Do you have to repent to be forgiven

[bibleapologist]

Odell,

Well I think I know why we havent heard back from BA in a while. He has updated his web site quite a bit. And I must say it is looking good. He has got a forum page now. I think everyone should know this and check it out. Maybe some time in the future I can post on his site where he has contridicted himself here on this site.

I apologize for being away for a couple of days.

You are right Odell and thank you for the compliment on how my website is looking. The reason for my being away is I have been spending alot of time updating my website. The forums and the chat system are done (that was a lot of work!). New additions to the blog, and several new articles. I had let the website go a little bit as I was spending alot of time here on these forums.

I have added an article that is pertinent to this discussion (or at least the original topic)… Easy Believism Defended.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Philthy,

Bible Apologist has made multiple claims which - IMO - have been solidly refuted. Here is a partial tally:

* Separation of salvation vs reward in heaven. BA offered Rev 11:18 as proof text, but it says nothing regarding quantification of reward. See post 104
* Repentance is only possible if you are in a state of grace, ie "is the fruit of salvation". BA offered Tertullian as proof yet that quote said that salvation was the fruit of repentance. See post 117
* Good works are merely evidence of our faith. This seems to contradict Rom 12:1, James 2:24, et al. Rom12:1 specifically says that good works are "a sacrifice (which is )holy and pleasing to God"
* Sin cannot separate you from Heaven if you have at some point believed in Christ. Paul in 1Cor is abundantly clear that various sins - adultery, murder, etc - when persisted in unrepentantly - deprive one of the kindgom of God.
* The only thing we will ever be judged on is whether we accepted or rejected Christ. Such a contention ignores all the Scripture which speaks of the final judgement as a judgement of deeds - both OT and NT
* Sinning is not rejecting Christ(!) Sin is a stumbling block, Christ is the Way. Sin is a lie - Christ is the Truth. Sin leads to death - Christ is Life. See post 132

Thank you for summarizing our disagreements.

Point 1. There is a separation between salvation vs. reward in heaven. There is a clear distinction between the “great white throne judgement” and the “judgement seat of Christ”. You have no scriptural basis for claiming these two accounts in Revelation are one in the same.

Point 2. I never said Repentance is only possible if you are in a state of grace… but a godly sorrow is only possible under those conditions… which is a true repentance (not after a worldly sort). Repentance is only expected “after” salvation (see my arguments comparing repentance with circumcision).

Point 3. I don’t understand your argument that a good work being a sacrifice is contradictory to that sacrifice being evidence of our faith… please explain your position.

Point 4. That is OSAS and that to comment on that would be opening a can of worms. Let’s consider a new thread.

Point 5. Again you have confused the “great white throne judgement” with the “judgement seat of Christ”.

Point 6. You have not explicated why sin is the rejection of Christ… you have only explained that sin is “contradictory” to what Christ IS. Christ IS the word of God… The commandment is the Word of God… Sin is a rejection of the commandment (the law)… So, in that sense, in the Old Testament to sin was to reject Christ… But Christ (as the law) died for us. Therefore we are not under the law any longer, but under Christ…

"Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. "

But it seems Catholics desire to be under the law (of which we were made free). To which Paul also addresses in Galatians 4:21 - 31.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[Eden]

Bibleapologist, you’re still promoting your Baptist errors? I’m disappointed. You’re version of theology has been roundly refuted across four pages of this thread. Well, someday when you are open to letting the Holy Spirit guide you to the truth, let us know.

By the way, since you are improving your website, I would expect you to correct the paragraph which I objected to ages ago in which you imply that St. Augustine created the Church’s doctrine of “Original Sin” in the 5th century. As you now know, St. Augustine’s understanding of “original sin” meaning we are born carrying the* guilt* of Adam’s sin, is not a Catholic teaching. I would expect you to have the integrity to fix that error and explain that the Church teaches that we are born with a wounded nature, but are not totally depraved.

 

[Odell]

Philthy,
Point 6. You have not explicated why sin is the rejection of Christ… you have only explained that sin is “contradictory” to what Christ IS. Christ IS the word of God… The commandment is the Word of God…

If you willfully do something to contradict Christ you are sinning.

Sin is a rejection of the commandment (the law)… So, in that sense, in the Old Testament to sin was to reject Christ… But Christ (as the law) died for us. Therefore we are not under the law any longer, but under Christ…

Christ did not come to abolish the law but came to fullfill.

I hope someone here can give you the catholic teaching on this better than me. But I do know Christ fullfills he did not abolish the law.

But it seems Catholics desire to be under the law (of which we were made free).

Catholics desire to do what Jesus commands (IN which Jesus came to show and make it possible)

I have posted this before and I will again because I do not think you got it the first time.

In fact those so called rules are not rules at all to a well formed conscience.

[Christopher West Book Theology of the body for beginners pg 40]
"Most people look at Christian morality-especially sexual morality-as an oppressive list of rules to follow. How far this misunderstanding is from the living morality proclaimed by Christ! The Gospel dosen’t give us more rules to follow. The Gospel is meant to change our hearts so that we no longer need the rules(see cathichsm 1968) To the degree that we experince this change of heart we experience freedom from the law(Rom7;Gal 5) not freedom to break the law; freedom to fullfill it."
"Heres an example of what freedom from the law looks like: Do you have any desire to murder your best friend? This may seem like an odd question, but it actually demonstrate the point. Assuming you do not, then you dont need that comandment. Thou shall not murder thy best friend. Because you have no desire to break it. To this extent you are free from the law. In other words, you don’t experience this law as an imposition because your heart conforms to it.

before original sin the human heart comformed to Gods. that is what Christ came back for to show us how to conform our will to his. and the Church is there to help

one last thing
When we allow Chist into our hearts we no longer need the law because we no longer desire to break them. What law do you still need? What teachings of the Church still feel like a burdan or impostion to you? Perhaps the problem isn’t the law or the Church, but with your “hardness of heart” dont throw away the law surender your disordered desires to Christ and let him transform them.

 

[Odell]

Philthy and Odell,
Premise 1b or 2b are not valid biblical premises so your conclusion 2 is not justifiable.

this is not our conclusion John we thought it was one of yours. Have you not said before that someone who lets say performs mass murder that they could not be saved? If this is true than sin does have different degrees. So is this what you believe. If someone came in your church and blew himself up along with everyone else was he saved or not?

 

[bibleapologist]

Odell,

Have you not said before that someone who lets say performs mass murder that they could not be saved? If this is true than sin does have different degrees. So is this what you believe. If someone came in your church and blew himself up along with everyone else was he saved or not?

Absolutely not… that is what the Catholics on this thread have said, but I have asserted that a person who did such a thing could very well be saved… they could just as well not be saved.

As a person grows in grace and admonition of the Lord they begin a process of becoming Christ-like. This does not happen immediately, but with the work of the Holy Spirit and the person’s submission to the will of the Holy Spirit it happens as a process.

This does not mean that the person in question is “being saved”… the belief that this process equates with “being saved” can only end in a belief that a person must be perfect to be saved. We know that is not the case, as no-one can reach sinless perfection while remaining in these sinful bodies (Romans 7).

Therefore, if anyone is EVER to be saved… it can only logically be that they must also remain a sinner until they are “changed” into a glorified body.

There is no other logical conclusion.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Eden,

By the way, since you are improving your website, I would expect you to correct the paragraph which I objected to ages ago in which you imply that St. Augustine created the Church’s doctrine of “Original Sin” in the 5th century.

I understand you objected to my assertion concerning Augustine and his teachings concerning “original sin”… but so far, you are the only Catholic I have heard that believes that (except Notworthy).

Before I amend that article, I will have to research the issue more.

If you would like to help me by providing some references I will be glad to look at them. But, as far as I can tell (by the Catechism, and other Catholics) the Catholic church teaches that Original sin is an Actual sin (ccc #289).

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Odell,

If you willfully do something to contradict Christ you are sinning.

Yes, but to sin is not to reject the gospel.

Catholics desire to do what Jesus commands (IN which Jesus came to show and make it possible)

Yes, we as Christians SHOULD have a desire to obey Christ Christ said “if you love me, keep my commandments”. But that is not the gospel… to keep His commandments. This gospel is to believe in Christ.

In fact those so called rules are not rules at all to a well formed conscience.

Yes, to someone who truly loves the Lord… any rule is not an imposition but an opportunity to make yourself more pleasing to God.

When we allow Chist into our hearts we no longer need *the law because we no longer desire to break them. What law do you still need? What teachings of the Church still feel like a burdan or impostion to you? Perhaps the problem isn’t the law or the Church, but with your “hardness of heart” dont throw away the law surender your disordered desires to Christ and let him transform them.

Yes, Odell. We no longer have a desire to break God’s laws in our hearts… but our flesh desires to serve itself… therefore we sin. As a born again Christian indwelt with the Holy Spirit our heart’s desire should be to grow closer to Him… but that only happens if we are walking in the Spirit. If we are walking in the flesh we are only attempting to fulfil the desires of our flesh, and we don’t have a desire to please God.

You understand all this I see. What you don’t understand yet, is that no-one can seek God except by the Spirit of God.

“1Co 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.”

We cannot know anything of God except it is revealed to us by the Spirit of God.

"1Co 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. "

Just as Peter did, we cannot call Jesus Lord except by the Spirit of God.

Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

If we have the Holy Spirit… we can KNOW that we are SEALED unto the day of redemption… that means we who are indwelt with the Holy Spirit will never lose our salvation.

Conclusion:

• If a man seeks seeks to know God, and build a relationship with Him, it is a result of that man’s perspective which is gained by the Holy Spirit.
• If a man is indwelt with the Holy Spirit, then that man is sealed unto the day of redemptioin, and according to Eph. 1:5 he has been “adopted” to the family of God.
• If a man is being led by the Spirit of God in a manner which I have described above… that man is saved.
• It cannot be said though, that a man’s actions negate a possibility of those intentions (Romans 7).

Repentance then, is twofold:

1. To change our minds concerning the methodology of salvation… to accept Christ rather than obedience to the law.
   1a. This change of mind occurs before salvation.
2. To change our actions and intentions by prompting from the Holy Spirit (to become more Christ-like).
   2a. This change occurs after salvation.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[Philthy]

Philthy
Thank you for summarizing our disagreements.

Point 1. There is a separation between salvation vs. reward in heaven. There is a clear distinction between the “great white throne judgement” and the “judgement seat of Christ”. You have no scriptural basis for claiming these two accounts in Revelation are one in the same.

John - I know it is difficult to keep it all together, but this is sad. YOU brought up the revelations quote to justify your claim that salvation and reward in heaven were separate and that there was a quantification of heavenly reward as a function of good works. I didnt bring it up - you did. The quote that you repeatedly threw at us said absolutely nothing about a quantification of reward - you were simply mistaken and I pointed that out to you. The quote referenced 3 separate classes of saved people - apostles, prophets and something else, but never once mentioned some separate degree of reward based on works. Get your argments together or get over it but dont pretend that I am confusing anything.
ba:

Point 2. I never said Repentance is only possible if you are in a state of grace… but a godly sorrow is only possible under those conditions… which is a true repentance (not after a worldly sort). Repentance is only expected “after” salvation (see my arguments comparing repentance with circumcision).

Now you are squirming. What you said was that Repentence is the fruit of salvation and that being saved comes first. You said this because you need to believe this to believe that there is no need to repent once one is already saved. And this only holds together if you beleive in OSAS so that no sin can jeapardize your salvation. Therefore why repent? Are you up to speed? To support your view you then threw out a quote by Tertullian which you claimed said that repentence is the fruit of salvation when, in fact, he said EXACTLY the opposite- he said that salvation is a fruit of repentance. I exposed your error and you have not mustered the courage to admit you were wrong in quoting him.
ba:

Point 3. I don’t understand your argument that a good work being a sacrifice is contradictory to that sacrifice being evidence of our faith… please explain your position.

That is because you are not very careful with words. The claim being addressed was that good works are MERELY evidence of our faith - not simply whether they are evidence of faith. They are not MERELY that, they are also ACTUALLY holy and pleasing to God as well as being evidence of faith. See the difference now? I appreciate your honesty in admitting you were confused.
ba:
Point 4. That is OSAS and that to comment on that would be opening a can of worms. Let’s consider a new thread.

Point 5. Again you have confused the “great white throne judgement” with the “judgement seat of Christ”.

I doubt that since I have no idea what either is. More probably you dont have a satisfactory response to what has been presented and the introduction of a new ambiguity seems comforting to you.
ba:
Point 6. You have not explicated why sin is the rejection of Christ…
John
www.gideonsword.net

If you wish to follow Him John you must deny your selfish, sinful desires, and take up your cross of perseverance in desiring to not sin through selfish conceit, and to follow Him in love.

 

[Odell]

Odell,
Absolutely not… that is what the Catholics on this thread have said, but I have asserted that a person who did such a thing could very well be saved… they could just as well not be saved.

There not saved until they are in heaven. I would say that they are less likely to be there than you and me especially if they are unrepentant. But we leave that up to God John.

As a person grows in grace and admonition of the Lord they begin a process of becoming Christ-like. This does not happen immediately, but with the work of the Holy Spirit and the person’s submission to the will of the Holy Spirit it happens as a process.

Yes but if you do not remain in Gods kindness you will be CUT OFF. (Rom 11:22-23) and you start all over again. But guess how we become apart of again we REPENT.

We know that is not the case, as no-one can reach sinless perfection while remaining in these sinful bodies (Romans 7).

Actually the moment after I repent of my sins I am free of all sins. I am perfectly sinless but usually not for long
You do believe this right?

Therefore, if anyone is EVER to be saved… it can only logically be that they must also remain a sinner until they are “changed” into a glorified body.

no where does the bible say we MUST remain a sinner John, it says the complete opposite

There is no other logical conclusion.

you think your conclusion was logical???

Odell,
Yes, but to sin is not to reject the gospel.

That is a bunch of hog wash. Could you please make this logical?

Yes, we as Christians SHOULD have a desire to obey Christ Christ said “if you love me, keep my commandments”. But that is not the gospel… to keep His commandments. This gospel is to believe in Christ.

If that is the case than your bible would only consist of (Jn 3:16)

You understand all this I see. What you don’t understand yet, is that no-one can seek God except by the Spirit of God.

I promise you John I understand this completly and so does everyone else on this page. I cant think of the verse but the bible says faith is a gift of the spirit. That is one reason why I do not Judge someone who does not yet believe but I try to help revel to those my faith and pray that the spirit will work threw me and help convert. I have a atheist at work. But the very same verse says that good deeds is a gift of the same spirit. And I can see the spirit of God work threw many people who do not even know Jesus. I hope you see the spirit of God amonst most Catholics.

Could anyone help me find the verse?

 

[bibleapologist]

Philthy,

YOU brought up the revelations quote to justify your claim that salvation and reward in heaven were separate and that there was a quantification of heavenly reward as a function of good works. I didnt bring it up - you did. The quote that you repeatedly threw at us said absolutely nothing about a quantification of reward - you were simply mistaken and I pointed that out to you. The quote referenced 3 separate classes of saved people - apostles, prophets and something else, but never once mentioned some separate degree of reward based on works. Get your argments together or get over it but dont pretend that I am confusing anything.

My point 1 in post #168 states that there is are two distinct judgements in Revelation. Revelation 20:12 clearly states that at the Great White Throne the people will be judged “out of the book of life”, and “according to their works”.

If that is the case, and that is all there is to the story, then none of us will ever enter heaven because we have all sinned and come short of the Glory of God (Romans 3:23). But there is more to the story… There is apparently another part of that same “book of Life” that contains the names of certain people who will not be judged according to their works (Rev. 20:15).

These people are those who are saved, are “in Christ”, and have been “born again” of the Spirit of God. Directly after the account of the “Great White Throne” judgement, we find in Rev. 21 a description of the Resurrection of those who’s names are written in that Book of Life. Rev. 21:3 describes that the tabernacle of God is with men; meaning that God lives within men. This is a reference to 2 Samuel 7:5-17 as the reason God would not allow David to built a tabernacle.

The “Judgement Seat of Christ” is a completely different judgement reserved for those who have escaped the “Great White Throne” judgement, and who are in Christ. This account can be found in…

"2Co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad. "

“Rom 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.”

There is obviously a different judgment seat, with a different judgment pertaining only to those who are saved. John gives us a perspective on this in Revelation 11:18 where not “ALL” are being judged… but a selected group are being judged and receiving reward… this verse specifically names these people as “them which fear thy name”. The account of this judgment by John comes directly after the 7th trumpet is blown, and we read that…

"Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become [the kingdoms] of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. "

These voices are those of the “true church” who are taken up in the “rapture”. And they are the ones of verse 18 who receive reward.

John
www.swordforums.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Philthy,

Now you are squirming. What you said was that Repentence is the fruit of salvation and that being saved comes first. You said this because you need to believe this to believe that there is no need to repent once one is already saved. And this only holds together if you beleive in OSAS so that no sin can jeapardize your salvation. Therefore why repent? Are you up to speed? To support your view you then threw out a quote by Tertullian which you claimed said that repentence is the fruit of salvation when, in fact, he said EXACTLY the opposite- he said that salvation is a fruit of repentance. I exposed your error and you have not mustered the courage to admit you were wrong in quoting him.

Here is my post that this was an answer to:

Point 2. I never said Repentance is only possible if you are in a state of grace… but a godly sorrow is only possible under those conditions… which is a true repentance (not after a worldly sort). Repentance is only expected “after” salvation (see my arguments comparing repentance with circumcision).

Again, like I have said numerous times in this thread… Repentance does not ALWAYS mean repentance of sin.

The very term “repentance” means to change your mind about something. To repent BEFORE you are saved only means that you have changed your mind about how a person is saved. I have shared the gospel with hundreds of people, and I can tell you that most of them were secure in what they “thought” was the way to heaven… but many of them, when they heard the truth they changed their minds… they repented and believed the truth.

That means that some of them had to turn away from the notion that Mohammed would save them, or that thier good works would save them, or that their church membership status would save them… and yes, some of them have repented of the notion that “turning away from sin has saved them”.

John
www.swordforums.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Philthy,

I doubt that since I have no idea what either is. More probably you dont have a satisfactory response to what has been presented and the introduction of a new ambiguity seems comforting to you.

If anything that I post is amiguous, it is not a result of the content of my statements, it is the result of your pre-conceived notions contending with the truth.

If you wish to follow Him John you must deny your selfish, sinful desires, and take up your cross of perseverance in desiring to not sin through selfish conceit, and to follow Him in love.

Let me ask you this… If we, within ourselves have the power to deny selfishness and sinful desires, persevere in desiring not to sin, and to follow God in love… why would we need Christ? Like I have asked before, according to this teaching, what purpose does the Blood have?

Christ is the Lamb of God. The spotless lamb of the Old Testament was not something man made, but something only God could create. It was an atonement for sin, that man had nothing to do with. That is why Abel’s sacrifice was more pleasing to God than Cain’s… God is the one who supplies Abel’s sacrifice, He gave it life, He nurtured it, He made it grow.

Any atonement for sin that comes from man is not only not acceptable to God, but God holds it in distain. And that includes your repentive acts, and your intentions to do right.

God has provided the sacrifice… why don’t you just accept that sacrifice and stop attempting to circumvent it by attempting to offer something better? That is what Cain did, and he was severely reproved for it.

"Gen 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together. "

John
www.swordforums.net

John
www.swordforums.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Odell,

Yes but if you do not remain in Gods kindness you will be CUT OFF. (Rom 11:22-23) and you start all over again. But guess how we become apart of again we REPENT.

One being cut off in Romans 11:22 is not Paul speaking of a person losing thier salvation, but rather that person being “excommunicated” from fellowship with the local church. Paul refers to this same type of person in 1 Corinthians 5:5…

“1Co 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”

Actually the moment after I repent of my sins I am free of all sins. I am perfectly sinless but usually not for long
You do believe this right?

I don’t believe your sins are covered by confessing them… they are covered by the Blood of Christ. But to confess (admit they are wrong) your sins, initiates the rebuilding of the relationship that was damaged by sin.

no where does the bible say we MUST remain a sinner John, it says the complete opposite

That’s not what I said. I said it “can only be logical that they must remain a sinner” until they are glorified. According to Romans 7 we are bound to the law of sin and death in our flesh… but when we are resurrected we will be “changed” (1 Cor. 15:51) we will take on a glorified body which is incorruptible and will never die.

That is a bunch of hog wash. Could you please make this logical?

I said, “to sin is not to reject the gospel.” To be saved according to the gospel is to be “born again” and to be “adopted” into the family of God (Romans 8:15).

That means that we are “God’s sons and daughters”. Since the family is an illustration of God (1 Cor. 7:14). I will use an illustration of my relationship with my son to explain. If my son was disobedient and didn’t clean his room when I told him to, that act of disobedience would damage the relationship that we have. We cannot have a close relationship because when he sinned (disobeyed) he immediately knew he could not approach me with the same confidence he had before he sinned.

His disobedience in no way negates his inclusion in our family, nor does it make him any less my child… but it does mean that we are not Father and Son like we should be. In the same way, when we sin we separate ourselves from God but that does not in any way negate our position as a child of God.

If that is the case than your bible would only consist of (Jn 3:16)

So, are you saying a legitimate Bible would have John 3:16 removed? If there seems to be a discrepancy between passages in the Bible, we should make an effort to find out how these are rectified… that is what I have done, and am trying to show you. The Bible does not contradict itself, so anything that seems like a contradiction is only a result of our misunderstanding.

John
www.swordforums.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Odell,

I promise you John I understand this completly and so does everyone else on this page. I cant think of the verse but the bible says faith is a gift of the spirit. That is one reason why I do not Judge someone who does not yet believe but I try to help revel to those my faith and pray that the spirit will work threw me and help convert. I have a atheist at work. But the very same verse says that good deeds is a gift of the same spirit. And I can see the spirit of God work threw many people who do not even know Jesus. I hope you see the spirit of God amonst most Catholics.

The verse you are looking for is…

“Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.”

The fruits of the Spirit are those things which the Spirit of God living in us causes us to be. Because we (if you are born again) have the Spirit of God, the Spirit causes us to take on Godly attributes. Paul further explains this in the next verse.

“Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.”

When you accept Christ and His payment for your sins, you effectually give your past affections and lusts over to be destroyed in the flesh. And we serve God in the Spirit.

"Rom 6:5-8 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him

John
www.swordforums.net

 

[Odell]

Philthy,
If that is the case, and that is all there is to the story, then none of us will ever enter heaven because we have all sinned and come short of the Glory of God (Romans 3:23). But there is more to the story… There is apparently another part of that same “book of Life” that contains the names of certain people who will not be judged according to their works (Rev. 20:15).

We will ALL be judge according to what we do and have not done.

(MT 25:31-46) “When the Son of Man come un his glory and all the angels with him he will sit upon his glorious throne and ALL the nations will be assebled before him.” And how where they judged on what they have done and have not done all of us including YOU will be judged on what you do and dont do.

The “Judgement Seat of Christ” is a completely different judgement reserved for those who have escaped the “Great White Throne” judgement, and who are in Christ.

will will actually be judged more serverly because we know better John…

"2Co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad. "

AMEN: key word ALL

These voices are those of the “true church” who are taken up in the “rapture”.

Actually the True Church is taken up every day at mass just as the early Christians belived.

(Rev 1:10) " I was called up in spirit on the Lords day"

(Heb 12:21-24) " But you have come to *Mount Zion *and to the city of the living God the heavenly Jersalem and the innumerable angels in FESTAL gathering, and to the assembly of the first born who are enrolled in heaven, and to judge who is God of all and to the spirits of just men made perfect and to Jesus the mediator of a new coevenat and to the sprinkled blood that speacks more gracioulsy that the blood of Abel."

Where did John get called up? to Moint Zion.
“Then I looked and there was the Lamb standing on Mont Zion and with him a hundred and four thousand who had his name written on there forheads.” (those who are enrolled in heaven) Revelation and Hebrews is talking about the same place.

If you really want to understand revelation or anyone reading this I recomend THE LAMS SUPPER by Scott Hahn.

otherwise you are just going to continue to twist revelation and it will really never make since to you. But this book show how it is all about the Mass.

Let me ask you this… If we, within ourselves have the power to deny selfishness and sinful desires, persevere in desiring not to sin, and to follow God in love… why would we need Christ? Like I have asked before, according to this teaching, what purpose does the Blood have?

Do you desire to sin? I dont and it is ONLY because of JESUS

Do you follow God in love? I do and it is ONLY because of JESUS

Any atonement for sin that comes from man is not only not acceptable to God, but God holds it in distain. And that includes your repentive acts, and your intentions to do right.

We dont atone for our own sins!!!
And our intentions to do what is right is not atoneing for what God has already done. It is doing what Gods atonment made possible for us to do and what GOD wants us to be doing.

God has provided the sacrifice… why don’t you just accept that sacrifice and stop attempting to circumvent it by attempting to offer something better?

We dont try to ofer somthing better!!! Why dont YOU just stop trying to tell us to stop doing Gods will because it aint going to happen. SATAN get Behind me:thumbsup:

 

[Odell]

Odell,
One being cut off in Romans 11:22 is not Paul speaking of a person losing thier salvation, but rather that person being “excommunicated” from fellowship with the local church.

Jesus only has ONE Body the CHURCH if you are excommunicated from one you are from all.

I said, “to sin is not to reject the gospel.” To be saved according to the gospel is to be “born again” and to be “adopted” into the family of God (Romans 8:15).

To be saved is to acept the gospel. To reject the gospel that means any of it you are on your way to hell.

We cannot have a close relationship because when he sinned (disobeyed) he immediately knew he could not approach me with the same confidence he had before he sinned.

That is sad I allways approch God with a ton of confidence he is a mercifull God.

So, are you saying a legitimate Bible would have John 3:16 removed?

No I agree with Jn 3:16 but it is not the whole gospel.

 

[Philthy]

Philthy,

My point 1 in post #168 states that there is are two distinct judgements in Revelation. Revelation 20:12 clearly states that at the Great White Throne the people will be judged “out of the book of life”, and “according to their works”.

…John
www.swordforums.net

Bibleapologist: you are clearly not keeping up with your own arguments. I will take you - and anyone else that wishes to see how far you go to avoid admitting when you have made a mistake - through the entire thread on this one little point to demonstrate the impossibility of teaching you anything.

You started the separation of salvation and reward (according to our works) with this claim from Post 68:
ba:

it cannot be denied that there will be “extra” rewards in heaven for those who are faithful. In the passage of scripture that accounts the rapture we see evidence that those saints were given rewards according to their faithfulness…

"Rev 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth. "

To which I responded

philthy:

I see no quantitative separation of reward in this verse. I see a listing of the various people who are the servants of God."

And you chose to reiterate your position with bolding in post 86
ba:

“Rev 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.”

Somewhat exasperated I responded in Post 104 with:

philthy:

Philthy post 104
John I still see no QUANTITATIVE separation of reward in this statement. Please re-read my previous sentence and come to understand why the word QUANTITATIVE was added to it.
When you do you will see that the portion you bolded simply says that God will give reward to his servants. It does not say that MORE (ie quantity) reward will be given to prophets, less to saints and less to those that fear his name.
Your original post was an attempt to justify your contention that a distinction between salvation and reward in Heaven exists, and, as several of us have pointed out more than once, this verse does nothing to support your contention.
Unless you have something better to offer your claim of a separation of salvation and reward remains invalid.

Which you never responded to. I then made a list of several items you neglected in Post 157:

philthy:

Bible Apologist has made multiple claims which - IMO - have been solidly refuted. Here is a partial tally:

1. Separation of salvation vs reward in heaven. BA offered Rev 11:18 as proof text, but it says nothing regarding quantification of reward. See post 104 And you finally responded with this from post 162

ba:

Thank you for summarizing our disagreements.

Point 1. There is a separation between salvation vs. reward in heaven. There is a clear distinction between the “great white throne judgement” and the “judgement seat of Christ”. You have no scriptural basis for claiming these two accounts in Revelation are one in the same.
Only notice how the discussion has morphed away from a defense of the Rev 11:18 verse that you quoted into an invented argument that I claimed two judgement seats are one and the same. How convenient. Now we are off a tangent of the "judgement seat of Christ and “great white throne judgement”. Is that really what we need to be discussing? I dont think so. But if you do, then please have the courtesy to acknowledge that you were mistaken in bringing up Revelations 11:18 in defense of the separation of heaven and reward when you should have been discussing judgement seats. I know you can do it…

 

[Philthy]

Philthy,

Here is my post that this was an answer to:

The post you listed is not at all what my comments were directed towards - I believe you know that. They were directed towards this post -your post 108:

bibleapologist:

Milliardo,
Quote:
But where there is no fear, in like manner there is no amendment; where there is no amendment, repentance is of necessity vain, for it lacks the fruit for which God sowed it; that is, man’s salvation.

As Turtullian so wisely said… the fruit of salvation is repentance. Which is what I have been trying to convey.

John

There it is. What you have been trying to convey is that the “fruit of salvation is repentance” and you cited Tertullian as support. Unfortunately, as I pointed out, Tertullian doesnt say that repentance is the fruit of salvation. He says that repentance without amendment does not bear the fruit of salvation. He is saying that salvation is the fruit of true repentance - which is the reverse of what you are saying.
You cant see that, of course, because you beleive in OSAS and it would never cross your mind to think that one would need to repent to bear the fruit of salvation. Even though we started this thread with Peters advice: "Repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins…"You are simply flat wrong again - but will you admit it and move on? Apparently not, you seem content to ignore the facts and insult my intellect by not simply admitting it.

 

[Odell]

John I have a question.

On another thred and we dont have to go into full detail, but you said those who drink wine can not be a true Christian.

Well do those who steal gum are they true Christians? Is drinking wine any different than stealing gum?