Fairlight said:
"Demonic twisting of scriptures" ????
Mark, disagree if you must but Calling David or his article "Demonic", is a bit much ! I don't think David is saying that sin can't be forgiven. God can certainly forgive anything BUT a person needs to appropriate that forgiveness. In order for that to happen they must first repent of their sin. Authentic repentence, by definition must actually include some "REPENTENCE" !!!! That means making a complete 180 and NOT continuing in any deliberate, habitual sin. I don't know why this is being criticised ? This is basic "Christianity 101".
Fairlight
Your comments are interesting, Fairlight, and I will try to give them the detailed response they deserve, although perhaps in reverse order.
But I will start with this. I clearly got angry, during the process of criticism of a flawed, dangerously misleading work. I contended then, and still do, that those specific issues I raised above were ignored (and even that those argument raised in this board in previous threads had been dealt with improperly) and should be addressed before people are condemned.
And I will go no further down that path at this point, because I do not want to defend myself. I appreciate what Edward wrote and quoted above*, and accept his criticism as well. "Let God be True, and every man a liar."
On to "Christianity 101". Edward just posted a single summary, but is so important that it bears repeating:
"...For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins...
...we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all...
...this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
...by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."
From Genesis One onward, the message of the Torah (which He said clearly will not change 'till "heaven and earth" pass), and the Writings, and the Prophets, and the Gospels, and the Letters, and the Witnesses hinges on Who He Is, and tells what He has done, and will do.
If He has made us clean, and washed us in His blood, who denies that Authority? (Acts 11:9) Does the perfect sacrifice of the blood of our Savior have the power to cleanse us "from
ALL unrightousness" or not? Can He make us "new creations in Him", give us a new birth, redeem us, and make us "free indeed", or is He a liar? He even says (through more than one witness, and including Hebrews),
"And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more."
That is "Christianity 101", I contend. And it all hinges on whether He IS Who He says He IS, and honors His Covenants.
And it is not complicated, Fairlight.
The "continuing in sin" deception is the issue. That fallacy can only be perpetuated by denying so much of "Christianity 101" -- not only that we can be cleansed and reborn -- ONCE!!!! Not as a continual mockery of His sacrifice! -- but also that He provided for divorce. And anyone who would try to deny that "the hardness of our hearts" has been done away with as well needs to take a good look around!
The claim that one "continues in murder" requires a continuing string of bodies, just as continuing in theft mans additional thievery. The twisting in the article is little different from the twisting of those who claim that ANY second marriage of a man while his wife yet lives is "adultery"; they even use most of the very same verses, and draw the same conclusions: "put her away!" Such accusations have been used for centuries to destroy families. Whether those claims "forbidding to marry" constitute a "doctrine of demons" or not, I leave for you to "study for yourself".
Scripture forbids "adding to" His Word, although Pharisees, scribes, and popes, and others who put the "traditions of man" above the commandments of God have done exactly that throughout history. For the Pharisees, "keeping Sabbath" was not enough; they took it upon themselves to define HOW FAR one could walk, they forbade certain mitzvot (healing, for one), and in general added "burdens" that Yeshua renounced. He made His point by not only healing on the Sabbath, but by breaking a number of man-made
halacha (rulings) in the process.
Yeshua "continued in sin" by
continuing to
BREAK THEIR MAN-MADE RULES. Every time His disciples husked grain in their palms on the Sabbath, they condemned Him! He kept His Word, His "Law", perfectly, and taught us discernment by breaking their imitation of it, every chance He had. He made an open mockery of their tradition, and they sought to kill Him for it.
But I will cite Scripture to make the point:
There is no idle Word in His teaching and understanding. When He used clear, distinct terminology to describe the difference between "putting away", and a lawful procedure for ending a marriage Covenant, He did so deliberately (Deut. 24:1, repeated specifically in 24:3). He would not have described a procedure in detail if He did not mean that there is a difference between doing as He commands, and doing otherwise (which is called "rebellion" in English). Yeshua clarified this perfectly (Matthew 5:32, even if the AKJV translators were wrong**). This has been hashed out repeatedly, and I contend that David's article does not do justice to the text, and disingenuously dismisses contrary arguments. But the bottom line is, I will not try to do a better job of clarifying what Yeshua said than He already did -- by His Words and His example.
Finally, a simple example is sufficient to dismiss the "continuing in sin" deception without falling for the "Torah is done away with" counter fallacy of "shall we sin more, that grace might abound?" ...And at this point I started to write an example which illustrates that point. But the point is simple, and needs no example.
If ANYONE is "washed clean", NONE of what came before matters! God says He can even forget, so why is it that we cannot? And if the woman accused of adultery has a "certificate of divorce", and has sought to demonstrate repentance by obedience, how much more so? And if she now
knows she has been forgiven, and is now in Covenant with a believing man who covers her, who is it that accuses her of adultery? Gather up those stones.
I find it ironic that it is those who claim that "the Law has been done away with" who so often the legalistically seek to add burdens to it, and put others "under" it -- even those not "under" their authority!
The "burden of proof" must be on the Accuser. One who takes it upon himself to claim that another man's wife is an adulterer, and thus threatens his marriage, his wife, and his house, should -- as Scripture witnesses repeatedly -- be especially careful before "forbidding to marry", or -- arguably worse still -- commanding a wife to "depart" from a husband, or a husband to "put her away". How dare some do what Yeshua did not (John 8:11) -- and without the "testimony of two or three witnesses" besides!
God's Word makes it clear that there is NO sin that he cannot cleanse, through His blood. There is NO sin that He is not able to forget.
"Let God be True, and every man a liar."
Blessings in Him,
Mark
---------------------------------
* WAY above - where he quoted at length from Hebrews. You folks must type fastern' I...
** I'll try to edit a pointer in later. I know I'm already over a full page behind.
)