I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[Philthy]

exrc:

Greg,
Paul wrote that the wages of sin was death. His debt to you was death for the wages you earned(sin). Jesus stepped in and paid that debt, FOR, you. God owed Jesus life for obeying the law perfectly, he earned righteousness. However, his mission was to offer YOU, his, righteousness through his death. Therefore, paying your sin debt substitutionarily.

Come home to Jesus Greg!

We welcome you with open arms!

In love, exrc!

Hey exrc-

You did’t respond to my post as to why, if Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross paid once and for all the penalty for your sins, you still need to confess your sins and then continue confessing them as you continue to sin. Haven’t they all been paid already? I’m a little confused.
In addition, you claim that intentional failure to confess your sins as they continue to occurr results in an “eternal consequence” but you didn’t tell me what it was. Please explain!

Phil

John 3:5 …born of water and the holy Spirit…

Titus 3:5 …bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit…

 

[RBushlow]

exrc:

Forsake the whore that you follow.

Are you refering to Jesus Christ and His Church as a whore?

.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

Though this is an obscure passage it is still quite apparent that it is not referring to “souls” who are being kept in a penitentiary-of-suffering called "Purgatory, " but rather just as it states, a “prison” designed to lock up disobedient, rebellious “spirits.”

The passage in context says that Jesus "died for sins (plural) once for all, the Just for the unjust, having been put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit (or, Spirit) in which he made “proclamation” to those “spirits” now in prison. The word “proclamation” is the Greek word “kerussein,” which means to “proclaim,” and therefore should not be interpreted as “preached” (Gr. euangelizein, meaning “to herald good tidings,” like an evangelist). Some contend (like Karl Keating) that He “preached” the gospel to those incarcerated “spirits” and took them to Heaven with Him (erroneously referencing Eph. 4:8 as a parallel passage). But based on what is described in this specific passage, it is far more likely that Jesus proclaimed His triumph over evil through the cross to these rebellious “spirits” - not preach the gospel to them. And it is far more likely that these “spirits” are still in “prison” awaiting final judgment and to be cast into the Lake of Fire prepared for the Devil and his angels.

Bottom line, it is impossible to exegetically derive the time-developed doctrine of “Purgatory” from this obscure passage. Those who claim they do read that nonbiblical doctrine INTO it.

Nice try Ozzie, but once again you are getting creative with the context. I’ve quoted you at length above so that your own context would not be violated. You contend that the translation from the Greek should be “proclaimed” and not “preached.” You make it sound as if there is a real difference. This is apparently all in your head.

Please note all of the following translations of 1 Peter 3:19:

• King James
  1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

– American Standard
1 Peter 3:19 in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison,

– Living Bible
1 Peter 3:19 and it was in the spirit that he visited the spirits in prison, and preached to them–

– Revised Standard
1 Peter 3:19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison,

– Simple English
1 Peter 3:19 In the spirit, Christ went and preached to spirits in prison.

– New Jerusalem
1 Peter 3:19 and, in the spirit, he went to preach to the spirits in prison.

– Young’s Bible
1 Peter 3:19 in which also to the spirits in prison having gone he did preach,

– Darby’s Bible
1 Peter 3:19 in which also going he **preached ** to the spirits which are in prison,

– Weymouth’s New Testament
1 Peter 3:19 in which He also went and proclaimed His Message to the spirits that were in prison,

– Webster’s Bible
1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and preached to the spirits in prison;

– Douay Rhiems
In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison:

–New American
It was in the spirit also that he went to preach to the spirits in prison.

All of them except for Weymouth’s New Testament use the word preach(ed). Somehow, I think I’ll trust the expertise of the translators of these well known bibles over your personal spin.

 

[exrc]

Philthy:

Hey exrc-

You did’t respond to my post as to why, if Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross paid once and for all the penalty for your sins, you still need to confess your sins and then continue confessing them as you continue to sin. Haven’t they all been paid already? I’m a little confused.
Phil,
Are we required to forgive one another?

If so, then for what reason?

Do you still need to confess your sins to someone other than an RC priest (James 5:16)? I thought he was the only one who could absolve you?

Or is that not the reason you do it?

I’m a little confused.

Think outside the RC box Phil.

In addition, you claim that intentional failure to confess your sins as they continue to occurr results in an “eternal consequence” but you didn’t tell me what it was. Please explain!

Phil
I explained this in a previous post Phil. It was my first response. Go back and read it again.

What is the consequence of not confessing your sins to one another, and forgiving one another Phil?

Phil,

Now I will repeat my last question.

Has Jesus paid the full penalty for all your sins past, present, and future, 2000 yrs ago on the cross?

Yes or No?

In love your friend Dan!!

 

[MariaG]

Only God forgives sin. #1441 CCC. Try to learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

 

[KLStevens]

Dear MariaG,

As each of us tries to help teach our brothers and sisters about Jesus’ Catholic Church on this thread, I feel it has almost become fruitless to try to teach certain people. As we have seen, some are not here to learn.

We will all keep trying though. And so we plug along…
Thanks for all your insight. Its been much appreciated by me!

Sincerely Yours In Christ,
KLStevens

PS: If that was you who posted the prayer to St. Michael earlier–Loved it! Perfect timing too!

 

[KLStevens]

Katholikos:

The criteria for the canon of Christian Scriptures was set by the Catholic Church. A writing had to meet all four tests in order to be accepted into the canon. The fourth criteria was that a writing had to conform to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

You are misreading the New Testament if you think it says one thing and the Church teaches another:tsktsk: .

Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), Sola Fide (Faith Alone), and Sola Gratia (Grace Alone) were doctrines inventented by Martin Luther. So was OSAS. There were no such doctrines taught by Jesus and the Apostles. These doctrines appear in the historical record only in and after the 16th century.

The Church did not come out of the New Testament – the NT came out of the Church! The NT was written by the leaders of the Catholic Church, and it reflects what the Church was teaching at the time it was written.

All Protestant churches are based upon a misinterpretation of Scripture.

I once was blind, but now I see.

To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant, John Henry Newman, ex-Anglican clergyman and Catholic convert.

JMJ Jay
Ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!

I see a very significant pattern developing here.

Our non-Catholic brothers and sisters DISREGARD the above stated facts even as they try to refute Catholic Truth by using our Scriptures.

I have noticed no direct responses to posts #:
703, 704, 709, 729, 737, 741, 751, 776, 782, 783, 785, 788, 801, 806 etc. and that was just looking at the last two pages!

The above postings all share some common points summed up by Jay’s quote.

Please take a moment and reread those postings.

A very interesting thing happened a few centuries ago. Protestant biblical scholars tried to find out for themselves where we got the Bible. The funny thing was–and this is something that Jesus’ Catholic Church has obviously know all along–their search lead them back to the Catholic Church.

Most non-Catholic Christians that I know DO NOT KNOW CHRISTIAN HISTORY. Someone once told them the real church was lost way back when only to be rediscovered some 1600 years later. This blanket statement disregards all the FACTS OF HISTORY that prove otherwise. Early Church writings (written prior to Scripture) support the AUTHORITY and TRADITION of JESUS’ CATHOLIC CHURCH. For 20 centuries we Catholics have had access to the fullness of faith that was left to us by Jesus. CHECK THE WRITINGS. LEARN OUR COMMON CHRISTIAN HISTORY. 1600 years after our Saviors death, men developed a new way of interpreting Scripture. These were the men of the Reformation. These are the men non-Catholics follow. We choose to follow Jesus and His Church He established.

To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant, John Henry Newman, ex-Anglican clergyman and Catholic convert.

Sincerely Yours In Christ,
KLStevens

 

[exrc]

MariaG:

Only God forgives sin. #1441 CCC. Try to learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

Maria,
I know exactly what the RCC says they teach, I am merely looking through the smoke. Hoping the blinders fall off.

You obviously do not understand my conversation with Phil so far. Who knows? Maybe he doesn’t either.

What kind of forgiveness do you offer people who trespass against …you Maria?

love Dan!

 

[ahimsaman72]

exrc:

Greg,
It was his substitutionary death which paid the debt owed.

His resurrection is the evidence that his promise was fulfilled,and could be delivered.

His life is proof that believers shall live again also!

Greg, you are also welcome to partake in eternal life if you choose to believe his promises.

Forsake the whore that you follow.

Come out of her my beloved, he says!

Your humble servant exrc

Love and blessings to you my friend!!!

No one will follow what you have to say if you consistently tell them they follow a whore. If you seek to convert Catholics to protestantism, you are barking up the wrong tree, so to speak. It brings up old hostilities when what we need in this day and age is better understanding between our faiths.

 

[exrc]

RBushlow:

Are you refering to Jesus Christ and His Church as a whore?

.

Revelation 17:3-6

1Tim.4:1-5

If you instruct the bretheren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ! 1Tim.4:6

Don’t shoot the messenger.

Why do you insist that I am trying to insult you?

I have not once attacked anyone personally on this forum, nor do I intend to.

And I heard another voice from heaven saying " come out of her my people, lest you share in her sins, and let you receive of her plagues" Rev.18:4

Your rift is with Christ.

Please listen before it’s too late!

Your truly concerned friend Dan

 

[exrc]

ahimsaman72:

No one will follow what you have to say if you consistently tell them they follow a whore. If you seek to convert Catholics to protestantism, you are barking up the wrong tree, so to speak. It brings up old hostilities when what we need in this day and age is better understanding between our faiths.

My friend,
Since I have been posting on this website, I have been called a swine, ignoramus, dumb protestant, amongst others.

I return only scriptures and blessings to those who scorn me.

Bless you all !!!

Repay not evil with evil.

I will defend the blood of martyrs before me, and NEVER betray their sacrifice. Their love was too great to be ignored or compromised.

In love your friend Dan!!

 

[Philthy]

exrc:

Phil,

Hey Dan- I’m gonna have to split this one up

Are we required to forgive one another?

I say YES. On the one hand God requires it, on the other you say I’m reducing Christs sacrifice on the Cross if I say we need to confess them. I tried to get you to answer how you would reconcile this apparant contradiction but you wouldn’t.

If so, then for what reason?

I would assume for our own forgiveness. But if we need to continue to confess our sins repeatedly that seems to be negating the work of Christ on the cross as you have proposed it, unless “confessing” is the means that God has established to apply the righteousness of Christ’s eternal sacrifice to our own sins over time. Is that really so outrageous a concept?

Do you still need to confess your sins to someone other than an RC priest (James 5:16)? I thought he was the only one who could absolve you?

This question is irrelevent to the discussion - not that it isn’t a good question. I’ll answer because I am honestly trying to reach understanding, but this is simply a diversion from the core issues of why we need to continue to confess our sins despite Christs sacrifice and how there can be an eternal consequence to failing to do so if once we’re saved we’re always saved and Christs sacrifice has already and forever taken care of all these things.

I need to confess my sins to God. I accept that, for some of them, under normal circumstances, a priest should be the individual through whom I confess them to God. You are wrong, again, in an area of Catholic theology if you think all sins must be confessed to a priest.

Or is that not the reason you do it?
I’m a little confused.

I’d say we’re both a little more than confused. This is why I was trying to keep things simple. Simple questions with yes or no answers or clear multiple choice, but you refused to go along. Go review our posts (661,673,682,696,728,738,744,784,815)
and tell me if you ever answered what the eternal consequence of not continuing to confess your sins is - I’ve reviewed all the posts multiple times. I listed specific “eternal consequences” for you to choose from in post 784 and also a final option of none of the above with room for commentary - you ignored it completely and simply hit me with a barrage of questions in this post. Again, this is not effective communication.

See next post…

 

[KLStevens]

exrc:

Revelation 17:3-6

1Tim.4:1-5

If you instruct the bretheren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ! 1Tim.4:6

Don’t shoot the messenger.

And I heard another voice from heaven saying " come out of her my people, lest you share in her sins, and let you receive of her plagues" Rev.18:4

Did you miss all those posting of the lines of Scripture that tell you you need to KNOW and BE TAUGHT the Oral Tradition?

Why do you disregard this SIMPLE FACT OF HISTORY:

IT IS JESUS’ CATHOLIC CHURCH THAT GIVES YOU THE BIBLE!

You can not change this simple fact of history:
The Scriptures you quote were WRITTEN, COLLECTED, SELECTED AND CANONIZED BY JESUS’ CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Why do you again disregard the post above about the criteria that were used to select the different books of Scripture?

Why are you fighting history?

NOTHING IN SCRIPTURE SPEAKS AGAINST JESUS’ CATHOLIC CHURCH. But many lines speak against personal interpretation, and about the need to learn from those who were taught by the Apostles, the need to follow your bishop, the need to be of one mind…

You have provided for us all here a great example of the damage that can be done by personal interpretation of Scripture and the delibrate disregarding of Sacred Tradition.

Don’t forget David Koresh and Jim Jones both used Scripture to support their ideas! So did all of the heretics since Christ.

Only His Ctholic Church was given the Authority to safeguard Scripture. Thank you for reinforcing our Faith in Jesus Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Sincerely Yours In Christ,
KLStevens

PS: PLEASE PICK UP A COPY OF CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM by Karl Keating. The insults you throw are based on such a simplicitic understanding of Catholicism, not to mention incredibly ill-informed anti-Catholic propoganda. Mr. Keating cites the specific sources of where these anti-Catholic ideas originated. You are spewing out all the classics! Quite honestly its comical more than insulting–and most specifically a reflection on yourself. You would do yourself and all of us a favor if you took the time to read at least the first few chapters of that book.

 

[Katholikos]

exrc,

The first Christians did not parse the Christian scriptures in order to decide what they believed, as you and other Protestants feel compelled to do. You are, at best, parsing words in a translation of a translation of a translation (from the underlying Aramaic to Greek to English). The reason: there was no New Testament. The Catholic Church is nearly 400 years older than the NT. She herself wrote the NT under the inspiration of the Spirit; she alone knows what it means and is its rightful interpreter. Her teachings are written into it, either explicitly or implicitly. The NT came out of the Church, not the other way around. So twist away; God’s revealed Truth remains the Truth.

Watching you and others twist the Scriptures in email after email causes me to rejoice even more fervently that I’ve been delivered from the clutches of the practitioners of an ersatz Christianity with a paper and ink god.

I’ve been rescued from belief in doctrines that were “revealed” to Martin Luther while he was sitting on the privy in the tower, 16 centuries too late to have been taught by Christ and the Apostles.

From the hands of the deceiver, deliver us, O Lord.

JMJ Jay

 

[Philthy]

exrc - dan
philthy - phil

Regarding the eternal consequence of not being "in communication with the Father you said…

I explained this in a previous post Phil. It was my first response. Go back and read it again.
I’ve read them all - you haven’t answered. Here are the posts:

661,673,682,696,728,738,744,784,815. Simply copy and paste your “eternal consequence” in language that is universally understood. My choices wee totally flexible - did you miss post 784 or did I miss something?

What is the consequence of not confessing your sins to one another, and forgiving one another Phil?

Excellent question! why didn’t I think of it? Hey, wait a minute, I did already…and you said that failing to do so would result in an eternal consequence but you didn’t specify what it was and repeatedly claim that you have. Please cut and paste it to your next reply.

Has Jesus paid the full penalty for all your sins past, present, and future, 2000 yrs ago on the cross?

Yes or No?

Dan, I already answered this with a YES. Now we’ve gone in a full circle thanks to this post. Yes Christ paid the price but YES we must still confess our sins to God as they occur and YES there is an eternal consequence if we don’t. These 3 facts raise questions however. If it’s a sin not to confess our sins and Christs sacrifice has already paid for all our sins(including not confessing) how can there possibly be an “eternal consequence” for you? I gave you good options in post 784 and you have ignored them completely. C’mon lets accomplish something here so these boards aren’t just a conduit for us to express our confidence in our own opinions. I am not tryng to be tricky and I have no interest in diminishing Christ’s sacrifice. I think our theologies are a lot closer than you realize. Please don’t judge me.

In love your friend Dan!!Philip means “lover” you know…

 

[KLStevens]

Katholikos:

The first Christians did not parse the Christian scriptures in order to decide what they believed, as you and other Protestants feel compelled to do. You are, at best, parsing words in a translation of a translation of a translation (from the underlying Aramaic to Greek to English). The reason: there was no New Testament. The Catholic Church is nearly 400 years older than the NT. She herself wrote the NT under the inspiration of the Spirit; she alone knows what it means and is its rightful interpreter. Her teachings are written into it, either explicitly or implicitly. The NT came out of the Church, not the other way around. So twist away; God’s revealed Truth remains the Truth.

Watching you and others twist the Scriptures in email after email causes me to rejoice even more fervently that I’ve been delivered from the clutches of the practitioners of an ersatz Christianity with a paper and ink god.

I’ve been rescued from belief in doctrines that were “revealed” to Martin Luther while he was sitting on the privy in the tower, 16 centuries too late to have been taught by Christ and the Apostles.

From the hands of the deceiver, deliver us, O Lord.

JMJ Jay

AMEN!!!

 

[KLStevens]

I think there’s a bit of clarification needed here:

exrc:

My friend,
Since I have been posting on this website, I have been called a swine, ignoramus, dumb protestant, amongst others.

For the record, I don’t think anyone on this forum called you an ignoramus. That came straight out of Scripture:

James 2:18-20
“Indeed someone might say, “You have your faith and I have works.” Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble. Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?”

Seems it was actually Scripture and the writer of James who used the word ignoramus. Did you take these words personally?

“Dumb” is a far cry off from the profanity you have used to describe Jesus’ Catholic Church.

No one is here to exchange insults. Many here have tried and tried–with proof from Scripture, history and the Tradition handed on by Jesus-- to help you in your struggles. We all pray that one day you will open yourself to what has been offered.

---

On another subject:
For the person who previously didn’t want to accept that even demons believe in God, the above line is the one that supports that theory. Now are those demons in heaven too? All they need to do is believe, right? Wouldn’t they no longer be demons then?

Just filling in some hole I saw.

Sincerely Yours In Christ,
KLStevens

 

[exrc]

Philthy:

Hey Dan- I’m gonna have to split this one up

Are we required to forgive one another?

I say YES. On the one hand God requires it, on the other you say I’m reducing Christs sacrifice on the Cross if I say we need to confess them. I tried to get you to answer how you would reconcile this apparant contradiction but you wouldn’t

If so, then for what reason?

I would assume for our own forgiveness. But if we need to continue to confess our sins repeatedly that seems to be negating the work of Christ on the cross as you have proposed it, unless “confessing” is the means that God has established to apply the righteousness of Christ’s eternal sacrifice to our own sins over time. Is that really so outrageous a concept?

Do you still need to confess your sins to someone other than an RC priest (James 5:16)? I thought he was the only one who could absolve you?

This question is irrelevent to the discussion - not that it isn’t a good question. I’ll answer because I am honestly trying to reach understanding, but this is simply a diversion from the core issues of why we need to continue to confess our sins despite Christs sacrifice and how there can be an eternal consequence to failing to do so if once we’re saved we’re always saved and Christs sacrifice has already and forever taken care of all these things.

I need to confess my sins to God. I accept that, for some of them, under normal circumstances, a priest should be the individual through whom I confess them to God. You are wrong, again, in an area of Catholic theology if you think all sins must be confessed to a priest.

Or is that not the reason you do it?
I’m a little confused.

I’d say we’re both a little more than confused. This is why I was trying to keep things simple. Simple questions with yes or no answers or clear multiple choice, but you refused to go along. Go review our posts (661,673,682,696,728,738,744,784,815)
and tell me if you ever answered what the eternal consequence of not continuing to confess your sins is - I’ve reviewed all the posts multiple times. I listed specific “eternal consequences” for you to choose from in post 784 and also a final option of none of the above with room for commentary - you ignored it completely and simply hit me with a barrage of questions in this post. Again, this is not effective communication.

See next post…

Phil,
One of my posts got lost, probably my fault, sorry.

I think you are missing my intention in our discussion so far.

What is the purpose of confessing your sin to another person whom you have offended, and what is the purpose of him forgiving you? I’m still going to let you figure out how this applies to our discussion. I hope you’re not playing dumb with me.

Everything has eternal consequences Phil, but not salvational consequences. If you are truly saved(born again), nothing can change that. My answer is (C)

Grace draws you to him, he gives you the faith to believe, then you confess him (Jesus) unto righteousness for you. This is called justification, it is imputed to you, declared perfectly righteous, at this point you’re sealed in Christ.

Do you still sin? Yes!

Does God know you will sin? Yes. Does he know what those sins will be?Yes. Did you catch him by surprise when you really blow it?No. Think Phil, would he save you knowing all this before hand then cast you into hell? (He would be a pretty dumb God) If so then why doesn’t he save us then take us directly to heaven? Why take the chance of leaving us here to possibly lose our salvation? Even as dumb as I am, I wouldn’t take that chance if I had a choice.

Think!!!

Now, after saying all that.

What is the purpose of confessing our sins after we are saved?

Your Friend Dan

 

[Philthy]

Dan - 2 posts again…

exrc:

Phil,
One of my posts got lost, probably my fault, sorry.

No problem - it happens

I think you are missing my intention in our discussion so far.

Yes, we’re jumping around quite a bit.

What is the purpose of confessing your sin to another person whom you have offended, and what is the purpose of him forgiving you?

For the record, the topic started out with the need to confess our sins to God, not to one another. That was the condition that brought about “eternal consequences” - failure to confess to God. All sins require confession to God, but not all sisn require confession to another person.You seem to be drifting…

I’m still going to let you figure out how this applies to our discussion. I hope you’re not playing dumb with me.

I’m not playing dumb. I don’t understand what you mean by an eternal consequence. Which is why I have repeatedly asked you to tell me what it is, but you haven’t. Is it an eternal consequence with any ramifications for me?

Everything has eternal consequences Phil, but not salvational consequences. If you are truly saved(born again), nothing can change that. My answer is (C)

Thank you. That wasn’t so hard was it? Now you need to explain the eternal consequences that you said occur from choosing not to confess your sins to God - so far you claim that there is an eternal consequence but, to me, it seems eternally irrelevant because you say you still go to Heaven without loss of any Heavenly reward. IF that’s the case, why should I care?

Grace draws you to him, he gives you the faith to believe, then you confess him (Jesus) unto righteousness for you. This is called justification, it is imputed to you, declared perfectly righteous, at this point you’re sealed in Christ.

Just one small problem remains - why do we need to continue to confess our sins if we’re sealed in Christ. This is the unresolved issue. You have not addressed it yet.

see next post…

 

[Philthy]

Do you still sin? Yes!

Have you been spying!? :bigyikes:

Does God know you will sin? Yes. Does he know what those sins will be?Yes. Did you catch him by surprise when you really blow it?No. Think Phil, would he save you knowing all this before hand then cast you into hell? Maybe He didn’t save us but simply made salvation available to us and then, since we were made in his image gave and respected our free will to choose him and thereby love HIm, because without the choice it isn’t Love but simply compulsion.I. (He would be a pretty dumb God) If so then why doesn’t he save us then take us directly to heaven? Better yet why even create Man in the first place, and allow evil into the world, and then have to concoct some scheme to rescue us when He could have avoided it all from the beginning? None of it makes sense.
We’re not making progress by simply asking 8 million questions. Normally you ask all those questions and then provide the answer that satisfies them all. You have me salivating! But you didn’t accomplish that last part!

Why take the chance of leaving us here to possibly lose our salvation? Do you think maybe God knows something that you and I don’t? Because the fact is, we are here and not all of us will be saved…
Even as dumb as I am, I wouldn’t take that chance if I had a choice. So knowing God is infinitely wise we are to conclude that maybe He had no choice. He must’ve had to do it this way. Is that your conclusion?

Think!!!

Now, after saying all that.

What is the purpose of confessing our sins after we are saved?

Scripture tells us confession of sins is for forgiveness and spiritual cleansing(1john 1:9) The problem is, according to your understanding, forgiveness and cleansing are instantaneous, complete and permanent at the time we are “born again” (through Christ’s sacrifice). That’s why I feel like we’re going in circles: I confess that Jesus is Lord and believe in my heart and I receive his righteousness completely and permanently for my sins, but you still want me to confess my sins and if I don’t there’s an eternal conseqence. Circles I say!

Your Friend Dan
Thanks for your time and patience,

Phil