The Godly Heresy of Sinless Perfectionism

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't think you are hearing me.

Much love!

Check out these articles here:

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

www.wayoflife.org

Scholarolatry and Ignorantolatry, Way of Life Literature

Scholarolatry and Ignorantolatry, Way of Life Literature

www.wayoflife.org

 

[marks]

Check out these articles here:

What is it you think we are discussing here?

Do you have issues with the King James Bible?

Much love!

 

[marks]

And I can say the same thing. But we both cannot be right. I trust the Bible by faith. This is a Bible that is one (the KJB), and it is perfect and divinely inspired whereby I cannot alter it or change it or allow others to change It. My Bible will remain the same 100 years from now. Scholars and their bibles keep changing the Word to keep the copyrights and money flowing.

OK, great, I'm King James also. I'm not King James Only, maybe 98%. I like JP Green, Young, and I've seen a usefulness in the NLT. But mostly I'm just KJV.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I believe God preserved His Words in English today. Also, you did not grow up in that culture to know if they did not speak that way. But I take it by faith they did because that is the only way the text makes sense in light of the whole counsel of God’s Word. Again… what about 1 Peter 4:1-2, Galatians 5:4, and 2 Corinthians 7:1? These verses would contradict the sin and still be saved viewpoint on Romans 7:14-24.

OK, I get it.

You are looking at the English translation from the Greek, which translation you believe to be divinely inspired, and therefore the perfect translation, not to be questioned. And you are reading a passage which you think is showing an historical present as a literary device. I don't think it is,, and therefore you are thinking I'm questioning the perfect translation.

I believe it reads more naturally and more harmoniously as an actual present tense. Historical presents are used in the Gospels quite a bit, in narrating events. I know Mark does that a lot.

When Paul wrote about his past in Philippians 3, he was very clear about what place that was in his life. Ditto in 1 Corinthians 1, he wrote with clarity.

In a narrative, an historical present brings immediacy to the telling of something known to be past. The hearer isn't thinking that this could be actually happening at this moment, or that this is something that has to be sorted out to know what you are hearing.

In a didactic - teaching - passage, as you can see in this discussion, introducing the distinction between an historical present and a present tense verb introduces the possibility of such different interpretations that one stands the other on it's head. And now the read must choose between to extremely different interpretations.

I look at the general clarity and specificity to Paul's writings, and find this sort of situation very unlikely. I believe he wrote with a simple clarity that is unknown without spiritual revelation. The words are all there right in front of our faces, but we don't understand the real significance until the Holy Spirit opens our minds to receive the simple truths of the words our eyes read.

He spoke of current conditions, and a change in where sin is, and identifies where sin is. And this is in exact agreement with what he wrote elsewhere. And just to be clear, of course these passages are all God Himself teaching you and I personally. Unless the trumpet sound a clear note, who shall know what is trumpeted?

I think this is the clear and plain understanding presented in the King James Bible itself, without resorting to any other resources. Though Koine Greek syntax and wording fully supports this understanding. Like I said, I think the KJ is an excellent translation.

Much love!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What is it you think we are discussing here?

You said I quote:,

“You're talking about American English, and you would need to demonstrate that this literary device was being employed by Paul in Koine Greek” Quote by: Marks.​

You also said you went to Bible college. These schools generally employ Textual Criticism and that you cannot trust any Bible in the English in what it says and you must go to the original languages to get the real meaning. But the problem is that in Textual Criticism it is tied to Modernism and denying the infallibility of the Scriptures. The origin of Textual Criticism in denying the Trinity and in denying the deity of Jesus Christ (of which you can see such attacks on the Godhead or Trinity in Modern Translations). While many today who are into Textual Criticism do not deny the Trinity, they do deny there is a perfect Bible divinely inspired and preserved in our current world language (like our English language).

So I am replying to your points on your foundation. Textual Criticism is rooted in the false Alexandrian manuscripts (Whereby there are different variant manuscripts and there is not one major variant set), and the Nestle and Aland text used today based on these Alexandrian manuscripts is tied to Catholicism. The Nestle and Aland text is where all your modern bibles come from. It’s not that we cannot use them, but they are not our final word of authority like the King James Bible should be.

Do you have issues with the King James Bible?

It’s actually the opposite.
I believe the King James Bible (Textus Receptus - NT / Masoretic manuscripts - OT) is the final authority for our faith.

Much love!

May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you (even if we disagree on Scripture).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

OK, great, I'm King James also. I'm not King James Only, maybe 98%. I like JP Green, Young, and I've seen a usefulness in the NLT. But mostly I'm just KJV.

Much love!

I believe the KJB is the perfect Word of God for today. But I do use and quote from Modern Translations to update the archaic English words in the KJB. So I would call myself “Core KJB” in that the KJB is my core foundation for my faith. So my faith must rest in what the KJB says in English as my final authority (if a Modern bible disagrees and says something completely different).

I also like the NLT at times, and the AMP. But when these translations differ with the KJB, I side with the KJB.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

OK, I get it.

You are looking at the English translation from the Greek, which translation you believe to be divinely inspired, and therefore the perfect translation, not to be questioned. And you are reading a passage which you think is showing an historical present as a literary device. I don't think it is,, and therefore you are thinking I'm questioning the perfect translation.

I believe it reads more naturally and more harmoniously as an actual present tense. Historical presents are used in the Gospels quite a bit, in narrating events. I know Mark does that a lot.

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I believe if a person reads their Bible with their moral compass turned off, it will not benefit them and they cannot actually understand God’s Word properly or fully. The issue for many today is that they should stop and question whether or not their interpretation is based on worldly wisdom at the expense of the goodness of God over their justification of sin or evil. I say this because again, Christians today make an excuse to sin using verses like Romans 7:14-24, 1 John 1:8 and they ignore and or do not properly explain verses like 1 Peter 4:1-2, Galatians 5:24, and 2 Corinthians 7:1. For one cannot hold to the ”excuse to sin” interpretation on Romans 7:14-24, and 1 John 1:8 if one also believes 1 Peter 4:1-2, 2 Corinthians 7:1, and Galatians 5:24. Your commentary on these verses really did not get to heart of the matter of what these verses plainly say (That refutes the false “we must sin again excuse” by using verses 1 John 1:8, and Romans 7:14-24 wrongfully). For you, it’s just intellectual that the original languages defends you here and or Greek could not have employed “Historic Present.” I believe there is nothing new under the sun. If such a thing existed today, it existed back then. But my ultimate reason for the good interpretation that does not make an excuse to sin on 1 John 1:8, and Romans 7:14-24 is rooted in the goodness of God and His holiness and how He does not want us to sin and He will never teach us that it is okay to sin. The Bible teaches we were slaves to sin and we can become slaves to righteousness by obeying the doctrine (Romans 6:17-18). You have to reckon yourself dead to sin (Romans 6:11) but you are not doing that if you believe Romans 7:14-24 and 1 John 1:8 is an excuse to how you must sin again at some future date in your life because of your fallen nature. I believe this is salvific to not grasp this point because if God truly does desire you to believe the Scriptures in overcoming sin in this life and you reject that and you desire to make excuses to sin, it could potentially cost you to entering the Kingdom. For me: That position is too risky to take a gamble on sin and yet, miss out on God’s Kingdom. I would rather play it safe than be sorry. For me: It is doing all that is good and holy and right in God’s sight in our minds, hearts, and actions and teaching others to do the same to glorify Jesus Christ (Who is God and our Savior). To justify sin goes against that idea. It spits on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Jesus paid a great price for our sins, and to have the mindset that we can just go back out and sin on occasion (not habitually) and think we will be saved dishonors our LORD and everything good He stands for. God cannot agree with our sin. That is what you are failing to grasp here. It is a moral or heart issue and it is not just thinking about it intellectually in regards to the text alone. You need the read Scriptures with your heart and eternal soul in mind and how God views sin. 1 John 1:5 says there is no darkness in God.

When Paul wrote about his past in Philippians 3, he was very clear about what place that was in his life. Ditto in 1 Corinthians 1, he wrote with clarity.

In a narrative, an historical present brings immediacy to the telling of something known to be past. The hearer isn't thinking that this could be actually happening at this moment, or that this is something that has to be sorted out to know what you are hearing.

In a didactic - teaching - passage, as you can see in this discussion, introducing the distinction between an historical present and a present tense verb introduces the possibility of such different interpretations that one stands the other on it's head. And now the read must choose between to extremely different interpretations.

I look at the general clarity and specificity to Paul's writings, and find this sort of situation very unlikely. I believe he wrote with a simple clarity that is unknown without spiritual revelation. The words are all there right in front of our faces, but we don't understand the real significance until the Holy Spirit opens our minds to receive the simple truths of the words our eyes read.

Actually, according to Scripture Paul did not write in a way that was always clear and easy to understand.

Peter says this about Paul's writings,
"As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16).

Wrest means to twist.
But Peter above says that Paul’s writes some things that are hard to be understood.
So Paul is not always easy to understand and we do need to realize that he speaks in ways whereby a person can use Paul’s words wrongfully when no doubt they say they are just reading them plainly at the expense of the rest of the whole counsel of God’s Word.

He spoke of current conditions, and a change in where sin is, and identifies where sin is. And this is in exact agreement with what he wrote elsewhere. And just to be clear, of course these passages are all God Himself teaching you and I personally. Unless the trumpet sound a clear note, who shall know what is trumpeted?

I think this is the clear and plain understanding presented in the King James Bible itself, without resorting to any other resources. Though Koine Greek syntax and wording fully supports this understanding. Like I said, I think the KJ is an excellent translation.

Much love!

Again, the issue is the heart and whether a person is seeking to justify sin or not. An axe murderer can quote the Bible to appear like it is supporting him while he talks to his victim before they kill them, but we know that this person would be in error and they are using the Bible to justify sin. This is the same way I see it when a Christian twists Paul’s words in Romans 7:14-24 as an excuse to sin. Paul made it clear elsewhere that you can overcome sin in this life in 2 Corinthians 7:1, and Galatians 5:24. Peter actually says that false teachers cannot cease from sin (2 Peter 2:1, 2 Peter 2:14). So if a Christian promotes the “cannot cease from sin” viewpoint on 1 John 1:8, and Romans 7:14-24, they are a false teacher according to Peter. Peter says in 1 Peter 4:1-2 that you can cease from sin by suffering in the flesh (Which would be doing so when one obeys the Lord’s commands in the New Testament in loving others and God). Justifying sin is not loving to your neighbor. If we sin, we are not loving our neighbor (See: Romans 13:8-10). Jesus agreed with the lawyer that to love God and love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (See: Luke 10:25-28).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

OK, I get it.

You are looking at the English translation from the Greek, which translation you believe to be divinely inspired, and therefore the perfect translation, not to be questioned. And you are reading a passage which you think is showing an historical present as a literary device. I don't think it is,, and therefore you are thinking I'm questioning the perfect translation.

I believe it reads more naturally and more harmoniously as an actual present tense. Historical presents are used in the Gospels quite a bit, in narrating events. I know Mark does that a lot.

When Paul wrote about his past in Philippians 3, he was very clear about what place that was in his life. Ditto in 1 Corinthians 1, he wrote with clarity.

In a narrative, an historical present brings immediacy to the telling of something known to be past. The hearer isn't thinking that this could be actually happening at this moment, or that this is something that has to be sorted out to know what you are hearing.

In a didactic - teaching - passage, as you can see in this discussion, introducing the distinction between an historical present and a present tense verb introduces the possibility of such different interpretations that one stands the other on it's head. And now the read must choose between to extremely different interpretations.

I look at the general clarity and specificity to Paul's writings, and find this sort of situation very unlikely. I believe he wrote with a simple clarity that is unknown without spiritual revelation. The words are all there right in front of our faces, but we don't understand the real significance until the Holy Spirit opens our minds to receive the simple truths of the words our eyes read.

He spoke of current conditions, and a change in where sin is, and identifies where sin is. And this is in exact agreement with what he wrote elsewhere. And just to be clear, of course these passages are all God Himself teaching you and I personally. Unless the trumpet sound a clear note, who shall know what is trumpeted?

I think this is the clear and plain understanding presented in the King James Bible itself, without resorting to any other resources. Though Koine Greek syntax and wording fully supports this understanding. Like I said, I think the KJ is an excellent translation.

Much love!

The issue is using the Bible to think one can sin and still be saved on some level.
Christians love to also use 1 John 1:8 as an excuse to sin, as well.

I have talked with Christians who believe that if they generally lived a holy life (Whatever that means), and they looked upon a woman in lust and they died and got hit by a bus without having a chance to confess of that sin, they are still saved. Meaning, they don’t believe 1 John 1:9 in that you have to confess of your sins to be forgiven of them. They think they are saved by a belief alone in Jesus even if they may slip up into a sin on occasion.

Proverbs 30:20 says:​

“Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.”​

Christians today think a believer must admit they must sin (do evil) again or they are not of the truth (the good) based on a false understanding on 1 John 1:8.

Isaiah 5:20 says:​

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”​

​

Malachi 2:17 AMP​

“You have wearied the LORD with your words. But you say, “In what way have we wearied Him?” In that you say, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and He delights in them,” or [by asking], “Where is the God of justice?”​

​

Job 17:12 NASB​

“They make night into day, saying, ‘The light is near,’ in the presence of darkness.”​

Again, why play games with your soul and take the chance on justifying sin? What if you are wrong? Would it not be the “safer play” to always justify in doing good and not evil?

You can try to intellectualice the text all you want, but if there is no heart (moral compass) involved in your reading of the Bible, it will not benefit you in any way. God is good, and His people are good, too (Because it is God who does the good work through them).

 

[marks]

The issue is using the Bible to think one can sin and still be saved on some level.

I think that a person who believes they are past sinning lacks self-awareness, and presumes things they do not know.

Beyond that, you must have a very different idea of what being born again is from what I think, because this "on again off again" rebirth, I don't find this in the Bible in the least.

Call it justifying sin, making excuses for sin, those are all your words, not mine.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Christians today think a believer must admit they must sin (do evil) again or they are not of the truth (the good) based on a false understanding on 1 John 1:8.

I'd say this fits the topic better . . .

1 Corinthians 4:3-5 KJV
3) But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
4) For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
5) Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

We aren't fit judges of ourselves, Jesus is. Those who deem themselves fit to determine whether or not they are committing sins are in error.

Much love!

Much love!

 

[marks]

You also said you went to Bible college. These schools generally employ Textual Criticism and that you cannot trust any Bible in the English in what it says and you must go to the original languages to get the real meaning. But the problem is that in Textual Criticism it is tied to Modernism and denying the infallibility of the Scriptures. The origin of Textual Criticism in denying the Trinity and in denying the deity of Jesus Christ (of which you can see such attacks on the Godhead or Trinity in Modern Translations). While many today who are into Textual Criticism do not deny the Trinity, they do deny there is a perfect Bible divinely inspired and preserved in our current world language (like our English language).

You are making mistakes presuming things about me, and then arguing against those things. How many times do I need to tell you I use the King James?

So much of what you write about me is competely off target.

Meanwhile, things I have written don't receive a response.

To answer directly to your question, how does this passage speak towards whether if a Christian sins he stops being a Christian, the presupposition to this passage is that there is sin to be ceased from, and so suffering comes to accomplish that. (Of course, this is taking in a broader context than just the two verses.)

Rather than casting His children because of continued sin, God speaks of helping us through suffering to cease from that sin. This is affirmed also in Hebrews 12, that God will in fact train His children, and that His training will in fact be effective.

Galatians 5:22-25
22) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23) Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
24) And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
25) If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

I'm not sure your thought here, but this saying is affirmed in a number of places.

Towards your question about whether sin causes you to stop being born again, IF we live in the Spirit, this is the condition to be met, and if you meet it, the subsequent admonition is for you, Let us also walk in the Spirit. The presupposition here is that you may be alive in the Spirit but not also walking in the Spirit, and to you it is said, "Let us also walk in the Spirit". If being alive in the Spirit is one and the same with walking in the Spirit, this verse would be a tautology. There is a reader whom Paul addresses who is alive in the Spirit though not walking in the Spirit.

Which happens to harmonize with Paul's writing in Romans 7 showing his current state of living.

2 Corinthians 7:1 KJV
1) Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

This is much the same thing.

Are you thinking I'm arguing against holy living? Because I'm not.

Much love!

These passages admonish to leave sin, but do not claim the loss of rebirth if you do sin.

How many times can you be born again?

Much love!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I think that a person who believes they are past sinning lacks self-awareness, and presumes things they do not know.

Believers should be in a Sanctification Process of living more progressively holy by the Spirit (2 Corinthians 7:1), until they overcome sin in this life (Galatians 5:24) (1 Peter 4:1-2).

A slave to sin will not abide in the house of Christ forever (See: John 8:34-35). What does this mean? Matthew 13:41-42 tells us in that the Son of Man (Jesus) will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of HIS Kingdom all who do iniquity and they will be cast into the furnace of fire (i.e. the Lake of Fire).

Beyond that, you must have a very different idea of what being born again is from what I think, because this "on again off again" rebirth, I don't find this in the Bible in the least.

John 8:39 KJB
“If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.—“

1 John 2:29 KJB
“…ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.”

1 John 3:10 KJB
“In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.”

1 John 4:7-8 KJB
7 “Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.”

1 John 5:2 KJB
“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.”

Matthew 8:12 KJB
“But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

In the Parable of the Prodigal Son: When the son came home from living it up with prostitutes, and he sought forgiveness with his father, his father said he was dead, and he is alive again. He was lost and now he is found (See: Luke 15:24, and Luke 13:32). The prodigal son did not die physically, and so it is talking in spiritual terms. The son died spiritually while living it up with with prostitutes and he became alive AGAIN spiritually when he came back home and sought forgiveness with his father. This same truth is taught in James 5:19-20. We learn that if any brethren errs from the truth, and they convert them back, they should know that they helped save a soul from death, and they helped to cover a multitude of sins. Meaning, if a fellow believer went prodigal into sin, and you helped to rededicate their life in following Jesus again and get them to seek forgiveness with the LORD Jesus, then you would have saved their soul from death.

Luke 8:21 KJB
“And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it”

Jude 1:12-13 KJB
12 “These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”

These types do not fear God, and they are without fruit, and they are twice dead. They are twice dead because they were once dead spiritually before coming to Christ, and they are dead spiritually a second time by later justifying sin. Jude 1:4 (NIV) says there are ungodly people who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality (KJB says: turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness).

Jesus warned how certain sins can keep you out of God’s kingdom (Matthew 5:28-30) (Matthew 6:15) (Matthew 12:37) (Matthew 25:31-46). The apostle Paul said if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing (1 Timothy 6:3-4). James 4:6 says God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.

Even the apostle Paul said,
“But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (1 Timothy 5:8).

Call it justifying sin, making excuses for sin, those are all your words, not mine.

Much love!

Jeremiah 22:23 says,
”But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'd say this fits the topic better . . .

1 Corinthians 4:3-5 KJV
3) But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
4) For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
5) Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

We aren't fit judges of ourselves, Jesus is. Those who deem themselves fit to determine whether or not they are committing sins are in error.

Much love!

Much love!

This is not about how we are not allowed to judge. Jesus said we can judge righteously (John 7:24). Also, Paul was saying this in regards to the Corinthians saying that they were of Paul, Apollos, etcetera (1 Corinthians 3).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You are making mistakes presuming things about me, and then arguing against those things. How many times do I need to tell you I use the King James?

Do you believe the Hebrew and Greek say the same thing in English involving the King James Bible?
Yes, or no?
Do you believe there are errors in the King James Bible?

So much of what you write about me is competely off target.

How so?

Meanwhile, things I have written don't receive a response.

It takes time to reply. But I can say the same thing.
If I am missing any points in regards to God’s Word, please bring them up, and I will address any points I missed.
I am not evading anything intentionally unless they are personal questions. For if you ask personal questions, to make your point to justify sin, I will not answer them. First, this is not Facebook or Instagram; Meaning, I am not here to share about my life with those who do not believe all of God’s Word to turn God’s grace into a license for immorality (Jude 1:4). Trust needs to be earned and I share my faith with believers who believe similar to the way I do (Who truly desire to obey God and overcome sin in this life). The Bible should be the standard and not any one person’s life alone. I also see making it personal as an attempt to walk by sight and not by faith in God’s Word. If a truth is going to be determined, it will be by what God’s Word says. I am even willing to consider parables or real world examples. But it must also be backed by Scripture.

These passages admonish to leave sin, but do not claim the loss of rebirth if you do sin.

How many times can you be born again?

Much love!

It’s not about being born again. It’s about whether or not you die spiritually and can come back to the saving of your soul from death.
The parable of the prodigal son and James 5:19-21 both prove you can go from life, to then die spiritually and then back to life again.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

When you say, "a person is justifying sin", what does that mean exactly?

You honestly don’t know about the concept of a person justifying sin?
It means that the evil they do they don’t think it either exists or they try to rationalize that their sin is not bad or that their sin does not deserve any kind of punishment. In other words, you imply you can sin and still be saved on some level by what you said so far. For you obviously believed you are saved and yet you acted like it was impossible for a Christian to keep the 1st commandment. This means by default you believe you can break God’s laws and be saved. By God cannot agree with your sin. God is holy, righteous, and good.

.

makes it clear he didn't know himself well enough to say whether he was sinning or not, what makes us any different?

That’s not what he was saying. Your seeing sin with an apostle where there is none.

Are you including in your "habitual sins" the habitual sin of not loving God with all your being? Who is not guilty of routinely breaking the first commandment? And it only gets worse from there.

So you believe no Christian on the planet is ever capable of keeping the first two commandments?
Why would God give us such commands if they were impossible to keep?
I mean, you do realize that God helped the Israelites to win battles when the odds were against them, right?
In other words, with God all things are possible.

Personally, I think the conclusion of the matter is found here . . .

1 Corinthians 1:27-31 KJV
27) But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28) And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29) That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30) But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31) That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

Verses 27-29 is referring to our Initial Salvation in being saved by God’s grace.
It does not mean we are not required afterwards to abide in the Sanctification of the Spirit (See: 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Romans 8:13, Galatians 6:8-9).

Remember who God first gave that passage to . . . a church riddled with error . . . a letter correcting sin after sin . . . to whom God also said,

1 Corinthians 1:6-9 KJV
6) Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7) So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8) Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9) God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

Much love!

You missed the word “may” in verse 8. It says that ye MAY be blameless. May is not a guarantee.

 

[-Phil]

your sin.

“Your sin”, in accordance with direct experience, has no relationship to an other. The thought is as is directly experienced.
A thought. Thus, being direct, it is the belief in “others” which is discordant, ‘off’, or suffering… not the beliefs of others. You’ve never actually felt or experienced directly, a “other’s beliefs”.

 

[marks]

This is not about how we are not allowed to judge. Jesus said we can judge righteously (John 7:24). Also, Paul was saying this in regards to the Corinthians saying that they were of Paul, Apollos, etcetera (1 Corinthians 3).

You should read it again.

1 Corinthians 4:3-5 KJV
3) But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
4) For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
5) Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

Though he knows nothing against himself - his conscience is clear - that doesn't mean he considers himself justified, because it's Jesus Who will declare that, who knows us well enough to do that rightly.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Do you believe the Hebrew and Greek say the same thing in English involving the King James Bible?
Yes, or no?

You are asking if I think the King James Bible is the perfect translation?

I'm quoting from the King James with you. Is there some issue with? The quotes say what I'm saying they say.

I'm addressing passages that you are bringing up, and you are skipping over my replies.

Much love!

 

[marks]

It’s not about being born again. It’s about whether or not you die spiritually and can come back to the saving of your soul from death.

Yeah . . . being born again over and over and over and over and over . . . all in the course of the same day!

Much love!

 

[marks]

You missed the word “may” in verse 8. It says that ye MAY be blameless. May is not a guarantee.

Again . . . maybe read the passage again . . .

1 Corinthians 1:4-9 KJV
4) I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5) That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6) Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7) So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8) Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9) God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

God shall confrim you unto the end. He shall do this. To what purpose? That you may be blameless in that day. Do we know this will happen? God is faithful!!

A parallel passage . . .

1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 KJV
23) And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
24) Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.


These are Scriptures quoted in context, from the King James Bible, that teach us God sanctifies us, that God preserves us blameless.

These are the plain sayings of plainly stated passages from the King James Bible. Do you receive this truth?

Much love!