Satan's doctrinal temptation: Believe in falling with salvation

[makesends]

I am only stating the obvious. You make no response to any point of the teaching I give. You only make it personal, and then make your own position independent of mine.

Until you show any verse contradicting my argument, or show any error in the argument itself, then it still stands as before: the one great doctrine of Satan recorded in the Bible, is temptation to believe in unconditional salvation security in this life.

It's pretty obvious that you wish to excoriate anyone who thinks differently from you. Notice you have yet to answer, From 1 John chapter 1: "8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us."

You won't say one way or the other where you stand as to sinlessness, yet you propose what nobody except Christ himself has done. I've shown you a passage contradicting your misuse of other passages of Scripture, and you have yet to show how it fits. —No, it's worse than that! You claim that the rest of us are in grievous error, and make eternal security about the pretended sinless believer, instead of about the dependable word, and sure work of God!

Do you claim that you are not after all at God's mercy, instead of living up to some equation by which you are safe? None of us claim sin is ok, for which you criticize a strawman, yet you yourself are the only one I've seen here who claims "it's ok" for the unsaved to sin. No! It is not ok for anyone to sin!

We all —except you, apparently— admit to our own sinful horror, and shrink from it in pain and sorrow, and gladly trust in God's justice and mercy, fearing his purity and power, knowing his judgement has been placed upon his own precious Son on our behalf, his Spirit witnessing to our spirits that we are the children of God. And you want to trust your obedience for security??? You should know better by now! I'm guessing you also believe that your salvation came about by way of the integrity of your choice to accept him into your heart, and by your immense gratitude for what he has done submitting your life to him. Has not experience shown you how silly, weak, ignorant, fitful, rebellious, self-important, presumptuous, self-serving and foolish we all are?

Isaiah 28: "19 ...The understanding of this message will bring sheer terror. 20 The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you."

"...
15 You boast, “We have entered into a covenant with death,
with the realm of the dead we have made an agreement.
When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by,
it cannot touch us,
for we have made a lie our refuge
and falsehood our hiding place.”

16 So this is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation;
the one who relies on it
will never be stricken with panic.
17 I will make justice the measuring line
and righteousness the plumb line;
hail will sweep away your refuge, the lie,
and water will overflow your hiding place.
18 Your covenant with death will be annulled;
your agreement with the realm of the dead will not stand.
When the overwhelming scourge sweeps by,
you will be beaten down by it.
19 As often as it comes it will carry you away;
morning after morning, by day and by night,
it will sweep through.”

The understanding of this message
will bring sheer terror.
20 The bed is too short to stretch out on,
the blanket too narrow to wrap around you..."

 

[makesends]

Do you not believe Satan's doctrine of eternal salvation security on earth?

I believe in God's word concerning what he will accomplish and his promise to see through what he has begun.

Do you not argue against being without sin and not sinning?

Do you never sin?

Do you not believe in falling to temptation and sin with your salvation upheld by God? Do you not believe all sons of God on earth, will still continue sinning more or less?

My salvation does not depend on my faithfulness, but on his. And,"...continue sinning more or less" is a useless statement, given by one who mocks the fact that their own lack of integrity is right there before their own eyes. No, "continue sinning" is not Biblical language, and I need not explain away or work around even one bit of Scripture you claim I should answer.

I agree with Scripture, but you do not agree with 1 John 1. I doubt you will understand, but I will try to give you a literal rendering of the Greek: verse 9: "If we are confessing our sin, he is faithful and just to have already forgiven us our sin." The forgiveness is accomplished —done— in past, but contingent on our continual confessing it—not denying it.

Or do you just want to believe that kind of teaching and witness of your own life, doesn't make it 'ok'?

What teaching —the false strawman you make of what I teach? What I teach doesn't make it ok. Have you not encountered the fear of God who has the burning power of purity such that I have no appeal, but Christ, and yet he shows me mercy, forebearance and patience for no reason that I can account to myself.

Any honest thief knows it's ok to steal, so long as he can get away with it. Preordained salvation and justification while disobeying God (however often or not), makes it definitely ok in that gospel book.

Here's one of the best quotes I've ever heard from Christians, that believe in their own imputed righteousness by faith alone, while continuing to do unrighteousness with the world.

"I am going to sin later, tomorrow, and most likely the next day, but God sees me as holy, sinless, righteous."

Don't you agree this is 'ok'? Or do you denounce it like me, as being from Satan's doctrine that sinning is ok, since sons shall surely not die by sinning?

I denounce it, but not like you, because you claim it is by your own righteousness that you are safe.

Or perhaps, you just don't think it's ok to be so open about this normal thinking, that results from eternal salvation security on earth?

I believe it's a great way to say it. Because it lacks all the pretty pretense and polish of pseudo-theological arguments, that most similar believers try to hide it in.

For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

No, my thinking is that you have little concept of a life before Christ that longs to be with him, as opposed to standing worthy before him. You don't know life that depends on God and that is grateful for God's assessment instead of self-esteem, because the redeemed is only what God has in mind for him, and not one's own performance or worth.

Do you not know the depth of fear of God that has nothing to do with condemnation? Just today I saw on another thread, in a conversation with @Mr GLee Job's confession of his terror of the Redeemer he loves —the Almighty who can and will do whatever he pleases with his own.

Once again ad nauseum. Already responded and quickly bypassed.

I know you're not a debater but only a personal interrogator and speech maker. Unfortunately, it's more common than not. And so, I accept it, and only continue inserting from time to time, until it's no more interesting to me.

When you begin to be honest about all Scripture, and stop describing strawmen about my teaching, maybe this could turn into a debate. Until then, you are like the many who came before you, pretending they were good enough to make it, but everyone else a pretender. I will abstain from calling you a troll, at this point. God go with you.

 

[makesends]

You mistake me for someone else like you. And so, you make a presumptive boast. You are not a christ example to me, that all believers should believe and be like.

I am not your own 'kind of Christian'. And neither are you mine. And so, we speak for ourselves only, and not for the other.

You didn't even hear what I said, apparently. You are imputing someone else's silly claim to me. Yes, you definitely don't speak for me because you have me all wrong! I have not claimed to be Christ's example to you, nor that how God sees me is MINE to boast about, as though *I* had something to do with it!

 

[Ghada]

It's pretty obvious that you wish to excoriate anyone who thinks differently from you.

You make things personal and then get offended?

Or you get offended at your doctrine being Satan's?

If unconditioned security is not Satan's, then you now need to finally address the actual argument to show any flaw in it.

Personal interrogation of the messenger, speech making, and personal offense is hardly a rebuttal to opposing doctrine.

 

[Ghada]

Notice you have yet to answer, From 1 John chapter 1: "8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us."

You won't say one way or the other where you stand as to sinlessness, yet you propose what nobody except Christ himself has done. I've shown you a passage contradicting your misuse of other passages of Scripture, and you have yet to show how it fits.

One more time to say already responded. You need to go back and actually read what is said to see it.

I'll no longer point this out.

—No, it's worse than that! You claim that the rest of us are in grievous error,

My original post teaches it, and so I'll own it. Until you show any flaw in it, then it's just you getting angry about your own conscience being convicted.

That is also the normal response of the unrepentant. And since, salvation without repentance is the gospel you preach, then it all just fits together.

Commanded to repent by God, refuse to repent by hardened hearts, offended at preaching gospel of repentance unto salvation...

 

[Ghada]

and make eternal security about the pretended sinless believer,

Eternal security is made about Satan's doctrinal temptation to the Son and sons of God:

instead of about the dependable word, and sure work of God!

The dependable and sure word of God records Satan's effort to tempt the Son with it.

And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

You can still read the first post to see how the two go together.

If you see any flaw in the argument, I'll be glad to take a look at it.

 

[makesends]

You make things personal and then get offended?

Or you get offended at your doctrine being Satan's?

If unconditioned security is not Satan's, then you now need to finally address the actual argument to show any flaw in it.

Personal interrogation of the messenger, speech making, and personal offense is hardly a rebuttal to opposing doctrine.

What was this I quote below, but smartmouthing? If this was intellectually honest talk, then I'd like to know how you can come to the conclusion that I agree, simply because what I said, (or didn't say), is, to your view, a non-answer?

Ghada said:
A nonanswer to the teaching. So you agree.

My doctrine isn't Satan's. You get an idea in your head as to what my doctrine is, then misrepresent it by presenting what you think my doctrine works out to, and that, without even knowing what I teach, but just assuming it.

No, you are offensive, true, but I would have to take you seriously to be very much offended. You give yourself too much credit.

 

[makesends]

One more time to say already responded. You need to go back and actually read what is said to see it.

I'll no longer point this out.


My original post teaches it, and so I'll own it. Until you show any flaw in it, then it's just you getting angry about your own conscience being convicted.

That is also the normal response of the unrepentant. And since, salvation without repentance is the gospel you preach, then it all just fits together.

Commanded to repent by God, refuse to repent by hardened hearts, offended at preaching gospel of repentance unto salvation...

I don't have to go back to remember your attempted answer, where you said you repented. That did not answer the question.

Your original post presented your point of view but proved nothing. There is no need to prove it wrong. The one passage I presented did, however, give reason to believe it wrong, and you have not shown how your op fits that passage. All you did was to double down and describe [what you took to be] my teaching as Satanic.

 

[Ghada]

None of us claim sin is ok, for which you criticize a strawman, yet you yourself are the only one I've seen here who claims "it's ok" for the unsaved to sin. No! It is not ok for anyone to sin!

What I show is, that the doctrine of unconditional security of soul makes it ok for it's believers to sin. But not ok for it's unbelievers to sin like them.

It's ok for the unconditionally saved to sin, because their covers their sinning by having faith in it. For those that do not make such a doctrine for themselves, they have no cover making it ok for them to fall and sin with salvation.

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

This Christian doctrinal hypocrisy, makes oneself uncondemned by their doctrinal faith alone. But the unenlightened sinners have no such noncondemning doctrine to trust in by 'unbelief'.

And of course it's that old serpent's doctrine, that makes such enlightened sinners believe that they are not condemned while sinning like others:

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die.

This is first openly bold lie recorded in the Bible. Anyone believing the lie, do certainly say that they surely do not die by sinning.

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

They openly and unashamedly say so, because their eyes have been opened to the wondrous liberty of saved sinning without condemnation.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

Unlike old unlightened sinners, they now convert to the immortal enlightenment of the gods, who by their own power to believe alone, they are forever alive to God, while doing both good and evil.

But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

The eye of the serpent is opened to be and do evil with everlasting life. I call it illuminati Christianity.

 

[Ghada]

We all —except you, apparently— admit to our own sinful horror

Only the Christian illuminaties declare plainly, that they are not dead, but alive to God while doing evil. They can fall to temptation and lust with salvation of God bearing them up on angels' wings of unconditional love, nonjudgmental grace, and noncondemning harmonia. Amen.

And as they themselves say, it certainly is horrifying. but true. The horrifyingly true doctrine of the serpent's evil eye: Enlightened sons do not die by sinning, but only unlightened nonsons die by sinning.

In the Bible, hating iniquity is by not doing it, not by being horrified at doing it.

And loving righteousness is by doing it, not by being horrified at not doing it.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

, and shrink from it in pain and sorrow,

Yes, yes. Of course. But like all shrink wrap, after so long of being horrified by committing sin, the conscience begins to develop a certain immunity to just how really horrible it was when first believed.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

I mean, it is true that people can only be so sorrowful and horrified for only so long...

and gladly trust in God's justice and mercy

Yes. Yes again and again: Trusting one's christ to keep the enlightened sinners saved while sinning horribly.

And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

, fearing his purity and power, knowing his judgement has been placed upon his own precious Son on our behalf,

For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

Jesus Christ died because of our sinning, so we were all guilty of His death on the cross.

The law of God for sin and death, did not die with Jesus at the cross. The wages of sinning is only paid for old past sins, when any man repents of sinning for Jesus' sake.

He pays the price only for past sinning repented of, not for present sinning unrepented of.

The hardened unrepented hearts are still guilty of crucifying the Son when sinning against Him and the Father.

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Satan's tempting doctrine is to believe we are borne up with God's salvation, while falling away to sinning and crucifying the Son afresh.

And you want to trust your obedience for security???

It's certainly better than trusting your disobedience with security. Don't you think?

 

[makesends]

Eternal security is made about Satan's doctrinal temptation to the Son and sons of God:






The dependable and sure word of God records Satan's effort to tempt the Son with it.

And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

You can still read the first post to see how the two go together.

If you see any flaw in the argument, I'll be glad to take a look at it.

The flaw is there and obvious. Eternal security is, as I said, by the work of God and not by the redeemed. It is a sure thing, not accomplished by the person.

Your example is about putting God to the test as far as one's temporal (in this life) safety. Unrelated.

 

[makesends]

What I show is, that the doctrine of unconditional security of soul makes it ok for it's believers to sin. But not ok for it's unbelievers to sin like them.

No, it does NOT make it ok.

I am curious why you would call it by that name, though —just to mock it? I call it the fact of God's sure salvation, or other words to that effect. In the end, it is not even a question of eternal security, but a question of who is accomplishing precisely all he set out to do.

It's ok for the unconditionally saved to sin, because their covers their sinning by having faith in it. For those that do not make such a doctrine for themselves, they have no cover making it ok for them to fall and sin with salvation.

I still would like to know who teaches this. So far, it seems to be a strawman of your own making, in your zeal for self-determinism.

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

This Christian doctrinal hypocrisy, makes oneself uncondemned by their doctrinal faith alone. But the unenlightened sinners have no such noncondemning doctrine to trust in by 'unbelief'.

And of course it's that old serpent's doctrine, that makes such enlightened sinners believe that they are not condemned while sinning like others:

Could you please tell me who teaches this? Just an example, a citation or quote, maybe a video, would be nice.

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die.

This is first openly bold lie recorded in the Bible. Anyone believing the lie, do certainly say that they surely do not die by sinning.

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

They openly and unashamedly say so, because their eyes have been opened to the wondrous liberty of saved sinning without condemnation.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

Unlike old unlightened sinners, they now convert to the immortal enlightenment of the gods, who by their own power to believe alone, they are forever alive to God, while doing both good and evil.

But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

The eye of the serpent is opened to be and do evil with everlasting life. I call it illuminati Christianity.

Nice soap box, though.

 

[Ghada]

I believe in God's word concerning what he will accomplish and his promise to see through what he has begun.

So, that's a yes? You do believe Satan's promise of being saved while sinning is unconditional salvation security?

Do you never sin?

Another yes? You do argue against any believer not sinning.

My salvation does not depend on my faithfulness, but on his. And,"...continue sinning more or less" is a useless statement, given by one who mocks the fact that their own lack of integrity is right there before their own eyes. No, "continue sinning" is not Biblical language, and I need not explain away or work around even one bit of Scripture you claim I should answer.

Since I see the pattern, that that is another yes, that you believe all sons will continue sinning.

What teaching —the false strawman you make of what I teach? What I teach doesn't make it ok. Have you not encountered the fear of God who has the burning power of purity such that I have no appeal, but Christ, and yet he shows me mercy, forebearance and patience for no reason that I can account to myself.

And so, your answer must be, that you don't like making sin 'ok', while making sin 'no problem' with being saved.

I call that a distinction without a difference.

With all the airy speeches you make people go through just to decipher an answer, you make the Pharisees blush. When they don't want to answer, they at least just say so in 3 words.

You give the term Wind Talker a whole new bloated meaning. I feel like a Navaho code breaker here.

In the end, you do not refute the actual argument, that Satan's doctrinal temptation to the Son and sons is falling with salvation. Instead you confirm it by teaching all sons of God to continue sinning, without possibility of ceasing to sin. And when you sin, you surely shall not die...

 

[makesends]

So, that's a yes? You do believe Satan's promise of being saved while sinning is unconditional salvation security?

Wow. I'm not playing your game.

Another yes? You do argue against any believer not sinning.


Since I see the pattern, that that is another yes, that you believe all sons will continue sinning.

See how you decide for me how I stand in relation to your false premise? And you call this honesty?

And so, your answer must be, that you don't like making sin 'ok', while making sin 'no problem' with being saved.

I call that a distinction without a difference.

I do neither. It is not ok, and sin is not "no problem". I think we are done here. I don't like being misrepresented.

With all the airy speeches you make people go through just to decipher an answer, you make the Pharisees blush. When they don't want to answer, they at least just say so in 3 words.

You give the term Wind Talker a whole new bloated meaning. I feel like a Navaho code breaker here.

In the end, you do not refute the actual argument, that Satan's doctrinal temptation to the Son and sons is falling with salvation. Instead you confirm it by teaching all sons of God to continue sinning, without possibility of ceasing to sin. And when you sin, you surely shall not die...

 

[Ghada]

I denounce it, but not like you, because you claim it is by your own righteousness that you are safe.

Our own righteousness is choosing what to repent of at our own will and convenience: Progressive Christianity for unrepented sinners.

Our own safety is doctrine to uphold us with salvation, while still sinning: Unconditional eternal security

Aka: Satan's doctrine of surely not dying to God while sinning. And falling to sin with salvation.

 

[Ghada]

No, my thinking is that you have little concept of a life before Christ that longs to be with him,

I was a free-lancing sinner, then a hearer but not a doer, and now with repentance from a whole heart, a doer and not a hearer only.

as opposed to standing worthy before him.

No unrepented ungodly sinner is standing nor walking worthy of the Lord.

Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Satan's doctrinal promise aside...

You don't know life that depends on God

I don't know of any sinful life that depends on God. But you're certainly doing a bang-up job of trying to instruct me in it.

 

[Ghada]

and that is grateful for God's assessment instead of self-esteem, because the redeemed is only what God has in mind for him, and not one's own performance or worth.

The Father judges our worth by our performance:

And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man is sowing, that shall he also reap. For he that is sowing to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that is sowing to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

 

[Ghada]

Do you not know the depth of fear of God that has nothing to do with condemnation?

Not with the righteous.

The fear of the Lord, like hating iniquity, is to not do iniquity.

And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.

The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether

The unrepentant unrighteous that do away with condemnation by doctrinal fiat, have no fear of the Lord, but only seared consciences:

The transgression of the wicked saith within the heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes.
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

Just today I saw on another thread, in a conversation with @Mr GLee Job's confession of his terror of the Redeemer he loves —the Almighty who can and will do whatever he pleases with his own.

The terror of God's presence and personal manifestation to all flesh and blood on earth, including Abraham, Job, Daniel, John..., is not the fearfulness of God's righteous judgment upon the ungodly sinners.

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

 

[Ghada]

Until then, you are like the many who came before you, pretending they were good enough to make it,

Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?

As the unbelieving forefathers with the Son, so with the unbelieving children with the sons of God.

It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?

 

[Ghada]

but everyone else a pretender.

I never ever would call unrepented Christians like you pretenders. I have no doubt whatsoever, that you absolutely believe and do exactly what you preach:

Live in continued unrepented sinning, and trust in Satan's tempting doctrine of being upheld all the while with salvation.

maybe this could turn into a debate.

I've already concluded you don't know what a standard debate is. I tried teaching it to you, and you only get upset.

Personal interrogation of the messenger, and one-sided pretty speeches (with a dash of HORROR), is not debating.

It's attacking and grandstanding.

I will abstain from calling you a troll, at this point.

As I said...

You not only change Bible meaning to justify yourself, but also word definitions to accuse others.

A troll pursues others unbidden only to harass them.

Responding to others is called courtesy.

God go with you.

If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

And so we see the words of the Bible mean nothing to you, but only to misuse them to soothe your defiled conscience.

Actually taking God's words seriously enough to do them is not your style.

By bidding me God speed, you thus consent to the doctrine I bring. If not, then you blindly partake of it.