Are Christians to keep the Sabbath?

[John 8:32]

It is a fact, and always was, that man cannot go through life sinless, if one man could do it Christ would not have to have been made flesh to be the perfect Lamb.

Any man that say's they are sinless (before or after Christ) is a liar.

1 John 1:10 (KJV)
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Interesting thought. Now add this to the thought...

Rom 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Anyone who thinks there is salvation in the old law is in fact the Legalistic and nullifies the Cross.

Salvation was never even promised under the Old Covenant.

Like before the Law, Abraham did sin, but because he did his best to continually obey God he was counted Righteous.

He sinned because he broke the law. The law has been in effect since the Garden.

Like Abraham, and After Christ, man will still sin, being "in Christ" will not change that, but if we have the same "obedient faith" that Abraham had to God, a true Christian will be counted Righteous by obeying Christ, during the Mosaic law sacrifice rolled back sin for but a year, but Obeying ALL of Christ commands, and continuing in "obedient faith" the blood of Christ will continually wash away sin accounting righteousness to the man as long as he (like Abraham) keep "obedient faith" (we have to work at it, the works James speaks of)

Again, I find this very interesting. Yet, you tell us not to...

Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Mat 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Anyone who thinks there is salvation in the old law is in fact the Legalistic and nullifies the Cross.

Mosaic law sacrifice rolled back sin for but a year, but Obeying ALL of Christ commands, and continuing in "obedient faith" the blood of Christ will continually wash away sin accounting righteousness to the man as long as he (like Abraham) keep "obedient faith" (we have to work at it, the works James speaks of)

You're talking out both sides of your mouth.

The obedient work that James talks about, that you say makes a man righteous and saved by doing, is the royal law of scripture 'love your neighbor as yourself' which is direct command of the Law of Moses. Yet you say that there is no salvation in the old law, and to think so is to be a Legalist that nullifies the cross. Explain your duplicity.

The literal Sabbath, along with all the other commands of the covenant of law, were conditions to be met to be in, and stay in, covenant with God--conditions that are now satisfied through service to the New Covenant, Jesus Christ and faith in his blood. Hebrews explains this.

When you have faith in the blood of Christ, that faith is the conduit through which God's requirements for sacrifices, and Sabbath and Festival cycles are met to God's complete and total satisfaction. There's no need to continually fulfill the requirements of a Sabbath and Festival cycle (for purposes of covenant) that got satisfied 'one time, for all' through the New Covenant of Jesus Christ. We draw near to God, and are in covenant with him, in a new and better way than that of the literal sacrifices, and Sabbaths and Festivals of the law.

In Christ, the requirements for covenant--specifically, circumcision and rest--are fully satisfied once and for all, provided you keep believing in Christ. Since they are satisfied through the NEW WAY of trusting in the promise of a son, Jesus Christ (not really 'new'--think 'Abraham'), the literal fulfillment is no longer needed for covenant purposes and has become obsolete for a people forever and completely put in covenant with God through this new way of faith in the promised Son and his blood (provided you keep believing).

The ongoing condition for covenant in this New Covenant is faith in Christ, not the necessity of fulfilling an ongoing cycle of conditions for covenant, as was required in the old Covenant, which only last as long as the next time they are required, or you break one of them, whichever comes first, lol. Through our faith, the blood of Christ is continually applied to us and accesses the acceptable fulfillment of the conditions for covenant with God that He demands (rest, circumcision, etc.).

 

[John 8:32]

Christ did not (destroy) the law, he fulfilled it!

Why is it a man can have a Mortgage on his house and fully understand the conditions set forth in it, then remortgage his house with that same bank, the new mortgage may contain some of the same as the old and may contain new conditions attached, yet he knows it would be foolish to try and enforce any condition not contained in the new that was contained in the old upon his banker?

Yet when it comes to the agreements (covenants) God has made between Him and man, he just can't get it?

See if you can understand ths conditions of the New Covenant...

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Instead of writing the law on a tablet of stone, He is writing the law on our hearts and minds. Now explain to me how this somehow does away with the law.

Christ explained how the law is fulfilled in what is called the Sermon on the Mount...

Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Mat 5:23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;
Mat 5:24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

So, instead of doing away with the Commandment not to kill, Christ said that if you are even angry with your brother without cause, you have broken the Sixth Commandment. Done away indeed.

Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Just looking on and lusting after a woman is adultery. How did that do away with the Seventh Commandment?

Here is a question for you. Which of these Commandments are we now free to break?

 

[rrowell]

Interesting thought. Now add this to the thought...

Rom 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.




Salvation was never even promised under the Old Covenant.



He sinned because he broke the law. The law has been in effect since the Garden.



Again, I find this very interesting. Yet, you tell us not to...

Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Mat 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

John 8:32 (the user),

It has been clearly shown to you by myself and many others that there are three laws, Patriarchal, Mosaic, and the Law of Christ... it is clear you cannot tell a dividing line amongst any one of them, and it is useless to try to explain it to you over and over again...

I sir truly believe you would get out of your car and argue with a stop sign.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Here is a question for you. Which of these Commandments are we now free to break?

'Eye for an eye'

 

[Deborah13]

Law is as noted prior, interesting subject matter.

Many forms of believers seek to brush it away.

I can only remind that Law is Gods Word. One should not intentionally seek to toss away Gods Words if they are a believer of/in same.

I might agree that Paul's statements could lead to that conclusion, but also as noted prior for every scripture set of no law there is just as compelling a set for pro law.

To me it will remain a pity on any student who thinks landing only on one side of the ledgers of those scripture sets have any serious approach to the matters.

It will remain that both sides are fully true when they are understood properly.

I noted before that the law is undoubtedly against the lawless. Sin is lawlessness and we all have sin. Grace has not 'excused' or 'granted' license to anyone inclusive of believers to sin nor has law. They are perfectly aligned in their being against all sin.

Therefore, being against sin, both law and grace are equal in this regards.

And I would go further to say that if any believer is against sin and evil they should not logically be against law.



I understand only that most N.T. believers don't really want to be honest about the facts of their own sin and seek grace as some kind of continuing 'excuse' for sin.

Law will ultimately be a test of honesty for any believer about their own sin.

If any believer is honest about their own sin, they will admit they are a sinner and that the law does condemn their sin, period. There is no escape from this fact nor is it excused under grace.

Galatians 3:22
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Any believer who but but but's on the fact of their own sin and can not come to a basic honest conclusion about having it as a present tense matter continually proven under law or excusing same under grace I would consider basically dishonest. And some are entirely dishonest about this matter.



It's perhaps a more interesting arena than such simplicities above imply. I don't care how obedient you may claim to be no honest believer can say they 'have' no sin as a present tense matter and be 'in Truth.'

For me law is a quick litmus test of honesty. No forms of obedience can bring any honest believer to the position where they can claim they have no sin. Those who do try to make that claim really don't like to hear about their sin and prefer to 'cloak' it under legal obedience or grace.

They can make any claims they think they see. The fact is no one is escaping the conclusion of having sin as a present tense working within the heart and mind.

If a man claims obedience, they should obey being truthful from the start. And if they are, they will not claim their sin to be legally obedient or their sin authorized or eliminated under grace.

That's why I have come to disdain many sects. They just are not honest in this particular arena. People love to be sold a way around this particularly nasty fact and be 'let off the hook' for their sins.

s

You my friend obviously do not have ANY understanding of grace or what we believe as NT believers. We are well aware of the fact that we do sin however we do not dwell on it, we repent and move on. We don't spend time worrying about the law that Jesus fulfilled at the cross. He gave us two laws, both of the law of love. I'm sure you know them. Grace is NOT an excuse to sin. Where in the world do you get this idea from. Because we know God's love for us (to human understanding of our Abba Father's love, which is so apparent in the life of His Son and His sacrifice) that we obey Him because of this love. We love Him because He first loved us. When you know you are loved you are secure and happy and at rest in Him. It becomes easier and easier to conform to the image of Christ. Redemption is in Him and what He did. We give all the glory to Him. There is nothing we could ever do to fulfill the law in our lives. We praise Him, worship Him, and obey Him not because we have to but because He put the desire in us to. It's part of that new creature in Christ. We are "being Made the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus." All glory and honor are HIS and HIS ALONE. Give me one scripture where a believer is ever called a "sinner" in the NT. They are called saints, there is a reason for this.

 

[John 8:32]

'Eye for an eye'

Are we now free to break any of the Ten Commandments? If so, which?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Are we now free to break any of the Ten Commandments? If so, which?

If you mean not keep them literally, then, 'yes', we can break some of them in that sense.

You don't have to literally keep a law whose requirements have been satisfied through your faith in Christ. The literal sacrifices for sin are the best example of this. Christ is NOT a literal OT sacrifice, yet he completely and totally, and forever satisfies the lawful requirement for sacrifice for sin. That's why we can 'break' those laws (not literally keep them anymore). Circumcision is another easy to understand example. The Sabbath is not as readily seen as fulfilled by faith in Christ. That's why we debate it to this day. But it really does get satisfied by faith in Christ.

 

[Deborah13]

Are we now free to break any of the Ten Commandments? If so, which?

There are two commandments given to us by Jesus. Love the Lord and love your neighbor. If we do these two things we will have obeyed all the 10. Paul too, says that we should obey these laws of love. So I say to you that we should obey them.
So far I haven't seen anyone on any thread say that it is OK to not obey these laws.

But if we do not we have a perfectly righteous high priest as our Advocate. We are covered in His blood not by the blood of lambs and goats. Our right standing with God is based on His righteousness, not ours.

As far as the Sabbath an observing it. What was the reason for the Sabbath? Was it because of a particular day of the week? Or was it to spend a day of rest, honoring our risen Lord?

I don't understand people who say they invite the Lord into their home on Sunday. I want my Lord with me every day. I know He is in my home every day because He lives in each one of my family members.

 

[BornAgain]

There are two commandments given to us by Jesus. Love the Lord and love your neighbor. If we do these two things we will have obeyed all the 10. Paul too, says that we should obey these laws of love. So I say to you that we should obey them.
So far I haven't seen anyone on any thread say that it is OK to not obey these laws.

But if we do not we have a perfectly righteous high priest as our Advocate. We are covered in His blood not by the blood of lambs and goats. Our right standing with God is based on His righteousness, not ours.

As far as the Sabbath an observing it. What was the reason for the Sabbath? Was it because of a particular day of the week? Or was it to spend a day of rest, honoring our risen Lord?

I don't understand people who say they invite the Lord into their home on Sunday. I want my Lord with me every day. I know He is in my home every day because He lives in each one of my family members.

Exodus 20:8-10 (KJV)
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

God calls them to remember it; as if he had said, Do not forget that when I had finished my creation I instituted the Sabbath, and remember why I did so, and for what purposes. Because this commandment has not been particularly mentioned in the New Testament as a moral precept binding on all, therefore some have presumptuously inferred that there is no Sabbath under the Christian dispensation, which is the law we are under today.

 

[smaller]

You my friend obviously do not have ANY understanding of grace or what we believe as NT believers.

Oh really? So grace let your sin off the hook. Free to sin all you want?

I'm not aware of the legitimacy of that kind of grace myself.

We are well aware of the fact that we do sin however we do not dwell on it,

Most don't. They prefer to slide past the fact of having same under the covers of grace excuses. Not my favorite form of understandings where there are better available. You know, like being truthful?

we repent and move on.

Believers can repent all they want. None of us regardless of 'repentance' can say we have no sin and be 'in Truth.' I prefer the later understanding for obvious reasons. Sorry if that offends other sinners. But I really don't care to be made into a liar over the matter quite frankly. It doesn't seem to bother many.

We don't spend time worrying about the law that Jesus fulfilled at the cross. He gave us two laws, both of the law of love.

And I'd say you didn't pay much attention to any of my posts regarding N.T. principles that are contained in the Law and the Apostles rather extensive deployments of same in their understandings. Tossing is not an option.

I'm sure you know them. Grace is NOT an excuse to sin. Where in the world do you get this idea from. Because we know God's love for us (to human understanding of our Abba Father's love, which is so apparent in the life of His Son and His sacrifice) that we obey Him because of this love. We love Him because He first loved us. When you know you are loved you are secure and happy and at rest in Him. It becomes easier and easier to conform to the image of Christ. Redemption is in Him and what He did. We give all the glory to Him. There is nothing we could ever do to fulfill the law in our lives. We praise Him, worship Him, and obey Him not because we have to but because He put the desire in us to. It's part of that new creature in Christ. We are "being Made the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus." All glory and honor are HIS and HIS ALONE. Give me one scripture where a believer is ever called a "sinner" in the NT. They are called saints, there is a reason for this.

You or any other believer can do all of the above and still not be able to say you have no sin and be 'in truth.'

In case you missed the rather minor drill of fact in this matter of law, all believers have sin, sin is lawlessness. The law not only reveals this fact, but arouses it within people. The Law and Grace are perfectly identical in being firmly firmly against sin in any form or fashion.

Yet we can't say we have no sin and be in truth.

Interesting little factoid isn't it? Is the law then my enemy for revealing this matter of fact?

No. I love the law. Every last jot and tittle of same. I also know that no matter how good I am I still can not say 'I have no sin.'

s

 

[smaller]

It is a fact, and always was, that man cannot go through life sinless, if one man could do it Christ would not have to have been made flesh to be the perfect Lamb.

Any man that say's they are sinless (before or after Christ) is a liar.

Indeed they are.

1 John 1:10 (KJV)
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Anyone who thinks there is salvation in the old law is in fact the Legalistic and nullifies the Cross.

Like before the Law, Abraham did sin, but because he did his best to continually obey God he was counted Righteous.

Like Abraham, and After Christ, man will still sin, being "in Christ" will not change that, but if we have the same "obedient faith" that Abraham had to God, a true Christian will be counted Righteous by obeying Christ, during the Mosaic law sacrifice rolled back sin for but a year, but Obeying ALL of Christ commands, and continuing in "obedient faith" the blood of Christ will continually wash away sin accounting righteousness to the man as long as he (like Abraham) keep "obedient faith" (we have to work at it, the works James speaks of)

Jesus and the Apostles actually lay out a case for every believer to fulfill every jot and tittle of the law in themselves. It's an integral part of the Gospel. Yet even in that we can not say we have no sin and be in truth.

It's one of the more interesting surface dichotomies in the text.

s

 

[Deborah13]

Oh really? So grace let your sin off the hook. Free to sin all you want?

I'm not aware of the legitimacy of that kind of grace myself.



Most don't. They prefer to slide past the fact of having same under the covers of grace excuses. Not my favorite form of understandings where there are better available. You know, like being truthful?



Believers can repent all they want. None of us regardless of 'repentance' can say we have no sin and be 'in Truth.' I prefer the later understanding for obvious reasons. Sorry if that offends other sinners. But I really don't care to be made into a liar over the matter quite frankly. It doesn't seem to bother many.



And I'd say you didn't pay much attention to any of my posts regarding N.T. principles that are contained in the Law and the Apostles rather extensive deployments of same in their understandings. Tossing is not an option.



You or any other believer can do all of the above and still not be able to say you have no sin and be 'in truth.'

In case you missed the rather minor drill of fact in this matter of law, all believers have sin, sin is lawlessness. The law not only reveals this fact, but arouses it within people. The Law and Grace are perfectly identical in being firmly firmly against sin in any form or fashion.

Yet we can't say we have no sin and be in truth.

Interesting little factoid isn't it? Is the law then my enemy for revealing this matter of fact?

No. I love the law. Every last jot and tittle of same. I also know that no matter how good I am I still can not say 'I have no sin.'

s

We do not say, we do Not Sin, we repent and move on. We don't take ourselves so seriously as to think we are so important that we must dwell on ourselves and our failures. We find when we sin that we were not walking in the Spirit that spirit of Christ that lives in us one with our spirit. We are to keep our eyes on Him remembering what He has done for us. The more we do this, hear His words, and talk with Him we are transformed into His image.


OK What do you do when you sin?
Are you a sinner or a saint?

 

[smaller]

We do not say, we do Not Sin, we repent and move on. We don't take ourselves so seriously as to think we are so important that we must dwell on ourselves and our failures.

Why would you think that everyone would think like you on this matter?

You and most believers will approach this matter in a myriad of ways. None perhaps alike.

For me these facts became a quest of questions. Matters of deep and sincere prayer and seekings for understandings.

WHY is this so? WHY is this a fact?

Would you prefer believers stall out? That is what I would consider your answer. A stall. A dodge. An avoidance.

oh, yeah, so what. I have sin BUT...BUT...BUT...

There are no such buts in my heart. I stand before God without a single excuse. And stand there completely unable to say I have no sin if I want to be IN truth.

But but but 'I do this and this and this' so it's all good does not interest me whatsoever. Sin is EVIL and BAD.

The fact is I don't want to sin, period. Ever. Repent and move on? I'm sorry. That would be the very last direction that would occur to me.

I am not one to settle for nonsense. I expected answers from God and got them because I asked HONEST QUESTIONS with sincere intentions.

We find when we sin that we were not walking in the Spirit that spirit of Christ that lives in us one with our spirit. We are to keep our eyes on Him remembering what He has done for us. The more we do this, hear His words, and talk with Him we are transformed into His image.

Like I said earlier. You can do whatever 'but' approach you care to spin. Fact is you can NOT say you 'have no sin' and be 'in Truth.'

Doesn't that bother you just a tad enough to want some answers?

Maybe that is not the case with most. They prefer to slide by with some of the most pathetic theological discourses on this particular matter that are available. Just pathetic.

OK What do you do when you sin?
Are you a sinner or a saint?

Well, maybe when you figure out that there is no avoiding this fact, you too may ask WHY.

Trying to stamp yourself one or the other is again absurdity.

You have sin. I have sin. Sin in the 'have' state is a 'present tense' application. Have. Not had. Not will have. HAVE. Attach any but formulas you think you need to slide by. They don't interest me one bit.

I prefer to be in truth. Sinner or saint? What a joke. Why don't you ask a real question. Is a SINNER a SAINT?

Don't you know this about sinners?

1 John 3:
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

Some along the trail of faith may actually roll up their sleeves and get to work doing some honest theology on this matter.

Here is a fact about the Sabbath. There is not one single person who sits in a pew on the Sabbath who can say they are legal or HAVE no sin at any given moment. Not a one.

That's why threads such as this one are ridiculous. Believers don't even seem know they 'have' sin or even the meaning of HAVE, and when they don't know and can't even speak truthfully guess what?

They are NOT in Truth. You might as well go ask any common liar on the street for the answer rather than from these types of believers.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[Deborah13]

Why would you think that everyone would think like you on this matter?

You and most believers will approach this matter in a myriad of ways. None perhaps alike.

For me these facts became a quest of questions. Matters of deep and sincere prayer and seekings for understandings.

WHY is this so? WHY is this a fact?

Would you prefer believers stall out? That is what I would consider your answer. A stall. A dodge. An avoidance.

oh, yeah, so what. I have sin BUT...BUT...BUT...

There are no such buts in my heart. I stand before God without a single excuse. And stand there completely unable to say I have no sin if I want to be IN truth.

But but but 'I do this and this and this' so it's all good does not interest me whatsoever. Sin is EVIL and BAD.

The fact is I don't want to sin, period. Ever. Repent and move on? I'm sorry. That would be the very last direction that would occur to me.

I am not one to settle for nonsense. I expected answers from God and got them because I asked HONEST QUESTIONS with sincere intentions.

Like I said earlier. You can do whatever 'but' approach you care to spin. Fact is you can NOT say you 'have no sin' and be 'in Truth.'

Doesn't that bother you just a tad enough to want some answers?

Maybe that is not the case with most. They prefer to slide by with some of the most pathetic theological discourses on this particular matter that are available. Just pathetic.

Well, maybe when you figure out that there is no avoiding this fact, you too may ask WHY.

Trying to stamp yourself one or the other is again absurdity.

You have sin. I have sin. Sin in the 'have' state is a 'present tense' application. Have. Not had. Not will have. HAVE. Attach any but formulas you think you need to slide by. They don't interest me one bit.

I prefer to be in truth. Sinner or saint? What a joke. Why don't you ask a real question. Is a SINNER a SAINT?

Don't you know this about sinners?

1 John 3:
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

Some along the trail of faith may actually roll up their sleeves and get to work doing some honest theology on this matter.

Here is a fact about the Sabbath. There is not one single person who sits in a pew on the Sabbath who can say they are legal or HAVE no sin at any given moment. Not a one.

That's why threads such as this one are ridiculous. Believers don't even seem know they 'have' sin or even the meaning of HAVE, and when they don't know and can't even speak truthfully guess what?

They are NOT in Truth. You might as well go ask any common liar on the street for the answer rather than from these types of believers.

enjoy!

smaller

smaller, why are you so angry? I have said I know I sin. I told you what I do and why.
Can't you tell me what you do and why. After rereading your posts, listening to you and trying to understand where you are coming, listening to you tell me how wrong I am and calling me a liar and we know that no liar will enter the kingdom of heaven. So you have condemned me to hell if I should die right now.
But you are refusing to give me your enlightenment about what YOU do when you sin. Some christian you are, you have the answer to my confusion but won't share it? Shame on you.

 

[smaller]

One of the reasons I quit the RCC was because their demanded confession in effect asked me to be a liar.

How is this so?

They have a confession that the congregants say at almost every service.

It goes like this: "Lord, I have sinned in thought, word and deed."

Uh, sorry, when one is in truth they 'have' sin. Not have sinned in the past. Have, right there at that moment, as they all speak they do not sin, past tense.

They all alike HAVE sin as a present tense working.

Have sinnED past tense? lol

I will not be made into a liar by fancy jibberish on tense applications.

No, none of you nor I 'have sinned.'

We 'have' sin. Right now, as we type. We 'have' sin.

Sit in that pew every Sabbath. Think yourself legal all you please. The fact of 'have sin' is present tense and doesn't change by formulamatic incantations of 'used to' or 'did recently' but now I am without sin because I'm sitting in the pew on the Sabbath.

It is a wonder to me why God doesn't just throw lightning bolts at these assemblies of liars. Probably doesn't because they are simply blind.

s

 

[smaller]

smaller, why are you so angry? I have said I know I sin. I told you what I do and why.

Angry? Why do you mistake honesty for anger?

Why don't you, like, you know, try to comprehend the conversation and quit spinning it?

If you can't respond to a few specifics in my posts it just shows me you are content to say, yeah, I have sin but but but I do this this and this so...

MY SIN IS OK.

I don't live that way.

Sorry.

s

 

[Deborah13]

Angry? Why do you mistake honesty for anger?

Why don't you, like, you know, try to comprehend the conversation and quit spinning it?

If you can't respond to a few specifics in my posts it just shows me you are content to say, yeah, I have sin but but but I do this this and this so...

MY SIN IS OK.

I don't live that way.

Sorry.

s

Please quote me where I say that sin is OK. I believe I said just the opposite.
You sure sound angry and hurt if you really want to know what I am hearing. But I must be wrong your honesty just sounds angry to me. I can't help it if God calls me a saint, He says you are one too so if you say your not then you call Him a liar, too.

 

[smaller]

Please quote me where I say that sin is OK. I believe I said just the opposite.
You sure sound angry and hurt if you really want to know what I am hearing. But I must be wrong your honesty just sounds angry to me. I can't help it if God calls me a saint, He says you are one too so if you say your not then you call Him a liar, too.

Well Deborah, when honesty turns to anger in your mind, the conversation ain't going far is it? Since when did you get to dictate my emotion condition in a factual conversation?

Manipulation is a common form of disengagement.

enjoy!

s

 

[Tri Unity]

Manipulation is a common form of disengagement.

It seems to me that you have manipulated, or entirely misunderstood, what Deborah has said.