Ukutsgp's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Ukutsgp's Profile › Ukutsgp's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 (of 94 pages)
 Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 9:44am On Sep 24, 2014 |
hisblud: please could you list verses that have the words "eternal death" in it after the death of Christ. thanks. Bible speaks of different categories of death:- a. Spiritual death. Took place when Adam and Eve committed sin. God did warn them of their death if they violate God’s word. But they did not die physically; it was separation from God their creator and His glory. They recognized it immediately and tried to find some solutions too. Cf. Genesis 2:17; 3:7, 21; Ezekiel 18:20; Ephesians 2:1; 4:18; Romans 3:23. 1 Timothy 5:6. Since we all are born to the family of Adam, it is our natural state that we are dead spiritually, we have no life of God, nor the facility to relate with God. b. Physical death. As mentioned above this is the separation of our body, soul and Spirit. Physical death and every other form of human agony is also the consequence of violation of God’s law – sin - from the Garden of Eden. “In the sweat of face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground. For out of it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you shall return.” Genesis 3:19. We see the first physical death in Genesis 4:8. From there death has spread to the whole humanity and it reigns today. Romans 5:12; Psalm 90:10. cf. Psalm 49:14 Death feeds on sinners. c. Eternal death. 2Thessalonials 1:9. This is the most dangerous type of death. It is separation from God and His blessings for ever. In connection with both the above mentioned types of death, God has made some solutions and we can still avail the benefit of it, but eternal death means there is no way out, away from God everlastingly. This death is also called second death. Cf. Revelation 2:11; 20:6; 21:8. Apart from these three types of death, Bible also speaks of:- Death for sin – Christ’s death. 1 Corinthians 15:3. It was unique. Totally different from the death that we go through today. Death to sin. 1Peter 2:24. It is experienced by those who trust Christ as their saviour. They count themselves as dead to sin, self and the world. Cf. Romans. 6: 2, 6 —11; Galatians 2:20. Colossians 2: 20; 1Corinthians 15:31. Death in sin. It’s about one’s death, while living in sin. He lost every chance to get saved, till the end lived in sin. Ezekiel 3:18, 20. Death in Christ. That means one dies in the state of being in Christ, having faith in Him. 1Thessalonians : 4:16. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 9:32am On Sep 24, 2014 |
hisblud: of course hence He did away with sin by making His Son to become sin...ONCE FOR ALL TIME...!and people still commits sin. sin is still present. but we have access to his mercy without performing any ritual such as killing goat, turtle dove, lambs etc. we can go directly to God for mercy through Christ. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 9:25am On Sep 24, 2014 |
labot: Dear Ukutsg, do you know who first promulgated that the law contains moral, ceremonial and judicial precepts? That both the ceremonial and judicial precepts are no longer binding but the moral is still binding? Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas(1225-1274). Yes the catholic doctrine you so condemn yet are now upholding. The Bible does not divide the Law of Moses into "moral laws", "ceremonial laws" and "judicial or civil law" as if the moral laws were somehow more eternally and universally binding than the others. Now Gal 3:19 says: What then was the purpose of the Law? It was added [later on, after the promise, to disclose and expose to men their guilt] because of transgressions and [to make men more conscious of the sinfulness] of sin; and it was intended to be in effect until the Seed (the Descendant, the Heir) should come, to and concerning Whom the promise had been made. And it [the Law] was arranged and ordained and appointed through the instrumentality of angels [and was given] by the hand (in the person) of a go-between [Moses, an intermediary person between God and man]. Amplified Bible (AMP).i am not upholding any catholic doctrines. i have already shown him that u cant do away with d ten commandment. the moral laws stands but the ceremonial law has been done away with by christ death. so will must continue to do d moral laws such as 'thou shall not kill'. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 9:13am On Sep 24, 2014 |
5solas: @ Ukutsgpthou shall not commit adultery stands. thou shall not kill stands. etc so u mean people today can commit adultery and kill? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Are Christians Supposed To Call Themselves 'sinners' ? by Ukutsgp(m): 11:43pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
sonOfLucifer: My soul is not for sale and can not be bought. I am a free son of Lucifer. Only slaves are bought at a price. Fucking Chrestards.i am happy to be Jesus christ slave. but i want u to know that u and ur master(Satan) will perish in hellfire. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 11:36pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
many people often confuse Moses Law with God's Ten Commandment Law, but they are very different. Moses' law was the temporary, ceremonial law of the Old Testament. It regulated the priesthood, sacrifices, rituals, meat and drink offerings, etc., all of which foreshadowed the cross. This law was added "till the seed should come," and that seed was Christ (Galatians 3:16, 19). The ritual and ceremony of Moses' law pointed forward to Christ's sacrifice. When He died, this law came to an end, but the Ten Commandments (God's law) "stand fast for ever and ever." Psalm 111:7,8. There are two laws that are made crystal clear in the following verses below. Daniel 9:10 is talking about God's law and verse 11 is talking about Moses' law: "Neither have we obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets." "Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him." Daniel 9:10,11 Special Note: Please note that God's law also called the 10 Commandments has existed at least as long as sin has existed. The Bible says, "Where no law is, there is no transgression [or sin]." Romans 4:15. So God's Ten Commandment law existed from the beginning. Men broke that law. "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4 Because of sin (or breaking God's law), Moses law was given (or "added" Galatians 3:16, 19) till Christ should come and die. Two separate laws involved: God's law or 10 Commandments and Moses law. 1 Like |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 11:20pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross (Colossians 2:14). Does this verse mean that we no longer need to follow the ceremonial law and the law of Ten Commandments? This verse refers to only one law: the law that was against us, that showed us our transgressions. This was not the Ten Commandments, but the ceremonial law. When Christ died, he satisfied the demands of justice in the law of ceremonies and blotted it out. Christ fulfilled the obligations of the ceremonial law by becoming the Lamb slain for the sins of the world. He fulfilled the obligation of the law of Ten Commandments by His perfect obedience to its precepts. After His death, the law of ceremonies was discontinued because it foreshadowed the cross, but the law of Ten Commandments did not change, nor was it done away with. The same law is still to be found in the New Testament and those who follow Christ must continue to live by this law |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 11:09pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
5solas: Didn't you see in that post , that justification does not from keeping the law? Do you know that the law and commandments are one and the same? If you see a distinction, It would please me to see iton Mount Sinai, Moses received both law of God and a precise set of instructions for the sacrificial system. These were to form the basis of the religious ceremonies of the Israelites. Both sets of instructions were called the law, but they were different in that the law of Ten Commandments defined what sin was, whereas the ceremonial law contained the solution to the sin problem. God wrote the Ten Commandments, and Moses wrote the ceremonial law, or book of the law. The Law of Ten Commandments And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God (Exodus 31:18). And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables (Exodus 32:16). When Moses returned from meeting with God on Sinai he found that the Israelites had made for themselves a golden calf to worship. Moses was so angry that he broke the tablets of stone. Then God said to him, “Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the mount, and make thee an ark of wood. And I will write on the tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark” (Deuteronomy 10:1-2). When Moses broke the first tablets, it symbolized the law of God that had been broken by God’s people when they served the golden calf. The law did not change as a result of the people’s sin. Rather, God wrote the law again onto the new tables of stone that Moses fashioned, symbolizing that we have to be co-workers together with God in upholding His law. Only in God’s strength can we uphold the law, but we must cooperate with Him in this regard. The two tables of stone were placed inside the Ark of the Covenant. The Ceremonial Law This law of types and ceremonies was written by Moses in the book of the law, and was placed beside the Ark. And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee (Deuteronomy 31:24-26 emphasis added). These two sets of laws, the one moral and the other ceremonial, were thus entirely different and served different purposes. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 9:48pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
CANTICLES: ....... U ar mistaken, bcoz u dont know d scriptures ;Act 15:29 Says " Keep Abstaining from blood, .... Sexual immorality " ! Wait , does dat min a person sud not play wit ladies again or wont g near women, isnt ur mom a woman? a reasonable person knows dat he doesnt commit sexual immorality until he had intimacy( sex) wit d opposite sex ! When d scripture says abstain from blood, u violate that law... Not by avoidin a bleedin person BUT by consumin blood into ur body system, wich may be in d form of transfusion or thru mouthsex is an act that is performed. so to abstain from sex is to stop performing that act. u can be close to a girl/woman without having sex. blood on d other hand is a physical thing that can be touched. it is a physical substance unlike sex that cannot been seen but can only be performed. so to abstain from blood should implies staying away from blood. not touching or coming close to it. no matter d person that was bleeding. supposing it says from eating blood, then we must not eat it. and it will be very illogical to say: eating blood= blood transfusion. check the definition of eating i gave earlier on and blood transfusion. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 8:25pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
labot: Brothers, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God is for Israel, that they may be saved. 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they didn’t subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the fulfillment[a] of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 5 For Moses writes about the righteousness of the law, “The one who does them will live by them.”[b] 6 But the righteousness which is of faith says this, “Don’t say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’[c] (that is, to bring Christ down); 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’[d] (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.)” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart”;[e] that is, the word of faith, which we preach: 9 that if you will confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart, one believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed. Romans 10:1-11so we are not supposed to obey the ten commandment? i know that we are not to follow the ceremonial law. but the principle of holiness in those laws stands. he said we should be holy and separates ourselves from the world. obeying him through his word can help us to live a holy life. u cant rule out the place of holiness in our christian walk with God. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Are Christians Supposed To Call Themselves 'sinners' ? by Ukutsgp(m): 8:11pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
sonOfLucifer: A slave.why are u bearing that name? have u sold ur soul to d devil? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Are Christians Supposed To Call Themselves 'sinners' ? by Ukutsgp(m): 8:09pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
what is anyone who commits sin called? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 7:51pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Biblical arguments The Jehovah's Witnesses' claim that their prohibition of blood transfusions has a scriptural basis relies primarily on three passages: Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:11-14 and Acts 15:20, 29. It is based on the premise that a blood transfusion involves the use of blood as a nutrient, or food, and is therefore comparable to eating blood. As regards Genesis 9:4, the Society teaches that this refers to a prohibition on eating blood which applies to all mankind, Jew or Gentile. It seems that the verse is referring to the eating of animals which have been killed without being bled. Also the very use of the word lifeblood (NIV) emphasises the close relationship between blood and life. Throughout history many pagans believed that by eating life that is `in the blood (Lv 17:11 ) they could increase their own life- force. This verse serves to correct that misconception and to remind us that life is the precious and mysterious gift of God: 'Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything'. (Gn 9:3). Indeed the Society's teaching is inconsistent with their own teaching that: `Jehovah's Witnesses (spiritual Jews) do not oppose the people's (spiritual Gentiles) use of transfusion, but allow each one to decide for himself what he can conscientiously do. The lsraelites felt bound to abide by God's law of forbidding the eating of meat with blood congealed in it, but still they had no objection whatever to those outside God's organisation doing it, and even supplied unbled carcasses to outsiders who regularly ate such things anyway.' So does Genesis 9:4, as part of the Noahic Law, apply to all or not? Deuteronomy 14:21 would initially seem to contradict the Genesis position, stating as it does that an Israelite could sell the undrained carcass of an animal to a Gentile. However, that is not necessarily the case 'if the Noahic Covenant is seen as superseded by the Old Covenant. The Society itself states: `... After Jesus died, true worshippers were no longer obliged to keep the Mosaic law.' (Rom 6:14, 10:4, Col 2:13,14). 9 thereby implying that they are no longer bound by the dietary restrictions of Leviticus and negating their own argument (as regards Lv 17:11-14). In any case Leviticus 17:11-14 clearly refers to the blood of sacrificial animals, requiring the death of the animal, in contrast to blood transfusion where the donor retains their life. The blood shed in such sacrifices was sacred, epitomising the life of the sacrificial victim, and therefore had to be treated with respect. The blood of the sacrifices pointed forward to the blood of the Lamb of God, who obtained for his people `eternal redemption' (Heb 9:12)for `without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness'. (Heb 9:22) Also, both Genesis 9:4 and Leviticus 17:11-14 relate to the blood of animals and birds and bear no reference to human blood, or indeed to that of fish which, interestingly, is not prohibited by Witnesses. The final reference which the Society uses to justify its position is Acts 15:20,29, where the Jerusalem Council instructs believers to abstain from...blood'. The Society argues that this prohibition is a permanent injunction to all Christians against taking blood into their body in any form. Once again however there is no suggestion that the Bible is referring to human, as well as to animal, blood. Also this is clearly an edict to do with peace between Jews and Gentiles in a specific situation where the Jews were particularly repulsed by what they saw as the Gentiles' violations of Divine directives. In this instance the Gentiles were merely obeying rules which they did not perceive as necessary to obtain salvation simply in order to increase the chances of the Jews becoming believers. As Paul says, for the sake of the Gospel, `I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some' (1 Cor 9:19-23). Bergman' states that `the Watchtower position is biblically indefensible' and that would certainly seem to be the case. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 7:45pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
The Jehovah's Witness movement was founded in 1884, in the United States, by Charles Taze Russell. Russell, reputedly a compelling speaker, had previously been a member of a conventional Christian church but then found reasons to disagree with much of its theology. The movement, originally known as Zion's Watchtower Society, preaches a literal belief in the Bible, aided by Russell's own `Aid to Bible Understanding'. Whilst originally basing their doctrines on the King James Version, in 1961 they introduced their own version, `The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures', with significant alterations from other, accepted translations. They deny, among other things, the Trinity, the personage of the Holy Spirit, the deity of Christ, bodily resurrection and a visible Second Coming. They represent one of the largest cults in the world today, publishing more material than all the other world cult groups combined. The introduction of the blood transfusion taboo The prohibition of blood transfusions was introduced by the Society towards the end of World War II. Its introduction was a relatively gradual process and followed prior objections to vaccination, inoculation and sorgan transplantation. (Since the 1950s acceptance of these treatments has been left up to the individual's conscience.) The first direct mention of the prohibition was in 1944: 'Not only as a descendant of Noah, but now also as one bound by God's law to Israel which incorporated the everlasting covenant regarding the sanctity of life-sustaining blood, the stranger was forbidden to eat or drink blood, whether by transfusion or by the mouth. In an attempt to strengthen the prohibition, Jehovah's Witnesses were referred to previous Watchtower articles which actually bore no relevance to the subject under discussion, being on other topics such as eating blood and murder. The whole subject seemed to be somewhat controversial, with a notorious quote, often cited as proof of doctrinal inconsistency by the Society's adversaries, in the September 1945 Dutch edition of 'Consolation': 'God never issued provisions prohibiting the use of medicine, injections or blood transfusion. It is an invention of the people who, like the Pharisees, leave Jehovah's mercy and love aside' In reality this quote merely shows the inadequacies of post-war communication and the arbitrary nature of the prohibition's introduction. The prohibition was openly ignored by many members until 1951 when the first court case occurred in Chicago. The case involved Cheryl LaBrenz, the second child of Rhoda and Darrell LaBrenz, who suffered from haemolytic disease of the newborn. It brought to light the practical problems which such a prohibition posed. From that point on Witnesses started to ask questions and a clearly defined stand, supposedly with biblical justification, was developed. Many people have questioned why such a controversial doctrine was ever introduced. As Bergman concludes there is probably no one reason but the need for world-wide cohesive unity and the re- establishment of a universal collective identity were clearly motivating factors. After all, World War I I marked the climax of the Witnesses' persecution when they were imprisoned in concentration camps in Nazi-occupied Europe, and marked out as social deviants in the USA for their stand as conscientious objectors and refusal to salute the flag or sing the National Anthem.[8] They also faced the prospect of a whole new administration, under Knorr's presidency, following the death of Judge Rutherford. In this context the complete avoidance of blood may well have been a means of `setting apart' Witnesses and consolidating their loyalty to the Society. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 7:26pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Boomark: Very nice point at the bolded. Why not tell us how.Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine allows a liver transplant but not the blood that is in it. Jehovahs Witnesses DO take blood products now. They take all fractions of blood.This includes hemoglobin, albumin, clotting factors, cryosupernatant and cryo-poor too, and many, many, others. If one adds up all the blood fractions the JWs takes, it equals a whole unit of blood. Any, many of these fractions are made from thousands upon thousands of units of donated blood. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 7:21pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
God hate sin with passion 1 Like |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 6:48pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
RikoduoSennin: Very sick people and People in coma are FEED through I.V which is done how? **intraveinously**does it means that u dnt touch blood? or go close to someone bleeding? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 6:42pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
5solas: Of course we should. But the big question is,WHY?it leads to eternal death as i have said. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 6:40pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
5solas: And when He receives you on the last day, it will not be for your, 'holiness '.1 peter 1:14-16 |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 6:10pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
i am not trying to justify myself. all i am saying is dat, sin leads to eternal death therefore we must avoid sin like ebola. sin can seperate us from God forever if we live carelessly in this world. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 6:03pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
labot: Dear Ukutsgp, do you honestly believe you're righteous? You think all your church going, tithe paying, prayer meetings, being good etc makes you righteous? All our righteousness are filth in God's eyes(Psalm 14:2-3, Rom 3:10-12). The only righteous thing we do is believing in Christ and even that is not our effort, it is the gift of God(Ephesians 2:8-10) i.e we can not believe in Christ by ourselves except God makes us believe(John 6:44-45). The good works we do after we accept Christ are all of God's work(Ephesians 2:10, Phillipians 2:13). When we accept Christ through the workings of the Holy Spirit, He instills into us different habits. These new habits, though they may and will develop by practice, are not produced by practice. The Spirit immediately forms the habits for us. Such is regeneration. We now have desires and thoughts we never had before. The Holy Spirit has regenerated us and changed our minds and when we sin, the Holy Spirit makes us realize our sins and we regret committing those sins. The Holy Spirit helps us abandon our sinful ways and we gradually become better people but we can never become completely sinless as long as we're in this flesh(1 John 5:16) not until the day of glorification. Yes Once Saved, Always Saved is biblical(John 5:24, 6:37-40, 6:44-47, 10:27-29, Phillipians 1:6, 2 Thessalonians 3:3, 1 Peter 1:3-5). Our salvation from beginning to end is all of God's work(Hebrews 12:2). God bless you.i just try all i cud to please God. that's all. without holiness, no man shall see God. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:57pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Rich4god: Shey yours is the true religion abi... Well, enjoy your heaven alone...i am nt boasting. u people were d one boasting that ur church gave d bible. that ur church is d only true church in the world and many more. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:50pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
5solas: Completely endorsed.laden with error. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:48pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
paxonel: Muslimwho made me a muslim? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:44pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
paxonel: Muslim like you, you are condemned alreadyi pity u. are u d one who made me a Muslim? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:42pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Rich4god: You rants and hatred wont stop good and devouted catholics from making it to heaven... Btw, its seems as if you are the final judge of God, cos all you keep saying is "you are going to hell"... Na wa... Is there joy in saying that... I pity you... With the way you are going, you may end up being some where you dont like. You are just like the poor man in the bible that keep elevating himself while praying instead of concentrating on the simplicity of prayer.being in dat false religion already spelt danger for u. i dnt know why u always opposed the truth. u and ur gangs |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:20pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
1John3:4 states that ‘all sin is transgression’, in other words, sin in God’s eyes is WILLFUL transgression of His law and Commandments. That’s why scripture can state emphatically that ‘he who commits sin is of the devil’ 1Jh3:8. NO ONE who continues to commit acts of known, willful sin against God’s law is a Christian nor can he remain a Christian. However contrary this is to the teaching of our day and age, it is absolute scriptural truth and nothing anyone can say from a pulpit or theological seminary has any bearing against it. If a born again person relapses into known and willful sin he forfeits his faith, plain and simple. Otherwise the wages of sin is no longer death and God has become a respecter of persons, which divides scripture against itself. The myth that your future sins are already forgiven even ‘before’ you commit them, is just that, a MYTH, invented by the preachers to keep you comfortable and coming back for more |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 5:02pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
u cant be sinning and expect ur salvation to be intact. God is not a respecter of persons. those that die in their sins are in danger already. they listen to this kind of message and they became lax in their sinful state. this was same kind of message satan preached to eve in d garden of eden. he told her that they could eat of the forbidden fruit and they will not die but be like God. they ate it and they die a spiritual death. all sin likewise will lead to spiritual death. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 4:48pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
paxonel: as a matter of fact i am a living witness. ever since i know that truth do you know that i find it very difficult to commit sin, my life is blessed, it's like i discovered a gold |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 4:48pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
paxonel: as a matter of fact i am a living witness. ever since i know that truth do you know that i find it very difficult to commit sin, my life is blessed, it's like i discovered a goldso it was as a result of confessing ur sin to God that was making u entrenched in sin? if had died then, u would have ended up in hell. the wages of sin is death. but when we confess our sins to him, he is faithful and just to forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Once Saved Always Saved Is A False Doctrine. Beware! by Ukutsgp(op): 4:38pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Rich4god: lol...how does this stops the catholic church from being a false religion they were? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: does The Jehovah Witness Still Forbids Blood Transfusion In This Century? by Ukutsgp(op): 4:35pm On Sep 23, 2014 |
Jehovah witness hold a belief that makes no sense and has led to multiple deaths: They refuse to undergo blood transfusions even if it means saving their own lives, a belief that stems from irresponsible interpretations of the Bible. It’s especially disgusting when the children of JW parents are the ones who are suffering and their parents would rather see their kids die than have the life- saving procedure done. In some cases, even when JWs have said no to the transfusions, doctors have ignored their wishes in order to save a life. Unless the patient is an adult JW saying “I don’t want a blood transfusion,” it’s exactly what the doctors should be doing. Children don’t deserve to die because their parents are deluded by religion. What boggles my mind is that JWs still hold this ridiculous belief despite all the unnecessary deaths that have occurred as a result of it. |
. 
i cant stop laffing... Ukutsgp served with his own spoon... How does it feel... When I tell you to keep shut and work on your salvation and unity of christianity... You go just dey para like person wey no get bearing... Stop bashing pple faith and believe... Just drop your preaching and leave... You cant achieve true conversion by forcing you teaching/belief on someone...1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 (of 94 pages)