Just a quickie.



Do you believe the IJ is for God to gather information? I don't. I think it is for all non-divine beings, who can't read the heart, to see the evidence of transformation for themselves. By their fruits, you will know them.



I made a new topic with subject occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds. See you there.

If Satan was in the dark about something that later came to light, then why would that coming to light be any more healing for you than for anyone else, including Satan.

Of course. God knows everything. It can't be for Him. Primarily it serves as evidence regarding God Himself, that He has been fair and just in all His actions. Satan has accused Him of being untrustworthy, unjust, and not having the best interests of His creatures in mind. The judgment will show the truth about God.

I made a new topic with subject occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds. See you there.

OK

I wanted to comment about this. The "atonement" is the "at-one-ment." For example:



The at-one-ment brings as at-one with God. In other words, we are reconciled to God. How? The following brings this out:



Satan has misrepresented God's character, leading men to be at odds with God, by believing his lies. Jesus Christ came to reveal the truth. When we believe the truth, we are set right, or reconciled, with God, which is the object of the atonement.



We have hope how? By a knowledge of God's love. By beholding God's character, we can be drawn back to Him (or reconciled, set right).

There was a reason I brought out the blood was not required in order for Satan to be pardoned. This is because the meaning of the blood is often misunderstood. The blood was not for God, but for us. God has no need of blood. God, because He is merciful and compassionate, freely offers pardon to us, just as He did to Satan. However, without the blood (which is the life of Christ), we could not see the goodness of God, or perceive His love.

Quoting the above, with a little more context:



Satan chose to rebel with an understanding of God's goodness and love. So all God could do for Satan was to freely offer Him pardon, which is what He did. "Again and again" God offered Lucifer pardon. There was no need for blood, because Satan already had an understanding of the love and character of God.

Back to your quote:



What is sin? Sin is the transgression of the law. What is the law? It is a transcript of the character of God. The underlying principle of the law is self-sacrificing love. It the underlying principle of God's government.

Therefore sin which is unrepented and unconfessed refers to the purpose of choosing to live contrary to the principles of God's government. It is to prefer living for self to living for others, or, above all, to live for God.

Given the purpose of the blood is the at-one-ment, it should be clear that the blood cannot have this purpose if one chooses to live contrary to the principles of God's government. As long as we are intransigent, set against God, we cannot be set right with Him.

However, this does not refer to falling into a sin. To be deceived into sin, or to fail in a moment of weakness does not mean that one has purposed in one's heart to live contrary to God and the principles of His government.

Remember that the choice of those who take part of the second resurrection no to go to heaven *is voluntary*.

God simply reveals Himself and the principles of His government. He gives everyone what they choose. Those who have chosen to live contrary to God and His purposes will hate heaven.



What enables us to desire the purity, holiness and peace of heaven is a revelation of the truth about God, seen in Jesus Christ.

Do you disagree that God imputes repentance and salvation in such cases based on the general trend of their lives?


The SC 58 quote concerning “good deeds” is clearly a reference to fruits of the Spirit, not ordinary deeds that appear good on the surface but are nothing more than beautiful sin. The “character” that she speaks of, which is revealed, is that of a born again believer abiding in Jesus. The “misdeeds” is what happens when believers are not abiding in Jesus. Such “misdeeds” include “all our righteousnesses” or worldly good deeds.

SC 57, 58
If the heart has been renewed by the Spirit of God, the life will bear witness to the fact. While we cannot do anything to change our hearts or to bring ourselves into harmony with God; while we must not trust at all to ourselves or our good works, our lives will reveal whether the grace of God is dwelling within us. A change will be seen in the character, the habits, the pursuits. The contrast will be clear and decided between what they have been and what they are. The character is revealed, not by occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds, but by the tendency of the habitual words and acts. {SC 57.2}


Moses did not choose to continue to abide in Jesus and that’s why he struck the rock twice in anger. Abiding in Jesus requires a conscious, deliberate, continuous choice, which we must make every second of every day.

Neglecting to continue to choose to abide in Jesus is choosing not to abide in Him. It’s our default choice. Abiding in Him requires diligence and choice. It is not by default, as you seem to be implying. There is nothing natural about it. Sinning is natural.

Therefore, if we neglect to choose to abide in Jesus, we separate ourselves from Him. Being separated from Jesus means we are sinning. There is no neutral time period between separating from Jesus and committing a known sin where we are not sinning. Consequently, neglecting to continue to choose to abide in Jesus is a sin itself. I’m surprised you disagree.

Does God know ahead of time if they will repent? If so, then what’s wrong with Him letting them die first and imputing it afterwards?

“Moses had sinned, and his past fidelity could not atone for the present sin.” (CC 109) I agree. But it does not mean God cannot impute repentance and salvation based on the general trend of their lives, based on the choices He knows they would have made had He not allowed them to die first.

I agree.


How do you mean?


Do you see a difference between intentional and unintentional sinning (as described above) as it relates to staying born again or not?


I'm sorry I gave you the impression I believe even sins of ignorance must be eradicated before a person can experience the miracle of rebirth. I believe people experience rebirth the moment they confess and crucify their moral imperfections as they relate to the what is known instinctively from birth (the last six commandments). Sins of ignorance cannot involve things that are prohibited by the last six commandments because they are known instinctively from birth. Nobody is ignorant of them.

I was pretty unclear there. I had to go back and review my own post.

Anyway, what I mean is that these things are not instantaneous events, unlike rebirth. They all start at rebirth, but they must be experienced continually.

Furthermore, they are all present if one is truly converted. If any one of these is missing, that is proof that the person has not crucified self, and is therefore not born of God.

If I'm understanding what you just wrote correctly Arnold (and I think I am), I agree.

Sure they are! The seventh commandment forbids adultery. This means having relations with someone who is not your wife. This is not something known instinctively from birth.

This is just one example.

Another is covetousness. Paul explictly says that he would not have known this was sin but for the law. This means he did not know it instintively, or he could not have said he would not have known it except for the law, since he would have known it already, without the law.

If the last six commandments were known instinctively, God would have just given four. That would have been sufficient.

A: Anyway, what I mean is that these things are not instantaneous events, unlike rebirth. They all start at rebirth, but they must be experienced continually.

MM: I agree. Rebirth is instantaneous. We begin experiencing the other things listed above at that time, and we must choose moment by moment to keep on experiencing them.

A: Furthermore, they are all present if one is truly converted. If any one of these is missing, that is proof that the person has not crucified self, and is therefore not born of God.

MM: True. They cannot begin experiencing them before they born again. They do not help us discover and confess and crucify moral imperfections prohibited by the last six commandments. We are instinctively aware of them. Instead, they help us develop the sinless traits of character God implanted within us the moment we were born again. Do you agree?

However, if born again believers spontaneously commit a known sin it proves they are not experiencing the things listed above, but it does not prove they never were truly born again or converted in the first place. Do you agree?

PS - Are you planning to address the other points I raised in my last two posts? I would like to discuss them with you.