poor weak struggling Christian, who believes that Christians live a better life than the world. If you are a friend of the world, you are an enemy to God.

    I believe we are saved, by the Grace of God and that Grace continues with us until the resurrection.

    One other thing DHK, Why do you say the following just means an early death, when it says it is impossible to renew this man again. If anyone could do what the following scripture says, then an early death will not help him, for he will still have that sin unto death against him, which cannot be removed, according to scripture.

    Eph. 6:4: For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
    5: And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
    6: If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
     
    #84 Brother Bob, Jul 13, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2007
  5. DQuixote

    DQuixote New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  6. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #86 Brother Bob, Jul 13, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2007
  7. charles_creech78

    charles_creech78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rolleyes:

    Ed
     
  9. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  10. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then, with all respect, why play them? You were the one who said, and I quote:
    I posted Scripture that showed that Paul referred to himself as carnal and to the Church at Corinth, whom he referred to as saints, and brethren as carnal. And I do believe that both Paul and "brethren" and "saints" are Christians.

    And I also posted that carnal equals the spiritually immature, or babies who are drinking milk, and posted that Scripture, as well.

    So I figure it is your opinion vs. what Scripture says.

    And I did not have to "interpret" away the Biblical wording of carnal, nor make an assumption that the Bible did not make, here.
    I merely quoted what it did say.

    Hence, I deny playing any word games.

    Ed
     
    #90 EdSutton, Jul 13, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2007
  11. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, where does Scripture say that "Paul's authority greatly overwrote any of NT prophets"? Mind telling me where you found this Scripture??

    And I'm also going to challenge a couple of your statements about Agabus.
    Agabus is mentioned exactly two times in Scripture. And I quoted both of those instances, above. In each case, he is identified as a prophet. And that is by NT standards, as I read it. so whether or not you want to call him a prophet, the Bible does. He also gave exactly two prophecies that are recorded in Scripture. The first one is said to have come to pass, and the second (ten chapters later) was about Paul. He said Paul would be "bound" though he did not say exactly how, by the Jews. I would say that since the Jews siezed apul and dragged him out of the temple, they in some way bound him. And since they were beating him, I seriously doubt they would have been able to do this, were he not bound. I simply don't think Paul would have "just stood there and let them beat on him," any more than would you or I. And as the Commander of the Romans took him, the logical question becomes, took him from whom? Obviously, the Jews, who had him. Seems to me like that prophecy came true as well.

    But I am glad you acknowledge, at least, that he prophesied "in the Holy Spirit."

    BTW, DHK did not post what you here quoted. I did! :rolleyes:

    Ed
     
    #91 EdSutton, Jul 13, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2007
  12. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    That is theological error (a kinder word for heresy). You are espousing Roman Catholic theology; are you sure you are not a Catholic? I used to be one for 20 years, so I know what they believe. The Catholics differentiate between degrees of sins; the Bible doesn't, and God doesn't. Why are you following a man-made system of philosophy? You have no Scriptural basis for this .
    What is the difference between sin against the flesh and spiritual sin? The answer is none. Sin is sin in God's sight. He doesn't differentiate. Let's look at some Scripture:

    Habakkuk 1:13 Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?
    --Habukkuk declared the holiness of God. He stated that God was so holy that he would not condone any sin, no matter how you would classify it. "He cans't look upon iniquity--not of the heart; not of the flesh--there is no difference in his sight. He is a holy God.

    Now take a look at what Jesus said about adultery:
    Matthew 5:27-28 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
    28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
    --Is adultery a sin unto the flesh or a spiritual sin? and what is the difference?
    This is one of those that sins that Bob says is a sin unto death (though Bob has no proof of it). It is a sin you call, a sin of the flesh; and yet it is no different than other sins. You draw arbitrary lines, and like Bob, act as a god to yourself deciding what sins are serious enough to send a person to Hell and what are not. How arrogant to put yourself above all else, and judge your brother as such. That is exactly what the Bible commands us not to do.

    Adultery is a sin of the heart. If you but look upon a woman to lust after her you commit the sin of adultery. That is how Jesus defined the sin of adultery. It wasn't simply the physical act. It was a sin that was committed in the heart.

    Likewise, according to Mat.5:21,22, murder is committed in the heart. If you lose your temper without a cause, become angry with your brother, you have committed murder. That was Christ's assessment. Murder doesn't have to be the actual physical act.
    Are you still going to differentiate between so called spiritual sins and physical sins?
    Let me give you a hint: there is no such difference. Sin is sin in God's sight. He doesn't differentiate between sin. He calls is a transgression of the law (1John 3:4). So why are you pretending to be a Catholic unless you are one?
    That verse is a quote from Ezekiel. It was to the Israelites. It was speaking of the consequence of sin--physcial death.
    That is your opinion without any foundation in Scripture--pure guesswork and nothing else. Why should we believe you over and above the Scripture?
    Prove that. Paul had a thron in the flesh. But that thorn was not a sin. God doesn not give people sin. God gave Paul a thorn in the flesh. You commit blasphemy by attributing sin to God.
    No we don't. especially if we have to rely on your definition and/or Bob's definition. We greatly disagree on our definitions. Just read through this thread and see. Everyone has there own definition of what a sin unto death is . You have made an arrogant statement, and you yourself can't define it, and then back it up with Scripture.
    If you believe that you take the position of an Arminian and believe that one can lose their salvation. I thought you believed in eternal security or OSAS. You statements say otherwise. Once saved a man cannot lose his salvation. Jesus promsied that. The gift of God is eternal life. It can't be lost. If it could then eternal life wouldn't be eternal and Christ would be a liar.
    That is heresy. Either you are born again or you are not. You can't be both. Either you are saved or you are not. You can't be both. Either you are on your way to heaven or you are not. You can't be both. Either your sins are forgiven or they are not. It can't be both ways. Perhaps you need to consider this matter very carefully and decide what side of the fence you are really on.
    This is complete nonsense. The entire chapter of 1John is written to believers. Sin is sin. God doesn't differentiate. Catholics do. Which are you?
     
  13. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    The thorn came from Satan, not God.

    God didn't think so: 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.
    1Jo 5:17All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
    1Jo 5:18¶We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

    Rom 8:23And not only [they], but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body.

    Rom 8:21Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
     
  14. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    Do you have Scripture for this, BB? When The Angel of The Lord touched Jacob's hip, he created a "thorn" of sorts, no?
     
  15. charles_creech78

    charles_creech78 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will not answer to you again you are in this more to judge then to listen. My God bless you more in under standing of what you read.
     
  16. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't see where he judged at all. He plainly provided Scripture to refute your false teaching...
     
  17. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    2Cr 12:7¶And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
     
  18. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    Wouldn't that be comparable to God allowing satan to test Job? Nothing can happen without the permissive will of God.
     
  19. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of Course, but the thorn still came from satan. Satan couldn't touch Job until God let him.

    32
    aggeloV
    aggelos
    ang'-el-os
    from aggello (probably derived from agw - ago 71; compare 34) (to bring tidings); a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:--angel, messenger.

    4566
    Satan
    Satan
    sat-an'
    of Hebrew origin (satan 7854); Satan, i.e. the devil:--Satan. Compare SatanaV - Satanas 4567.

    Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

    Just my opinion, of course I could be wrong, but even the scripture says it was of satan. I don't know if it was sin or not though, but being it came from satan, there is a good chance it was the temptation of sin, it could of been Paul's persecutions, enemies, troubles in the flesh for serving God. Could of been many things to discourage him from continuing on in the "word", or as Moses "look what we did".
     
    #99 Brother Bob, Jul 14, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 14, 2007
  20. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, what I meant by saying that there is no such thing as a carnal Christian is that someone cannot be genuinely converted to Christ without being born again. This changes the person's objectives and actions. While they will continue to sin they will repent and return to the Master. I'm saying that a carnal Christian meaning someone who doesn't undergo a radical change in their life which makes Christ their Lord and Savior isn't a Christian at all.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...