The OP the person who started this thread!

Please read the posts in order, the one above is the one I reply to. IF you want to make a new thread, on a different topic then do so.

At Peace said:

Who are you "replying" to?

Click to expand...

At Peace said:

You are being hyper- focused.
Cussing and swearing were simple, over the top, examples of disputation among brethren.
I suppose that I could have used "eating with Gentiles" as an example instead. Or, "is baptism essential to remaining in the light".
Or, "is the gift of tongues given to all recipients of the Holy Ghost"?
If part of a congregation holds with the "No eating with Gentiles" sect, the anti-group will be offended by them; And the group who feels there is nothing wrong with eating with the "heathen" will be an offense to the "No Gentiles" sect.
Too many "leaders" were allowing differences to fester instead of declaring what was correct...by the Spirit of God.
Salt water and fresh...from the same spigot.

Click to expand...

No I'm not that was what James was writing about. He was just being plain. You can have your own interpretation but dont try to make his letter about disputes over doctrine when it wasnt.

A different letter in NT talked about that. Galatians.

If you want to write your own letter to the church than do so here but just make a new thread for that! As for being offensive, well, some people can be offended by the gospel even. Which is weird because the gospel blesses people not curses them.

John warned about the anti-christ...there will always be someone who is anti-Jesus at some point sometimes not even realising they are. But generally IMHO its only evil if they deliberately refusing Jesus not just perhaps misunderstanding Him.

Ok lets just declare what is correct. Atpeace can see where you getting at, which is good, its edifying.
I can also see what Bac is saying.

I am uncomfortable with people claiming that Paul and Peter sinned after conversion.
Also I think some people make little things they do into sins when they are not, it could be just a different way of seeing it, but then maybe ignore the huge sin staring them in the face. Motes in peoples eyes perhaps?

For example, maye theres a pastor who appears to do everything correctly at church but then goes home to watch porn. He makes little things he does out to be sins like maybe not greeting everyone in church or maybe..not contributing to the church potluck by saying its ok Jesus forgives you while totally ignoring the big sin or abomination he is practicising.

Sins that are sins to us..may not be sins to other people because they are comfortable or familiar with them? But what does God say? Some of us want to point out the sins in other people all the time while ignoring our own and so not do anything about them. Cos if we continue in sinnning we arent really following Jesus are we? Our mouths could be opening and closing singing all these great worship songs and talking about Him but our hearts could be far from him.

When we do sin....

Why would we do sin. I have difficulty understanding this...if we apply the blood of Jesus correctly, he takes away our sin so we wont sin again. Maybe some people just havent learned how to apply it, cos if youve repented of something you dont go back the same way. Maybe you didnt close the door behind you! You follow Jesus AWAY from evil and NOT into temptation.

I was thinking about someone saying something about a store discount, well, if that was someone was greedy or convetous, and repented of it, they would NOT go back to that store again. It might be that they completely give up the need to acquire more possessions and be thankful for what they already have. Or even give away their possessions.

Lets see what Zaccheus did, he confessed he kept extra money from tax collecting that wasnt his, well guess what he did after meeting Jesus...he paid everyone back!

Lanolin said:

The OP the person who started this thread!

Please read the posts in order, the one above is the one I reply to. IF you want to make a new thread, on a different topic then do so.

Click to expand...

If you answer a post after using the "reply" button, your addressee will be shown with your reply.

Lanolin said:

Ok lets just declare what is correct. Atpeace can see where you getting at, which is good, its edifying.
I can also see what Bac is saying.

I am uncomfortable with people claiming that Paul and Peter sinned after conversion.
Also I think some people make little things they do into sins when they are not, it could be just a different way of seeing it, but then maybe ignore the huge sin staring them in the face. Motes in peoples eyes perhaps?

For example, maye theres a pastor who appears to do everything correctly at church but then goes home to watch porn. He makes little things he does out to be sins like maybe not greeting everyone in church or maybe..not contributing to the church potluck by saying its ok Jesus forgives you while totally ignoring the big sin or abomination he is practicising.

Sins that are sins to us..may not be sins to other people because they are comfortable or familiar with them? But what does God say? Some of us want to point out the sins in other people all the time while ignoring our own and so not do anything about them. Cos if we continue in sinnning we arent really following Jesus are we? Our mouths could be opening and closing singing all these great worship songs and talking about Him but our hearts could be far from him.

Click to expand...

I use 1 John 5:17 to define sin..."All unrighteousness is sin:"

At Peace said:

I use 1 John 5:17 to define sin..."All unrighteousness is sin:"

Click to expand...

Ok maybed different people have their own definitions on what sin is. Your argument is not with me.

Some people like to think they are right all the time..even when they are wrong. Everyone is right in their own eyes.

That verse does talk about a sin that is not unto death, so you ought to pray and ask life for your brother as in the previous verse that says he is sinning.

1 Cor 3:1; And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
1 Cor 3:2; I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,
1 Cor 3:3; for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
1 Cor 3:4; For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?
1 Cor 3:5; What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one.
1 Cor 3:6; I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.
1 Cor 3:7; So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.
1 Cor 3:8; Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
1 Cor 3:9; For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

The Bible talks about different stages of Christians maturity. 1 Jn speaks of children young men and fathers,
Not necessary their age, but rather their maturity as Christians. In the passage above, Paul is admonishing these "men".
Even though they are men, they are "infants" in Christ. Why does Paul say that about them? Because they are
arguing and bickering over who to follow. These aren't unbelievers. They are called "brethren", they are also called
infant.. "in Christ". They are called "fellow workers" and finally they are called "God's field and God's building".

Being a Christian doesn't mean you have to be perfect. You should strive to be certainly. We don't have a license to sin
freely. But on the other hand, we don't lose our salvation just because we've sinned.

Gal 2:11; But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
Gal 2:12; For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.
Gal 2:13; The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.
Gal 2:14; But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, "If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

Paul says he "opposed Peter" because Peter was condemned. Peter considered himself too good to eat with the Gentiles.
It says he "used to" eat with them, but then starting withdrawing from them. Even Barnabas started doing this.
When did Paul have this discussion with Peter? Before they were saved? No. Paul (who was Saul) was trying to kill
them, not encourage and admonish them. Paul goes on to say...

Gal 2:15; "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles;
Gal 2:16; nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.
Gal 2:17; "But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be!
Gal 2:18; "For if I rebuild what I have once destroyed, I prove myself to be a transgressor.

Peter and Paul weren't "seeking to be justified in Christ" before they knew Jesus. In fact this chapter starts off saying...

Gal 2:1; Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also.

Pauls "conversion" didn't happen until after Jesus had already ascended into heaven. This "argument" between Paul and Peter
happened at least 14 years after that. Peter received the baptism of the Holy Spirit less than 4 years after he was picked by Jesus to follow.

My kjv doesnt say condemned it says blamed.

But then reading Peters letter he gave a reason why he wasnt eating with the gentiles in 1 peter 4:1-6 esp verse 3-4

Pauls mission was agreed toward the gentiles and peters was toward the jews (the circumcised). Its not because Peter was snobbing them, Peter already knew God had made all foods clean cos of the vision of the beasts God gave him. Its just he wasnt going to eat with unsaved gentiles, and he gave a reason for that.

Looks like another of those misunderstandings. Im sure Peter would have eaten with the saved gentiles, otherwise Timothy would be having supper by himself..

Gal 2:14; But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Paul "blamed" Peter, because he was being a hypocrite and not "walking uprightly".

......

1 Pet 4:3; For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
1 Pet 4:4; Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:

Many times in the Bible.. when it says "Gentiles" it simply means sinners. Obviously "all" Gentiles don't walk in lust, drunkenness, and idolatries.
But even here.... It doesn't say you don't sin at all... it says you don't sin "to the same excess".

........

Just because someone commits a sin doesn't mean they aren't saved.

1 Jn 2:1; My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Um think your interpretation is a bit skewed BAC it seems you want to allow some sin into your life and say well everything we do is sinful anyway, even eating and breathing.

Peter was actually not eating and drinking with them at all at that point. That's not to say he never ate or drank. He just wasnt going to their parties.

Also that passage in 1 John does not just stop at that verse.

Lanolin said:

Ok maybed different people have their own definitions on what sin is. Your argument is not with me.

Some people like to think they are right all the time..even when they are wrong. Everyone is right in their own eyes.

That verse does talk about a sin that is not unto death, so you ought to pray and ask life for your brother as in the previous verse that says he is sinning.

Click to expand...

I pray every day for the souls of those I deal with.

B-A-C said:

1 Cor 3:1; And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
1 Cor 3:2; I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,
1 Cor 3:3; for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
1 Cor 3:4; For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?
1 Cor 3:5; What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one.
1 Cor 3:6; I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.
1 Cor 3:7; So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.
1 Cor 3:8; Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
1 Cor 3:9; For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

The Bible talks about different stages of Christians maturity. 1 Jn speaks of children young men and fathers,
Not necessary their age, but rather their maturity as Christians. In the passage above, Paul is admonishing these "men".
Even though they are men, they are "infants" in Christ. Why does Paul say that about them? Because they are
arguing and bickering over who to follow. These aren't unbelievers. They are called "brethren", they are also called
infant.. "in Christ". They are called "fellow workers" and finally they are called "God's field and God's building".

Being a Christian doesn't mean you have to be perfect. You should strive to be certainly. We don't have a license to sin
freely. But on the other hand, we don't lose our salvation just because we've sinned.
.

Click to expand...

There may be differing stages of maturity, but everybody reborn of God's seed cannot bring forth evil fruit. (1 John 3:9)
Being a Christian DOES mean you CAN BE perfect...as Jesus commanded in Matt 5:48.

B-A-C said:

.......

Just because someone commits a sin doesn't mean they aren't saved.

Click to expand...

It does mean they are not born of God's seed. (1 John 3:9)
Do you really think that the children of the devil "will be saved"?

Lanolin said:

I am uncomfortable with people claiming that Paul and Peter sinned after conversion.

Click to expand...

Only speculation, but I thought of Romans 7:15 when I read your post:

" I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do."

It's quite possible he could have messed up a time or two and repented. Do note that I am only guessing this, and I could very well be wrong.

Another point of interest being the "thorn in the flesh" in 2 Corinthians 12. Paul doesn't exactly specify what it is. Whether it's a sin he could have been struggling with, or if it was something else entirely. I don't know.

At Peace said:

It does mean they are not born of God's seed. (1 John 3:9)
Do you really think that the children of the devil "will be saved"?

Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about that. Look at King David. Not only did he have an affair with Bathsheba, he facilitated the murder of her husband Uriah by having him put on the front lines of battle. Not only that, but Uriah unknowingly carried his death warrant by delivering that letter to Joab.

Psalm 51 is one of the most heart wrenching psalms to read, but at the same time, it shows that our God is merciful. Under Mosaic law, David (and Uriah) should have been killed for adultery. But God saw his repentant heart and said "took away his sin".

Doesn't mean there weren't consequences. But if God can have mercy on an adulterous king so much that He refers to David as a man after Hos own heart, then he can pick up a sinner like me, dust me off, and put me back on the narrow road.

Gabriel Kinson said:

Only speculation, but I thought of Romans 7:15 when I read your post:

" I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do."

It's quite possible he could have messed up a time or two and repented. Do note that I am only guessing this, and I could very well be wrong.

Another point of interest being the "thorn in the flesh" in 2 Corinthians 12. Paul doesn't exactly specify what it is. Whether it's a sin he could have been struggling with, or if it was something else entirely. I don't know.

Click to expand...

Paul was talking about what he was like before conversion, remember he said he was the chief sinner.
Paul did specify what the thorn in the flesh was..a messenger from satan to buffet him from becoming too proud.

My thoughts are when paul was a sinner before conversion pride or exalting himself was his main sin. Remember he was a Pharisee and Pharisees were religious elite know-it-alls. So God in his wisdom didnt take that thorn away to keep Paul from sinning.

And Paul knew this and the great thing is he was humble enought to admit he was a sinner before he knew Jesus. He said he counted everything he knew before as dung. He also said he did things out of ignorance and unbelief.

We can relate to him in so many ways because that was what did too before we knew Jesus, before Jesus set us free.

Gabriel Kinson said:

I'm not too sure about that. Look at King David. Not only did he have an affair with Bathsheba, he facilitated the murder of her husband Uriah by having him put on the front lines of battle. Not only that, but Uriah unknowingly carried his death warrant by delivering that letter to Joab.

Psalm 51 is one of the most heart wrenching psalms to read, but at the same time, it shows that our God is merciful. Under Mosaic law, David (and Uriah) should have been killed for adultery. But God saw his repentant heart and said "took away his sin".

Doesn't mean there weren't consequences. But if God can have mercy on an adulterous king so much that He refers to David as a man after Hos own heart, then he can pick up a sinner like me, dust me off, and put me back on the narrow road.

Click to expand...

Only difference Jesus was the only one begotten of God. David wasnt born again in the OT. David wasnt actually Gods only begotten son. He was of Abrahams seed but unlike Jesus wasnt divine.But yes, if God can have mercy on David he can have mercy on us if we repent. The thing is, Davids heart was broken and contrite. But there are people whos hearts are hard as steel who wont ever be sorry or repent of their wickedness. While thats disturbing to us, that is reality for many and that why hell is enlarged. Hell was never meant for people though, it was meant for the devil and his demons.

Jesus doesnt want anyone to go there.

Gabriel Kinson said:

Psalm 51 is one of the most heart wrenching psalms to read, but at the same time, it shows that our God is merciful. Under Mosaic law, David (and Uriah) should have been killed for adultery. But God saw his repentant heart and said "took away his sin".
.

Click to expand...

Why do you think Uriah should have been killed for adultery?

At Peace said:

Why do you think Uriah should have been killed for adultery?

Click to expand...

That was an oversight on my part. It should have been Bathsheba. Sorry about that.

Gabriel Kinson said:

That was an oversight on my part. It should have been Bathsheba. Sorry about that.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification..

bump - because of another thread.