Name those sins Christ didn't die for

[Josiah]

Those who reject the works on the cross don't receive it. Which means, never has forgiveness.

OBVIOUSLY.....

Let's say I offer you a pass to Disneyland which I have. I'm not but go with me here, lol. Now, you may not accept it (for whatever reason - doesn't matter). Does that prove that ERGO I didn't buy the pass? That I never had the pass? That I never offered it to you? Obviously not. Thus the illogical falsehood our friend is TRYING to impose in an attempt to change the subject to the uber-Calvinist rejection of universal grace (which of course is not the subject of this thread but only a diversion).

Our friend is perhaps right that there is a sin which is not forgiven. He is wrong is saying ERGO Christ didn't die for all our sins but just for some (although he can't list which ones He did and did not die for). LAMM (and I mean this only for Lamm).... take it from this former Catholic.... this is just a TINY bit of the confusion, the uncertainty, the "terror" that results from the RCC having such a confused, entangled, mixed up, blurry soteriology, it has ENORMOUS implications and just seems to get into everything. When eyes are taken off Christ and placed on self.... when the Theology of Glory is the focus.... when it's just not clear and laser focused who is and is not the Savior - this is the sort of thing that results. I can't know if Jesus died for me, for my sin, for my salvation..... ). I lived with this - unaware there was an option, unaware of the GLORY of having the Savior. What comes out from many Catholics is just the tip of the deadly iceburg - but it pops up over and over, even when you'd never expect it. Virtually all former Catholics seem to agree with me on this, but here's where I disagree with a lot of my fellow Protestants: The confusion, the terror, the uncertainty, the MESS that Catholic members get from their denomination on this - that reveals itself SO often - doesn't NOT necessarily mean their hearts have rejected the Gospel. I have a family full of Catholics..... LOTS of Catholic friends...... I've talked and prayed and worship with and cried with MANY. God is powerful. His Word does not return void. MANY Catholics believe they ARE sinful.... they NEED a SAVIOR (not just possibilities, not just help).... and they HAVE one. They believe this in spite of the MESS their denomination feeds them, they believe this because the Word is read, the Word is proclaimed in the Liturgy and hymns (MANY of which are Protestant now), the Holy Spirit couldn't care less that these folks get their paycheck from the RC Denomination. Lamm..... I firmly beleive this..... IF you can dig under all the confusion, all the entangling, all the mixed up stuff they've been taught from childhood, past the RC verbage - you'll often find faith. The president of my congregation (a man who was studying for the priesthood until about midway through college) puts it this way: "In their words - they are Catholic, in their hearts - they are often Lutherans." Maybe, lol.


Back to the point: IF you have a list of sins that Scripture states Christ did not die for, list them.




.

 

[popsthebuilder]

To blaspheme the Holy Spirit is to deny it's righteous benevolent nature and the effect of It in a believers life.

Actually very similar to what lam seems to be saying.
Imagine that!

A whole lot of needless back and forth it seems. But that's just my opinion.



So the sin that Jesus the Christ didn't sacrifice himself for was the sin of knowingly going against the will of the Holy Spirit.


Peace



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

To blaspheme the Holy Spirit is to deny it's righteous benevolent nature and the effect of It in a believers life.

Actually very similar to what lam seems to be saying.

I think that's the opinion of everyone in this thread except for MoreCoffee.


I think where the "back and forth" is is MoreCoffee's assumption that if a sin is not forgiven, ERGO it is a mandate that Christ isn't forgiving, that Christ didn't die for all sins, that the "fault" for this lies with Christ not supplying what is needed. I agree with you, the "blame" (if that's the issue) lies with the person who rejects God's grace - not with God withholding it or never having such.

So the sin that the Jesus the Christ didn't sacrifice himself for was the sin of knowingly going against the will of the Holy Spirit.

Well..... the sin is not forgiven because the forgiveness is rejected. Would you agree?




Pax Christi



- Josiah

 

[Rens]

There is more to what the Lord Jesus Christ said than that. In the last supper dialogues he says his blood is shed for many for the forgiveness is sins and in the passage we're discussing he says that the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit is guilty of an eternal sin. Is his blood shed for this one? The one who blasphemes the Holy Spirit yet not shed for all?

I think He couldn't die for that.

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Now that a sin (at east one sin) has been named for which Christ did not die is this thread finished?

 

[popsthebuilder]

I think that's the opinion of everyone in this thread except for MoreCoffee.


I think where the "back and forth" is is MoreCoffee's assumption that if a sin is not forgiven, ERGO it is a mandate that Christ isn't forgiving, that Christ didn't die for all sins, that the "fault" for this lies with Christ not supplying what is needed. I agree with you, the "blame" (if that's the issue) lies with the person who rejects God's grace - not with God withholding it or never having such.







Well..... the sin is not forgiven because the forgiveness is rejected. Would you agree?




Pax Christi



- Josiah

If by that you mean the effectual work of the Holy Spirit is denied and as such, forgiveness too, then yes.

I think so.

Yet the effectual work of the Holy Spirit on a persons soul can only be to no effect to those who reject it.

I'm sorry, I'm getting slightly confused. I'm working and can't really devote the attention this topic deserves at this time

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

I reasoned this way.

• Jesus says he shed his blood for many (Matthew 26:28)
• Jesus said blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an eternal sin for which there is no forgiveness (Mark 3:28,29)
• Jesus' blood is said to wash the robes of the faithful making them white (Revelation 7:14; 19:8)

Then asking "does Jesus' blood fail to wash away the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?"
And asking "Is there any sin for which Jesus' blood is not effectual?"
And finally asking "Is there any sin for which Jesus' blood is not shed and hence a sin for which Jesus did not die?"
leads to the conclusion that

• there is at least one sin for which Jesus' shed blood is of no avail and for which he did not die.

 

[Josiah]

Now that a sin (at east one sin) has been named for which Christ did not die is this thread finished?

No such sin has been named.

No one has been able to come up with the list.... in fact, no one has been able to come up with even one.

So, yes - I'd say we're done. In THIRTY-FIVE pages of posts, not one poster could name even one sin for which Jesus did not die.... so we probably have our collective response to Turtle's question.




- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

I reasoned this way.

• Jesus says he shed his blood for many (Matthew 26:28)
• Jesus said blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an eternal sin for which there is no forgiveness (Mark 3:28,29)
• Jesus' blood is said to wash the robes of the faithful making them white (Revelation 7:14; 19:8)

Then asking "does Jesus' blood fail to wash away the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?"
And asking "Is there any sin for which Jesus' blood is not effectual?"
And finally asking "Is there any sin for which Jesus' blood is not shed and hence a sin for which Jesus did not die?"
leads to the conclusion that

• there is at least one sin for which Jesus' shed blood is of no avail and for which he did not die.

Now that a sin (at east one sin) has been named for which Christ did not die is this thread finished?

No such sin has been named.

No one has been able to come up with the list.... in fact, no one has been able to come up with even one.

So, yes - I'd say we're done. In THIRTY-FIVE pages of posts, not one poster could name even one sin for which Jesus did not die.... so we probably have our collective response to Turtle's question.
Josiah

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an eternal sin for which there is no forgiveness (Mark 3:28,29) that's one sin. Isn't that enough?

 

[Josiah]

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an eternal sin for which there is no forgiveness (Mark 3:28,29) that's one sin. Isn't that enough?

Irrelevant. Just because a sin is not forgiven does not prove Jesus didn't die for that - only that all that is needed for one to be forgiven for it isn't in place. IMO, your point that if something isn't accepted/applied ERGO it was never offered is absurd and illogical. Let's say I buy you a Porsche. But you don't accept it. Do you have it? If not, is it because I never purchased it, never offered it to you? You are making an entirely absurd, illogical jump - TRYING to lessen the work of Christ.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Irrelevant. Just because a sin is not forgiven does not prove Jesus didn't die for that - only that all that is needed for one to be forgiven for it isn't in place. IMO, your point that if something isn't accepted/applied ERGO it was never offered is absurd and illogical. Let's say I buy you a Porsche. But you don't accept it. Do you have it? If not, is it because I never purchased it, never offered it to you? You are making an entirely absurd, illogical jump - TRYING to lessen the work of Christ.

But didn't the Christ go so far as to say not to pray for that soul that blasphemes the Holy Spirit?



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

But didn't the Christ go so far as to say not to pray for that soul that blasphemes the Holy Spirit?



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

Saint John wrote that but he wrote it under inspiration so Christians believe it to be revelation from God.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Saint John wrote that but he wrote it under inspiration so Christians believe it to be revelation from God.

Thank you for the correction.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Lamb]

But didn't the Christ go so far as to say not to pray for that soul that blasphemes the Holy Spirit?



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

There is a Law Gospel distinction that always needs to be made. The Law accuses and does not forgive. The Gospel forgives...always. How it applies to mankind is tricky because it depends on if the man is proud of his sin or in despair. For the man proud in his sin, he is given Law to hammer him down so he can see of his wrong doing. For the man in despair he is given the Savior and forgiveness of sins so that he can rejoice. Is the man who thinks he committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit proud of it or in despair? That is where Law and Gospel needs to be properly distinguished.

 

[Josiah]

Irrelevant. Just because a sin is not forgiven does not prove Jesus didn't die for that - only that all that is needed for one to be forgiven for it isn't in place.

IMO, your point that if something isn't accepted/applied ERGO it was never offered is absurd and illogical. Let's say I buy you a Porsche. But you don't accept it. Do you have it? If not, is it because I never purchased it, never offered it to you? You are making an entirely absurd, illogical jump - TRYING to lessen the work of Christ.



.

But didn't the Christ go so far as to say not to pray for that soul that blasphemes the Holy Spirit?

IF so, how does that prove Jesus' death was insufficient for that sin, that He didn't die for all sins?

The issue of this thread is NOT "are some sins not forgiven" but an entirely, completely different issue: List the sins Jesus didn't die for, His sacrifice insufficient for?




- Josiah


.

 

[popsthebuilder]

IF so, how does that prove Jesus' death was insufficient for that sin, that He didn't die for all sins?

The issue of this thread is NOT "are some sins not forgiven" but an entirely, completely different issue: List the sins Jesus didn't die for, His sacrifice insufficient for?




- Josiah


.

They seem quite related to me.



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Pedrito]

In Post 267 on Page 27, Josiah offered the oft-repeated:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.

That seemed to be in support of the oft-stated (Lämmchen in Post # 266 on Page 27):

God gives faith. He actually GIVES that to you and faith comes by hearing His Word. Mankind can reject and some do

Well, in another forum some time ago (a forum which I believe it would be improper for me to name), a Greek scholar showed convincingly that the grammar of that verse (Ephesians 2:8) shows that the “this is not from yourselves” refers to neither the grace nor the faith, but to the having-been-saved.

And as for (ibid):

But we don't choose to have faith. John 15:16 You did not choose me but I chose you.

Did Jesus speak those words to everyone who would benefit from His atoning death, or even to the whole band of people who believed in Him at that time, or to just those few whom He had chosen (and maybe would choose) to be His front-line ambassadors in the spreading of the Gospel? (Judas had been chosen to join that band, but was the prophesied exception to that purpose.)

Once again, are we not seeing that proper context can have a real bearing on understanding and applying scripture?

So too, in this case (and some others), do we not see that looking beyond bland (and often misleading) English translation, can help us avoid common, erroneous conclusions that do not really gel with the original Greek or Hebrew?


It is so sad to miss the wonderful, by confining ourselves to the conventional.

 

[Lamb]

The whole world needed atoning because of the fall of Adam. God accomplished that even though Satan will insist that God did no such thing since Satan is always trying to twist scripture and make man doubt God's saving abilities.

 

[Rens]

For such there remains no sacrifice the Bible says and for those you shouldn't even pray.
Did Jesus carry the sin of rejecting His offer?

 

[Lamb]

For such there remains no sacrifice the Bible says and for those you shouldn't even pray.
Did Jesus carry the sin of rejecting His offer?

Rejecting His offer? Those who reject FORGIVENESS won at the cross do not receive it. Those who reject the Savior do not receive forgiveness.

Colossians 2:13-14 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

The Gospel remains true as in the scripture aboe. Those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit by rejecting the Savior and forgiveness do not receive it.