Replies

Could, yes. Will? No, because God wouldn’t allow me to do it. His Holy Spirit, which resides in me, will not allow such a thing. I wouldn’t even want to try. I couldn’t contemplate me even wanting to. But, if all my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus, then ALL my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus. Every single one of them. Those I did, those I do now, and those I will do in the future.

I know you do not understand, and I understand why you do not understand. I will pray for your understanding about this. And, once you do understand... praise God!

***Could, yes. Will? No, because God wouldn’t allow me to do it. His Holy Spirit, which resides in me, will not allow such a thing. ***

Now do you understand why we regard the Reformed doctrine with such horror? Because the Reformed regard heinous acts as merely trivial things that the Holy Spirit wouldn’t permit the individual to do if it were truly heinous. And even if they perform them, it still does not stop the ride to Heaven.

This is the Gnosticism that we are attempting to warn you guys about. Jesus dying on the Cross does not give you permission to sin.

Mark to Irish: So what you are saying is that you, as a Reformed believer, could rape 1000 women, kill 1000 men, steal millions of dollars, drop atomic weapons, infect millions of people with AIDS, put thousands of people in jail on false charges, and violate every single temporal and moral law that you know of and you would still go to heaven?

Irish: Could, yes. Will? No, because God wouldn’t allow me to do it. His Holy Spirit, which resides in me, will not allow such a thing. I wouldn’t even want to try. I couldn’t contemplate me even wanting to. But, if all my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus, then ALL my sins are covered by the blood of Jesus. Every single one of them. Those I did, those I do now, and those I will do in the future.

Yes, that's a good way to put it. Well done. :)

Mark, from your above I infer that you think that if someone did all those things that he would be barred from Heaven, is that right? But, what if someone did all those things and then really repented and asked the forgiveness of a priest after convincing him that he was sincere? Wouldn't that person be just fine and saved in the Church's eyes at that point? I mean, at least until he committed the least mortal sin after that? IOW, are you saying that there is a "sin threshold" (not involving the Spirit) after which one crosses he cannot be saved no matter what a priest does on his behalf? I've never heard of that.

Irish, and Quix, and I are all saying that Christ died for all of our sins, past, present and future. That gives His death real meaning and worth. Consider these:

Luke 19:10 : For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."

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.

Now, these both say that Christ came to save, but did He really? We would say YES, that's exactly what He came to do, AND He did it! However, I think that your side doesn't see it that way at all. For you Christ actually saved no one, He only made it possible for men to cooperate and finish the job that Christ didn't/couldn't finish by saving themselves. Which victory for Christ has more meaning, the one where He does it all, or the one where He passes the buck? :)