When we sin do we disconnect?

[pnattmbtc]

i think grace "ends" when no one else is accepting it. everyone has become firmly determined to go one way or the other, so "grace" or chances, no longer has anyone to work on...

I think this is a good way of putting it.

[Gerr]

Consider Moses, as an example. He committed an intentional sin when he struck the rock. Would he have been in big trouble if he had died when he did so?

I am not so sure that Moses premeditatively/high-handedly struck the Rock. Remember, the people have been constantly complaining and criticizing Moses in spite of all the visual and aural evidence of God's care for them. Have you ever reflexively gotten angry? You know that that can short-circuit your brain and makes you do something you didn't mean to do at all.

[Gerr]

There are different judgments which occur at different times, each of which consider the same facts. The angels look at things at one point in time, the saved at another, and the lost at another, although they each consider the same evidence.

Since justification and pardon are "one and the same," it follows that we are repeatedly justified, given that we are repeatedly pardoned. Conversely, if we are only justified once, then we are only pardoned once.

Angels are not the judge. They record only what they see. You judgment as to whether ultimately saved or lost occurs when your name comes up for judgment.

[Twilight]

Quote:

I would define nature, as that which is inherited from the parent.

Do you mean what one inherits from one's parents at conception? Are you considering things other than DNA?

Yes, I am. :-)

[Gerr]

It can be held in a state of death.

As revealed in Galatians.

Where in Galatians is that?

[pnattmbtc]

T:I would define nature, as that which is inherited from the parent.

p:Do you mean what one inherits from one's parents at conception? Are you considering things other than DNA?

T:Yes, I am. :-)

Are you intentionally wishing to be unclear? If so, there's no point in continuing a discussion. If no, would you please clarify what you meant.

There are many things which one can inherit from one's parents which have nothing to do with one's nature. For example, money, to name one thing. "Inheritance" is a very broad term. If you're talking about conception, that would limit it to DNA, it would seem to me. If your talking about birth, that would include prenatal influences as well. But if one is going to include pre-natal influences, why not post-natal ones? What point in time are you talking about when you say "that which is inherited from the parent." This seems to me to be a critical question to understanding your statement, yet you didn't respond to the question. You just said you're considering more than DNA.

[Gerr]

I believe that Gods Grace extends over us, whilst we travel the road that leads to total death of the flesh, with the passions and lusts.

That when we sin, the part of the relationship being maintained is that of Gods part reaching out to us.

Therefore, until God breaks of that relationship with us, we are still justified from His standpoint, right?

Quote:

Because once Jesus stands up, we have no more intercession, there is no more grace to extend to us if we break that connection.

But we will also be sealed, so that has to be born in mnd.

Your thoughts?

That's when you REALLY find out whether you've REALLY been justified or not! The one who perseveres to the end is the one who will be saved.

[Gerr]

Yes, you were.

It is in this statement below that I was making a categorical statement, not in the previous post.

Quote:

I am making a categorical statement that Jesus was born, "in the likeness of sinful flesh", Ro 8:3; shared "in flesh and blood," Heb 2:14, born "holy" Lk 1:35, and "in Him was no sin," 1 Jn 3:5. And that He had NO propensity or inborn inclination to sin. IOW, in moral terms, he was on the level with Adam, but had the body of a man over 4k yrs after Adam.

[pnattmbtc]

p:Consider Moses, as an example. He committed an intentional sin when he struck the rock. Would he have been in big trouble if he had died when he did so?

G:I am not so sure that Moses premeditatively/high-handedly struck the Rock.

[pnattmbtc]

p:There are different judgments which occur at different times, each of which consider the same facts. The angels look at things at one point in time, the saved at another, and the lost at another, although they each consider the same evidence.

Since justification and pardon are "one and the same," it follows that we are repeatedly justified, given that we are repeatedly pardoned. Conversely, if we are only justified once, then we are only pardoned once.

G:Angels are not the judge. They record only what they see.

[Gerr]

What do you mean by "saved" and "lost"?

I mean: saved = justified, and lost = unjustified.

Quote:

My point was that if justification is one and the same thing as pardon, then if we are pardoned repeatedly, we must be justified repeatedly. That's correct, isn't it?

If that is the case, then we are justified/saved everytime we repent, and unjustified/lost everytime we sin per your reasoning, right?

But Heb 10:10 has this to say: "And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." ESV.

"And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." NIV.

"have been sanctified"/"have been made holy" is perfect tense, "once for all." Like justification, sanctification can't be on again/off again kind of arrangement. The final tally as to whether one has maintained justification/pardon & sanctification comes when one is judged after death or just before the close of probation.

[Gerr]

Why would one label the indwelling of the Holy Spirit at birth as "nature"?

This is obvious, isn't it? Whatever is inherent in you at birth IS your nature.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

So do you maintain then that we are: saved, lost, saved, lost, saved, etc. etc. until Jesus comes?

«For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.» Heb 10:14

Thanks for that, Just. I just posted Heb 10:10 "And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." When we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior, we declared righteous and perfect before the universe. That status does not change until the records are examined to see if we have persevered and maintained that status. That's how I understand it. This is quite different from once-saved-always-saved.

[pnattmbtc]

p:Why would one label the indwelling of the Holy Spirit at birth as "nature"?

Twilight:Our nature is what we inherit at birth isn't it?

G:This is obvious, isn't it? Whatever is inherent in you at birth IS your nature.

Why birth? Why not conception? What's special about birth in terms of defining one's nature?

You seem to be arguing if a person is born with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, then this is "inherent," and thus a part of that person's nature. However, Twilight agreed with me earlier that it is not only Jesus Christ who could be born filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, using the suggested argument, one would conclude that this other person filled with the Holy Spirit had a different nature than those other babies who weren't filled with the Holy Spirit at birth.

This is "obvious"?

[Gerr]

yet, i do believe that we separate ourselves from God when we sin, or drift away. big difference as i see it. God is still there, but we arent. we are off doing our own thing, so to speak...

But the point we are discussing is whether you lose your justification/pardon/salvation every time you sin, and reinstated each time you repent. And I say, not.

[pnattmbtc]

p:My point was that if justification is one and the same thing as pardon, then if we are pardoned repeatedly, we must be justified repeatedly. That's correct, isn't it?

G:If that is the case, then we are justified/saved everytime we repent, and unjustified/lost everytime we sin per your reasoning, right?

Not necessarily. It depends upon how one defines one's terms. Let's stick with my question for a moment, please, and we can come back to your question.

If justification and pardon are one and the same, then if one is pardoned repeatedly, then it must follow that one is justified repeatedly. If you disagree that one is justified repeatedly then you must believe either:

a.One is only pardoned once.

b.Justification and pardon are not "one and the same."

This is correct reasoning, correct? If you disagree, please point out where you see a flaw in the reasoning. If you agree, then which of a. and/or b. do you disagree with?

[Gerr]

Angels are among the judges. The entire universe will judge. This is what the Great Controversy is all about, the judgment as to whether or not God has been just in all His ways. That's the really big thing going on. Our individual cases come into play, of course, but they are a part of the bigger issue.

Christ is THE Judge. The angels and the universe are judges only in the sense of their opinion as whether they approve of Christ's verdict or not.

Quote:

Whether one's name comes up simply reflects the reality of one's character. The judgment doesn't make something happen that wouldn't have happened anyway. It's simply a means by which other beings besides God (who already knows what's going on) can see things.

The sum of your character is what's in the books.

Quote:

I've made the following point a couple of times now:

Quote:

Since justification and pardon are "one and the same," it follows that we are repeatedly justified, given that we are repeatedly pardoned. Conversely, if we are only justified once, then we are only pardoned once.

I don't believe you've commented. Do you agree with what I wrote here?

I believe I have answered that question. I don't believe that our justification/pardon/salvation is OFF every time we sin and ON again like a switch every time we repent. Heb 10:10 & 14 says we have been sanctified and made perfect once for all or for all time. That status changes only if we are found unfaithful when we come up for judgment.

[Gerr]

Why birth? Why not conception? What's special about birth in terms of defining one's nature?

Ok, if you want to get technical. The reason I mention "birth" is because not all conception results in live births.

Quote:

You seem to be arguing if a person is born with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, then this is "inherent," and thus a part of that person's nature. However, Twilight agreed with me earlier that it is not only Jesus Christ who could be born filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, using the suggested argument, one would conclude that this other person filled with the Holy Spirit had a different nature than those other babies who weren't filled with the Holy Spirit at birth.

This is "obvious"?

I believe there's a gulf of difference between being conceived by the Spirit (Christ) and born filled with the Spirit (John the Baptist).

[Gerr]

If justification and pardon are one and the same, then if one is pardoned repeatedly, then it must follow that one is justified repeatedly. If you disagree that one is justified repeatedly then you must believe either:

a.One is only pardoned once.

b.Justification and pardon are not "one and the same."

Heb 10:14 "because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." NIV.

Christ's sacrifice covers all sins have ever committed, what

we are committing now, and sins we commit tomorrow. And if we have been made perfect (perfect tense), that means that while still on your journey, you remain justified/considered perfect as though never sinned. But the moment of truth comes when we come up for judgment. The judgment will then reveal what sort of faith we had - whether dead or live.

Quote:

This is correct reasoning, correct? If you disagree, please point out where you see a flaw in the reasoning. If you agree, then which of a. and/or b. do you disagree with?

See above. The flaw in your position as I see it, is that if you sin and die before you can repent or confess, you're a dead duck!

[pnattmbtc]

p:Angels are among the judges. The entire universe will judge. This is what the Great Controversy is all about, the judgment as to whether or not God has been just in all His ways. That's the really big thing going on. Our individual cases come into play, of course, but they are a part of the bigger issue.

G:Christ is THE Judge. The angels and the universe are judges only in the sense of their opinion as whether they approve of Christ's verdict or not.

[pnattmbtc]

p:If justification and pardon are one and the same, then if one is pardoned repeatedly, then it must follow that one is justified repeatedly. If you disagree that one is justified repeatedly then you must believe either:

a.One is only pardoned once.

b.Justification and pardon are not "one and the same."

G:Heb 10:14 "because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." NIV.

Christ's sacrifice covers all sins have ever committed, what

we are committing now, and sins we commit tomorrow. And if we have been made perfect (perfect tense), that means that while still on your journey, you remain justified/considered perfect as though never sinned. But the moment of truth comes when we come up for judgment. The judgment will then reveal what sort of faith we had - whether dead or live.

p:This is correct reasoning, correct? If you disagree, please point out where you see a flaw in the reasoning. If you agree, then which of a. and/or b. do you disagree with?

G:See above.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

It can be held in a state of death.

As revealed in Galatians.

Where in Galatians is that?

Galatians 5... :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

T:I would define nature, as that which is inherited from the parent.

p:Do you mean what one inherits from one's parents at conception? Are you considering things other than DNA?

T:Yes, I am. :-)

Are you intentionally wishing to be unclear? If so, there's no point in continuing a discussion. If no, would you please clarify what you meant.

There are many things which one can inherit from one's parents which have nothing to do with one's nature. For example, money, to name one thing. "Inheritance" is a very broad term. If you're talking about conception, that would limit it to DNA, it would seem to me. If your talking about birth, that would include prenatal influences as well. But if one is going to include pre-natal influences, why not post-natal ones? What point in time are you talking about when you say "that which is inherited from the parent." This seems to me to be a critical question to understanding your statement, yet you didn't respond to the question. You just said you're considering more than DNA.

Patience pnat... :-)

Your nature is what you are born with, right?

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I believe that Gods Grace extends over us, whilst we travel the road that leads to total death of the flesh, with the passions and lusts.

That when we sin, the part of the relationship being maintained is that of Gods part reaching out to us.

Therefore, until God breaks of that relationship with us, we are still justified from His standpoint, right?

That is the difficult question Gerry.

I do not think so.

Because Eve, without repentance would have been lost, in spite of Gods calling out for her...

[Twilight]

It is in this statement below that I was making a categorical statement, not in the previous post.

Quote:

I am making a categorical statement that Jesus was born, "in the likeness of sinful flesh", Ro 8:3; shared "in flesh and blood," Heb 2:14, born "holy" Lk 1:35, and "in Him was no sin," 1 Jn 3:5. And that He had NO propensity or inborn inclination to sin. IOW, in moral terms, he was on the level with Adam, but had the body of a man over 4k yrs after Adam.

I concurr...