1 Peter 1:23 is about eternal security

[FreeGrace]

Those who repent and believe the Gospel are forgiven of their sins and are washed in the precious blood of Jesus, and are now called saints, not sinners.

Yet, Paul referred to himself as the worst of sinners:
1 Tim 1:15
Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst.
NIV

Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
Ephesians 2:19

and again

3 But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; 4 neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. 5 For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not be partakers with them.
Ephesians 5:3-7

How 'bout that: saints still sin.

What sins to you accuse someone of having in this condition of being cleansed from all sin?

I was sure I read that your view is all sins EXCEPT the sin of unbelief. Which hasn't been shown from Scripture.

If we should stumble and commit a sin, then we confess our sin, and are forgiven and cleansed of all unrighteousness.

9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9

This sounds as though it's our confession that forgives and cleanses, rather than Christ's work on the cross.

Why do you call someone who is cleansed from their sin, a "sinner", when the bible says their saint's?

Because all saints sin.

Your doctrine continues to promote error.JLB

No, yours does.

 

[JLB]

I'm not blind and I can't see the claim you made of this Text. It clearly says that it would be better for whoever is causing the stumbling (not the little one, the believers)... You twist the words in this passage then claim it says something it does not.

Yeah. Just like you can't see that those who depart from the faith... is really some "other" faith, than the faith in Christ Jesus.
[koolaide drinkers special]


Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 4:1


Context:

8 Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, 9 holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience. 10 But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being found blameless. 11 Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. 12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

14 These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly;15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.

Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 3:8-4:1

You blatant refusal to acknowledge the plain and clear truth that Paul, by the Holy Spirit warned us about, is the mark of those in error.

Depart from the faith, is a plain reference to the faith in Jesus Christ, and not some other faith, such as faith in food, or faith in marriage or faith in things created by God. 2



JLB

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"The debate was over when I showed that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable and that eternal life is one of those gifts. Debate over."

Just curious. If this is true then why are there about a dozen locked threads on this topic in which behavior got out of hand and now this one is in its 9th page of argument repeating the same things over and over and over...?

I firmly believe the Bible is crystal clear about eternal security. How can, or why would, the Bible was ambiguous about it? That wouldn't make sense.

The reason for all the threads and all the repetition is that the clarity of biblical teaching has not been accepted. It is parallel to the Pharisees who actually saw the miracles of Jesus but denied His deity.

If a person takes Rom 6:23 at face value, and Rom 11:29 at face value, then the only conclusion is that eternal life is irrevocable.

And logic demands it.

 

[smaller]

Just curious. If this is true then why are there about a dozen locked threads on this topic in which behavior got out of hand and now this one is in its 9th page of argument repeating the same things over and over and over...?

If it's irrevocable, which I agree with, then why worry about it? Take the facts as facts personally, attribute same to other believers, and move on. I think there are a lot of believers who have to "use" potential eternal damnation to keep themselves in check. They probably have good reasons to do so. Where it gets ugly is when they spread it around because some really do believe that Jesus is entirely capable of saving sinners. 1 Tim. 1:15.

So who is the other side favoring? They should favor their own sorry hides with their eternal damnation sights, for what is therein: Romans 7:17-21.

I believe eternal damnation is an excellent scriptural understanding, if applied PERSONALLY, as in the example below. That's as far as it needs to go.

2 Corinthians 12:
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

 

[JLB]

Perhaps in the minds of some, they are sinless, not sinners.

Saints are not sinners, but those who have been forgiven and cleansed from their sins.

Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, Ephesians 2:19

Those who have been cleansed, and wander from the truth, and return to a life of practicing sin, have indeed returned to being sinners.

19 Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, 20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins. James 5:19-20


and again


20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. 21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.” 2 Peter 2:20-22



JLB

 

[smaller]

Saints and not sinners, but those who have been forgiven and cleansed from their sins.

I don't believe in "sinless" anybody other than God Himself while He was in flesh. End of that conversation in my sights. IF we say we "have," that's present tense "have" as Paul shows us in Romans 7:17 & 20-21, no sin we're not even "in truth." 1 John 1:8. I'd be far more interested in being in truth myself.

Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
Ephesians 2:19

Those who have been cleansed, and wander from the truth, and return to a life of practicing sin, have indeed returned to being sinners.

19 Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, 20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins. James 5:19-20


and again


20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. 21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.” 2 Peter 2:20-22
JLB

I don't think the sin indwelling any believers flesh or the evil present with any believer is going to be sneaking past the Pearly Gates on any count by any measures.

1 Corinthians 1:29
That no flesh should glory in his presence.

No exceptions.

 

[JLB]

I said this:
"The debate was over when I showed that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable and that eternal life is one of those gifts. Debate over."

I firmly believe the Bible is crystal clear about eternal security. How can, or why would, the Bible was ambiguous about it? That wouldn't make sense.

The reason for all the threads and all the repetition is that the clarity of biblical teaching has not been accepted. It is parallel to the Pharisees who actually saw the miracles of Jesus but denied His deity.

If a person takes Rom 6:23 at face value, and Rom 11:29 at face value, then the only conclusion is that eternal life is irrevocable.

And logic demands it.

If someone actually post's the scripture from Romans 6:23, rather than hiding there false doctrine in the shadows of their opinion they will plainly see that... the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23


The eternal life is received at the end, by those who have a lifestyle of bearing fruit unto holiness, not to those who live a lifestyle of practicing the works of the flesh, as a slave to sin.


16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.

20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:16-23


As all can plainly see from the scriptures and the context, Paul warns the Church, not to become a slave to sin, but to present ourselves as slaves to God, and bear fruit unto holiness, so that, in the end we will receive eternal life.

• That is the hope of our faith, by those who have been justified and regenerated by the Holy Spirit

4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Titus 3:4-7


JLB

 

[JLB]

I don't believe in "sinless" anybody other than God Himself while He was in flesh. End of that conversation in my sights. IF we say we "have," that's present tense "have" as Paul shows us in Romans 7:17 & 20-21, no sin we're not even "in truth." 1 John 1:8. I'd be far more interested in being in truth myself.

I don't think the sin indwelling any believers flesh or the evil present with any believer is going to be sneaking past the Pearly Gates on any count by any measures.

1 Corinthians 1:29
That no flesh should glory in his presence.

No exceptions.

The physical body will be buried in the ground, then resurrected when Jesus returns.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15:42-43


Those who live as sinners practicing the works of the flesh, will not inherit the kingdom of God.

No Exceptions.

I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. Galatians 5:16

19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21


You can't hide from the truth, no matter how much you twist the scriptures.



JLB

 

[smaller]

The physical body will be buried in the ground, then resurrected when Jesus returns.

You and I see differently on that one. There will be no "dust balls" in heaven. The Resurrection is planted in the ground by faith in Christ. Only The Resurrection goes on.

That would be A WHO?

John 11:25
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

When God said He kills and makes alive, He wasn't kidding about the killing. It's permanent. Deut. 32:39, 1 Sam. 2:6. The ONLY BODY that did not suffer corruption was Jesus' Body. Which is also "ours."

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15:42-43

I'd suggest you miss the point of the exercise entirely. It is The Resurrection that comes forth, not what it is sown in.

Those who live as sinners practicing the works of the flesh, will not inherit the kingdom of God.

No Exceptions.

Sorry. I don't believe in sinless anyone other than Jesus Himself when He was in flesh.

I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. Galatians 5:16

19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21


You can't hide from the truth, no matter how much you twist the scriptures.

If your positions have concluded you are sinless, what can I really say to that other than to look at the claims of an Apostle by comparison, IF I really want to know the truth. Romans 7:17-21 is where I'll stake the claims of fact, from the mouth of an Apostle. Why? Because I think Paul is actually telling the truth. Contrary to what sin dwelling in the flesh and evil present is able or capable of "telling" because these workings can not tell the truth.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If a person takes Rom 6:23 at face value, and Rom 11:29 at face value, then the only conclusion is that eternal life is irrevocable.

And logic demands it.

Logic demands that the context of Romans 11 be taken into consideration.
It's not logical to ignore the context in which Paul says the "gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29 NASB). Logic demands that you see that Paul is saying God has not changed his mind about "the gifts and calling of God" for the nation of Israel (Romans 11:29 NASB), even though they rejected the gifts and calling and were cut out of the tree.

Paul uses himself as proof that God did not withdraw the promises made to the Patriarchs on behalf of the Israelites (Romans 11:1-2 NASB) even though there are those Israelites who rejected the calling and gifts and were themselves rejected (Romans 11:15 NASB). Their lack of faith did not nullify God's faithfulness to the promises for those Israelites who would believe (Romans 3:3 NASB). God rejected those who did not believe, but he did not reject the nation altogether as evidenced by Paul, an Israelite who is indeed walking in the gifts and calling of God promised to the Fathers on behalf of Israel. That shows that the gifts and calling of God were not revoked for the nation of Israel, even though unbelievers among them rejected and killed the Messiah.

That explanation of what "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" comes right from the passage. And it has NOTHING to do with a believer who stops believing still having the gifts and calling of God. NOTHING. Your logic can only be accurate if it takes into consideration the explanation Paul himself provides about what "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" actually means. But your 'logic' does not do that.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Yet, Paul referred to himself as the worst of sinners:
1 Tim 1:15
Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst.
NIV


How 'bout that: saints still sin.


I was sure I read that your view is all sins EXCEPT the sin of unbelief. Which hasn't been shown from Scripture.


This sounds as though it's our confession that forgives and cleanses, rather than Christ's work on the cross.


Because all saints sin.


No, yours does.

hello FreeGrace, dirtfarmer here

In studying scripture I find that 1 Timothy 1:15 has been misinterpreted. Paul is not saying that he is the worst sinner but the foremost or first in time or example of the grace that God gives in Christ Jesus. I understand that verse 16 give credence to that.
1 Timothy 1:16 " Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first( same Greek word as chief) Jesus Christ might shew forth longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life eternal."

 

[smaller]

hello FreeGrace, dirtfarmer here

In studying scripture I find that 1 Timothy 1:15 has been misinterpreted. Paul is not saying that he is the worst sinner but the foremost or first in time or example of the grace that God gives in Christ Jesus. I understand that verse 16 give credence to that.
1 Timothy 1:16 " Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first( same Greek word as chief) Jesus Christ might shew forth longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life eternal."

What your position interprets is that what Paul said is not what Paul said. I find that claim unlikely.

1 Timothy 1:15
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Anytime the claim of context tries to alter a hard line/written statement of fact, the claim of context is wrong, not the statement of fact, written.

In other words, it actually does say what it says, regardless.

 

[dirtfarmer]

What your position interprets is that what Paul said is not what Paul said. I find that claim unlikely.

1 Timothy 1:15
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Anytime the claim of context tries to alter a hard line/written statement of fact, the claim of context is wrong, not the statement of fact, written.

In other words, it actually does say what it says, regardless.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

OK. If you want to believe that Paul thought that he was a worse sinner than Tiberius, Nero, or even Ahab and Jezebel.

 

[smaller]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

OK. If you want to believe that Paul thought that he was a worse sinner than Tiberius, Nero, or even Ahab and Jezebel.

Yep!

Paul was the very first person who had this specifically done to him, and "spoke the truth" about it. God with Divine Purposes in doing so, that being to specifically emphasize salvation by faith in Christ through Gods Grace and Mercy and NOT of our own self righteousness. Only Gods children can tell the truth OVER them and speak OF them, because they are given the gift of honesty from Above, and are not captured by lying.

2 Corinthians 12:
6 For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

If we read 1 Tim. 1:15, VOID of the above fact, we'll only see Paul and likewise we can't believe our own eyes.

But, if we put our reality glasses on and read the fine print, we'll see exactly HOW Paul came to that determination, present tense, "I am," after salvation. Paul was incorporating the above fact into who he was, and his own flesh, with it's afflictions of indwelling sin and evil present, Romans 7:17-21, which same are quite entirely and utterly demonic. 1 John 3:8.

The "enemies" we are saved from we carry with us, in our own sorry hides. They are also WHY we turn only to Gods Mercy, because God can very well be UNMERCIFUL to the other party, to remind us why Gods Mercy in Christ Is A Heavenly Premium.

Now, knowing this, who do you suppose opposes and resists Gods Grace and Mercy in Christ, and pulls believers in other directions?

Oh, yeah. Surprise usurpers. They ain't foolin anybody but the blinded by them.

 

[FreeGrace]

Saints are not sinners, but those who have been forgiven and cleansed from their sins.

Tell that to Paul, who described himself as the "worst of sinners". Note that he used the present tense.

Point: saints sin.

 

[FreeGrace]

If someone actually post's the scripture from Romans 6:23, rather than hiding there false doctrine in the shadows of their opinion they will plainly see that... the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Already been over this. Humanity is BORN spiritually dead. And once someone believes in Christ, they are born again of IMPERISHABLE SEED. I will assume that everyone understands what that means. It means they won't EVER perish. That's what Jesus said in John 3:16.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

How does quoting the first half of this verse refute anything I've said?

The eternal life is received at the end

This is in direct contradiction to Jesus' own words in John 5:24
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life". NIV

Now, please explain why anyone would make a claim that is in direct contradiction to the words of Jesus.

[/QUOTE]by those who have a lifestyle of bearing fruit unto holiness, not to those who live a lifestyle of practicing the works of the flesh, as a slave to sin.[/QUOTE]
It is clear that your theology is a works (lifestyle) based salvation. Which is in direct contradiction to the Bible.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. NIV

We are saved by grace, not by works (lifestyle). Your system of salvation is based on lifestyle. Interesting. But unbiblical.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"If a person takes Rom 6:23 at face value, and Rom 11:29 at face value, then the only conclusion is that eternal life is irrevocable.

And logic demands it."

Logic demands that the context of Romans 11 be taken into consideration.

Logic demands that since the gifts of God are irrevocable, and eternal life is a gift of God, that eternal life is irrevocable.

There is nothing in Rom 9-11 that changes that. Paul never even discussed eternal life, or gifts to Israel in those chapter.

There is no context for your opinion.

It's not logical to ignore the context in which Paul says the "gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29 NASB).

Your logic is fuzzy.

Logic demands that you see that Paul is saying God has not changed his mind about "the gifts and calling of God" for the nation of Israel (Romans 11:29 NASB)

In fact, context demands that Paul NEVER described any gifts of God to Israel. Not in ch 11, and not anywhere else in Scripture.

There is no context for your opinion.

That explanation of what "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" comes right from the passage. And it has NOTHING to do with a believer who stops believing still having the gifts and calling of God. NOTHING.

If the "gifts and calling of God are "right from the passage, what specific verse or verses delineates these so-called gifts to Israel?

Your logic can only be accurate if it takes into consideration the explanation Paul himself provides about what "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" actually means.

So, where in the chapter are these gifts to Israel mentioned?

But your 'logic' does not do that.

Because Rom 11:29 deals with ALL the gifts of God. And Paul had already noted 3 of them. So logic demands that all of them be included in whatever all the gifts of God are.

 

[chessman]

Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
1 Timothy 3:8-4:1

You blatant refusal to acknowledge the plain and clear truth that Paul, by the Holy Spirit warned us about, is the mark of those in error.

Is it safe to assume that your repeated posts of Paul's 1/5 of a sentence that begins Paul's "but" (on the other hand) point, dis-regarding the rest of it, then accusing me of disgregarding the 'context' and falsely accusing me of claiming faith in food saves is all you have to say about 1 Tim 4:1-5?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If the "gifts and calling of God are "right from the passage, what specific verse or verses delineates these so-called gifts to Israel?

You're not paying attention.

"the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29 NASB)
I said the context in which "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" is found right there in Romans chapter 11. It doesn't matter what the gifts and calling of God are. What matters is, Paul shows that he is proof that God did not change his mind about the gifts and calling of God for Israel (whatever those gifts may be). Do you understand the argument? If you do, use chapter 11 to prove it wrong.

Don't start arguing what the gifts and calling are. THAT'S NOT THE POINT. The point is, those gifts and calling as promised to the descendants of Abraham were not taken away from Israel just because they as a nation have been cut out of the tree. They are irrevocable in that regard. There is NOTHING in the chapter, or even the whole book of Romans, about God letting former believers keep their eternal life in Christ despite their fall from faith in Christ.

DO NOT START TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE GIFTS ARE, AGAIN. That has NOTHING to do with my argument. If you want to disprove what I'm saying YOU MUST TALK ABOUT WHAT I'M SAYING.

 

[Mike]

So much posturing in this thread. I find it disingenuous to repeatedly deem someone's interpretation of scripture to be opinion. This reduces the level of the conversation and relies on tactics as opposed to an honest dependence on the Word alone.

You (general) do yourself and your argument a disservice by relying on such tactics. So too when you accuse others of ignoring or refusing to believe scripture. "You" must realize your credibility is tarnished when your argument depends upon such posturing. The appearance is that you are running low on confidence that the Word alone supports your position.