Forgiveness Once? Don't Be A Dunce!

[YehwehPaladin]

Welcome back friends. Today's topic is "forever forgiveness". Are you aware that some denominations believe that you only have to ask for forgiveness once? After that you're supposedly forgiven for all of your future sins as well. I have a problem with this for several reasons.

Ephesians 4:26-27 (NLT)

And “don’t sin by letting anger control you.†Don’t let the sun go down while you are still angry,

for anger gives a foothold to the devil.

My first issue is if we are forgiven for all future sins then why would we have to be careful in letting the devil get a foothold? And also remember that Paul was writing this letter to a body of believers who had accepted Christ as their savior. So why would he warn then to not sin? It's impossible to sin if you're already forgiven. Wouldn't he have just said "act like a believer and be careful"?

Hebrews 10:26-27 (NLT)

Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice that will cover these sins.

There is only the terrible expectation of God’s judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies.

As far as I'm concerned the bible states very clearly that you can sin after you're forgiven, which means you cut yourself off from God. You need to ask for forgiveness again and try not to repeat it! Besides, if we are to treat God as a friend then we owe Him our apologies out of friendship.

 

[unred typo]

No takers? I’m not surprised. There are plenty on this board that believe in OSAS (once saved, always saved ) and a single confession of faith but they don’t like to think about whether the Bible really teaches it or not. If they studied it too much it would fall into ashes. The really vehement proponents of that position have left this board in search of stagnant water. Living water was apparently not to their liking. :-?

 

[Guest]

No takers? I’m not surprised. There are plenty on this board that believe in OSAS (once saved, always saved ) and a single confession of faith but they don’t like to think about whether the Bible really teaches it or not. If they studied it too much it would fall into ashes. The really vehement proponents of that position have left this board in search of stagnant water. Living water was apparently not to their liking. :-?

Is this how you hope to attract people to enter into dialogue with you?

 

[unred typo]

No takers? I’m not surprised. There are plenty on this board that believe in OSAS (once saved, always saved ) and a single confession of faith but they don’t like to think about whether the Bible really teaches it or not. If they studied it too much it would fall into ashes. The really vehement proponents of that position have left this board in search of stagnant water. Living water was apparently not to their liking. :-?

Is this how you hope to attract people to enter into dialogue with you?

As a matter of fact, it works. This post has been on here for a week and not one soul has bothered to write a word until now. So, now that you’re here, would you like to discuss the OP? :-D

 

[Guest]

[quote="unred typo":e71ac]No takers? I’m not surprised. There are plenty on this board that believe in OSAS (once saved, always saved ) and a single confession of faith but they don’t like to think about whether the Bible really teaches it or not. If they studied it too much it would fall into ashes. The really vehement proponents of that position have left this board in search of stagnant water. Living water was apparently not to their liking. :-?

Is this how you hope to attract people to enter into dialogue with you?

As a matter of fact, it works. This post has been on here for a week and not one soul has bothered to write a word until now. So, now that you’re here, would you like to discuss the OP? :-D[/quote:e71ac]

No, not really - I stay away from OSAS debates. I have my tulip, and you have your daisy.

He loves me, He loves me not, He loves me, He loves me not.

 

[unred typo]

:smt044 :smt043 :smt005 that was a good one!

 

[francisdesales]

No, not really - I stay away from OSAS debates. I have my tulip, and you have your daisy.

He loves me, He loves me not, He loves me, He loves me not.

God loves even those in hell. Forgiveness of sin is not the same as God loving us. God does not cease to love us EVER. He loved us and died for us EVEN when we were in sin, as Romans 5 states. Does this LOVE cease when we sin a second time??? One John writes to CHRISTIANS that we have an advocate in heaven for us, Jesus. For what purpose, if ALL sin has been forgiven, past, present and future, for the Christian??

There is no "he loves me, he loves me not" when a someone says that repentance is done over and over again.

Regards

 

[Guest]

No, not really - I stay away from OSAS debates. I have my tulip, and you have your daisy.

He loves me, He loves me not, He loves me, He loves me not.

God loves even those in hell. Forgiveness of sin is not the same as God loving us. God does not cease to love us EVER. He loved us and died for us EVEN when we were in sin, as Romans 5 states. Does this LOVE cease when we sin a second time??? One John writes to CHRISTIANS that we have an advocate in heaven for us, Jesus. For what purpose, if ALL sin has been forgiven, past, present and future, for the Christian??

There is no "he loves me, he loves me not" when a someone says that repentance is done over and over again.

Regards

Please Francis - it was a "joke". TULIP is the acronym that is used for "Calvinists" or those of Reformed theology. For those who agree with a more Armienists (sp?) view - it is said that they have the "daisy" because they do not believe in OSAS.

"Jakob I loved, Esau I hated", "I hate divorce". God "hates" sin. And those who have not turned from their sin and received the salvation that is found in Christ Jesus alone will be tormented in the place of gnawing and gnashing of teeth.

 

[unred typo]

quote by aLoneVoice on Tue Oct 09:

Please Francis - it was a "joke". TULIP is the acronym that is used for "Calvinists" or those of Reformed theology. For those who agree with a more Armienists (sp?) view - it is said that they have the "daisy" because they do not believe in OSAS.

I thought it was funny but I should have said that Calvinists pick daisies and say, “He loves me, he loves you not, he loves me, he loves you not…†:-D

 

[Cymbalistic1]

"Jakob I loved, Esau I hated", "I hate divorce". God "hates" sin. And those who have not turned from their sin and received the salvation that is found in Christ Jesus alone will be tormented in the place of gnawing and gnashing of teeth.

That doesn't mean that God hates the person that sins. He hates their ways; as you said, the sin itself. Sure, they'll be casted into the gnawing and gnashing of teeth, but God still doesn't hate them. As another poster said above this one, God loves even those in Hell.

Hebrews 10:26-27 (NLT)

Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice that will cover these sins.

There is only the terrible expectation of God’s judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies.

As far as I'm concerned the bible states very clearly that you can sin after you're forgiven, which means you cut yourself off from God. You need to ask for forgiveness again and try not to repeat it! Besides, if we are to treat God as a friend then we owe Him our apologies out of friendship.

To recieve knowledge of the truth doesn't necessarily mean to be forgiven. It just means that you have no excuse; you can't say "Oh, I didn't know that was sin."

Pretty much, the way I understand it is that Jesus died for all of our sins, past, present, and future. We're all already fully forgiven for any and everything.

And go easy on me; I'm new to Christian debate, lol.

 

[francisdesales]

I thought it was funny but I should have said that Calvinists pick daisies and say, “He loves me, he loves you not, he loves me, he loves you not…†:-D

:-D :-D

I liked that one better!

 

[cyberjosh]

God loves even those in hell. Forgiveness of sin is not the same as God loving us. God does not cease to love us EVER.

I'm not sure how far you mean to take that, however that view isn't far from the front door step of universal reconcilliation. Could you clarify, biblically?

Thanks,

~Josh

 

[unred typo]

quote by Cymbalistic1:
Pretty much, the way I understand it is that Jesus died for all of our sins, past, present, and future. We're all already fully forgiven for any and everything.

And go easy on me; I'm new to Christian debate, lol.

LOL. I’ll try to be gentle, but it’s like ripping off a bandage, it’s gonna hurt. Especially if it’s been on there too long. Let’s take it by peeling back a little at a time then:

When we first hear we have offended God with our bad behavior, and we confess that our lives have been all about us and not ‘love one another’, and that we repent of our sin, want to please God now and follow Christ, we are forgiven of all the sins of the past and all things are become new. If we died then, we would go to be with the Lord. We were saved from our sins. We’re ecstatic.

Now, when reality of following Christ hits us, and we begin to turn the other cheek, not gossip, not lie, not follow the sinful ways we used to do, we will suffer persecution. We can then choose to fall back into the old ways and give up our commitment to following Christ or we can buckle down and stick to the new way of life. If we choose to drop out, and deliberately sin after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for our sin, because we have forsaken the way that leads us to life. We must start again where we were, confess our sin, and return to following the way of Christ. Some even say this is impossible to do but with God all things are possible. Repentance is the key.

I reject the idea you were taught that confession once includes all sin, past, present and future. How can you confess and repent of sin that you haven’t committed yet? That’s like saying, “I’m really sorry I ever hit you, I truly repent of hitting you, and I don’t ever want to do it again but I’m probably coming over and punching you in the ace tomorrow.†That’s just wrong.

There, that didn’t hurt too much did it? :smt064

 

[Guest]

Being forgiven and seeking repentance - two seperate things.

 

[francisdesales]

I'm not sure how far you mean to take that, however that view isn't far from the front door step of universal reconcilliation. Could you clarify, biblically?

Josh,

The very existence of hell is an indication that God loves even those who do not love Him. God could remove ALL being, all traces of Himself, from the damned, and they would not exist anymore, since God IS. We ARE merely because we share in God's IS. Thus, existence implies that God continues to love us. I think the story of the prodigal son is an example of how God continues to love us even when we turn from Him. Do you think the father in the story would have STOPPED loving his wayward son if the son never returned home? When if there was not a famine? Do you think the father STILL would have loved his son?

The existence of hell is not on the "front door step" of universal reconcilliation". The existence of hell means just the opposite. A person in hell is not reconciled with God. He may not love God, but that doesn't mean that God doesn't love that person - He continues to provide for that person's existence. However, that person will never receive eternal happiness, will never be fully human, will never be united with God into the Trinity of Love that God calls us to participate in.

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

He may not love God, but that doesn't mean that God doesn't love that person - He continues to provide for that person's existence.

I wouldn't call that love but rather justice. Love always has an end (a goal) it works towards. Love towards those in hell is futile without redemption. Actually existance for those in hell is not a blessing, it would be better if they were annihilated. But unfortunately for them they will not be annihilated (to those who care: no I do not want this to turn into an annihilation debate), but it would have been better for them if they had never been born.

What you speak of is called common grace, but it ends at the judgement as can be seen in Hebrews 6:6-7 (right after the apostacy passage), "For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close [denotes an end] to being cursed, and it ends up being burned." God is not a lover of vain and worthless things. He extends love to all while they are alive but if they are damned and seperated from His presence I suggest they are given wholely over to their sin nature, no restraint or hopes of future redemption. I could be wrong, because this latter part is speculation but I do believe however that God does not extend love in any sense that we think of to those in hell.

 

[Lewis]

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is the one.

 

[francisdesales]

I wouldn't call that love but rather justice. Love always has an end (a goal) it works towards. Love towards those in hell is futile without redemption. Actually existance for those in hell is not a blessing, it would be better if they were annihilated.

God gives those in hell what they wanted - life without God. Often, hell is described as a place of physical punishment. We don't really know whether those are metaphors or not. Does God really torture people through eternity? That is a question we cannot understand or answer at this point. However, we know that a person would be worse off in heaven, from that person's point of view.

Perhaps an example may help...

Imagine living with someone, being with them throughout the day, all day, every day. This person loves you, but you despise them. How long would it take you to say "Get me the heck out of here, I can't stand you anymore"? We see this all the time in marriages - one way love where the other person loves something else (or themself) and feels the desperate need to get out. Placing someone in heaven who doesn't WANT to be there would be a worse punishment then sending someone to hell (which is an existence without God - the rest of the "physical punishments" we don't know about).

What you speak of is called common grace, but it ends at the judgement as can be seen in Hebrews 6:6-7 (right after the apostacy passage), "For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close [denotes an end] to being cursed, and it ends up being burned." God is not a lover of vain and worthless things. He extends love to all while they are alive but if they are damned and seperated from His presence I suggest they are given wholely over to their sin nature, no restraint or hopes of future redemption. I could be wrong, because this latter part is speculation but I do believe however that God does not extend love in any sense that we think of to those in hell.

Well, that is certainly your opinion. I believe that God's love for us is unconditional. Even when we were in sin, He STILL died for us. Seeing that He KNEW that some would REFUSE His love throughout their lives, God STILL died for ALL men, so the Scriptures repeat over and over again. Think about that, Josh. God's love is unconditional. He loves us even after we have sinned. You are attributing to God a conditional love - "I will only love you if you love me". The Scriptures do not speak this way about God. Sure, God's wrath presents Itself to those who have earned it, but according to Romans 1, God's wrath is NOT destruction, but allowing man to FOLLOW HIS DESIRES - right into hell, if they desire. It is in their evil, their own doing, that they are punished. Read the last half of that chapter and let me know what you think about how God's wrath is manifested to those deserving of it.

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

Think about that, Josh. God's love is unconditional.

Ok, to what end? I do not deny that God died for all men, regardless of the fact that it will not save all men.

Like I said love always has an end goal. To what end would it serve to the eternally damned? And would you suggest that God is also not angry with those who chose the way of wickedness? Hell was created for the devil and his angels, and those who walk in the way of the devil share in Satan's deeds, and God does not love Satan.


~Josh

 

[Cymbalistic1]

to unred typo:

Ha! I need to be alot more clear when posting, lol. In all truthfulness, what you said is what I believe, but I also believe what I said too. I realize that its rather conflicting when I don't clarify myself, which is why I hope to do so now.

You see, as I said, I believe that we are all already forgiven for everything, but as you said (if I understood right), we'll be tested as time goes on. To make it short, if we fall off the "straight and narrow" then we'll have to seek repentance and honor the fact that Jesus did die for our sins by doing all we can to get back on the right path and stay there.