Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Under Christanity nobody can sin?

Stupidape
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...
Geogeer
Posts: 4,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 4:29:39 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin. That doesn't mean that Christians do not sin.
Stupidape
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 4:33:19 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 4:29:39 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin. That doesn't mean that Christians do not sin.

That's what I thought. I'm not sure how my opponent got the idea that it is impossible for Christians to sin.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 4:41:32 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 4:33:19 AM, Stupidape wrote:
At 8/13/2016 4:29:39 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin. That doesn't mean that Christians do not sin.


That's what I thought. I'm not sure how my opponent got the idea that it is impossible for Christians to sin.

There are certain Protestant denominations that take it to be that by believing in Jesus you can no longer sin. It reduces salvation to a triviality.
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
uncung
Posts: 3,454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 8:37:13 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

I thought your question says: under Christianity laws nobody is allowed to commit sin?
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 11:23:48 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

This is the number one problem that takes place when we reduce the Gospels to doctrines rather than application.
Jesus didn't sacrifice so everyone could become heathens joker, He sacrificed so that those with a sincere heart would confess their sins, turn from them and get a fresh start, a clean slate so that we don't have to be ashamed before God of our past, this causes gratefulness in the believer, and this is the platform on which the applicant and God begin a cultivation.
READ joHN 15....ABIDE in me. this should make my point clear.
https://www.biblegateway.com...

Anyone who actually believes this rubbish Deem has attempted to assert has not understood the Gospels and Epistles AT ALL, sorry but this is just too absurd. I have a hard time believing anyone claiming to have read or understand the scriptures and then claim that.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 12:08:31 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Just in case there's a small chance someone does not know what ABIDE means....

Abide-
accept or act in accordance with
to continue in a particular condition, attitude, relationship, etc
to remain or continue
to endure without yielding
to have one's abode; dwell; reside
to remain stable or fixed in a state
to continue in a place
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 1:08:58 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 1:28:34 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:08:58 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 2:07:02 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:28:34 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:08:58 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 2:37:49 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:07:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:28:34 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:08:58 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?

"Sufficient" means "sufficient". Another word he could have used was "able". But just because something is able to do something doesn't mean it always put into affect. Do you understand now?
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 2:59:23 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 11:23:48 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

This is the number one problem that takes place when we reduce the Gospels to doctrines rather than application.
Jesus didn't sacrifice so everyone could become heathens joker, He sacrificed so that those with a sincere heart would confess their sins, turn from them and get a fresh start, a clean slate so that we don't have to be ashamed before God of our past, this causes gratefulness in the believer, and this is the platform on which the applicant and God begin a cultivation.
READ joHN 15....ABIDE in me. this should make my point clear.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


John 15 tells us Jesus believed he was a vine tree and God was a farmer. God created a tree of knowledge, a tree of life and a tree that provided the sacred wood that was used to nail Jesus to at his crucifixion. The significance of trees is lost in our modern world.
Mans ego must be contained. We inherited our knowledge of good and evil from eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Jesus believed he could take away the evil and put it back into the tree leaving behind only the good. He got help from the Romans who nailed him to the wooden cross for good measure.

Anyone who actually believes this rubbish Deem has attempted to assert has not understood the Gospels and Epistles AT ALL, sorry but this is just too absurd. I have a hard time believing anyone claiming to have read or understand the scriptures and then claim that.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 3:06:30 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

Specifically, Christians believe human sacrifice, under certain conditions, can be effective in making people innocent of doing 'bad' things after they do 'bad' things.
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 3:11:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:37:49 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:07:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:28:34 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:08:58 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:05:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:03:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 12:44:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 11:04:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 8:11:16 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?

"Sufficient" means "sufficient". Another word he could have used was "able". But just because something is able to do something doesn't mean it always put into affect. Do you understand now?

sufficient
adjective & determiner
enough; adequate.
"he had a small private income which was sufficient for her needs"


able
adjective
1.
having the power, skill, means, or opportunity to do something.
"he was able to read Greek at the age of eight"


They're entirely different words. Sorry, but you don't get to rewrite Geogeer's words to suit your agenda. That would be dishonest, right?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 3:22:37 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:11:24 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:37:49 PM, dsjpk5 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?

"Sufficient" means "sufficient". Another word he could have used was "able". But just because something is able to do something doesn't mean it always put into affect. Do you understand now?

sufficient
adjective & determiner
enough; adequate.
"he had a small private income which was sufficient for her needs"


able
adjective
1.
having the power, skill, means, or opportunity to do something.
"he was able to read Greek at the age of eight"


They're entirely different words. Sorry, but you don't get to rewrite Geogeer's words to suit your agenda. That would be dishonest, right?

Ok. Let's go with "enough". If the USA has "enough" nuclear weapons to kill everyone living in Canada, does that guarantee the USA will kill everyone in Canada?
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 12:32:27 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:22:37 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 3:11:24 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:37:49 PM, dsjpk5 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?

"Sufficient" means "sufficient". Another word he could have used was "able". But just because something is able to do something doesn't mean it always put into affect. Do you understand now?

sufficient
adjective & determiner
enough; adequate.
"he had a small private income which was sufficient for her needs"


able
adjective
1.
having the power, skill, means, or opportunity to do something.
"he was able to read Greek at the age of eight"


They're entirely different words. Sorry, but you don't get to rewrite Geogeer's words to suit your agenda. That would be dishonest, right?

Ok. Let's go with "enough". If the USA has "enough" nuclear weapons to kill everyone living in Canada, does that guarantee the USA will kill everyone in Canada?

Lol. That sentence bears no relation to anything Geogeer said. Try this:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was enough to pay the price of all sin.

The USA took all blame onto itself in the sense that one devastating nuclear strike on Canada was enough to destroy all human life.

Yeah, all means all. I still don't see any problem.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 1:18:28 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/14/2016 12:32:27 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 3:22:37 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 8/13/2016 3:11:24 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:37:49 PM, dsjpk5 7:30:20 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.

http://www.debate.org...

I don't agree that men can't be sinners. However, it certainly provides a license to sin since jesus has taken all sin upon himself. What does it matter if anyone sins or not? Jesus is carrying the can for everyone. Sin away!

Which is why many denominations reject "once saved, always saved" as unbiblical.

Jesus either took all man's sins onto himself or he didn't. If he did then everyone has carte blanche to sin away. I don't see the problem.

Jesus made it possible for us to enter Heaven. His sacrifice still needs to be applied to each of our lives in order to be forgiven.

The sacrifice has already been made. It has been applied to all men. He took on the sins of the whole world. What is the problem?

The problem is that your second sentence is false.

In post #2 Geogeer wrote:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay the price of all sin.

Does "all" no longer mean "all"?

I guarantee Geogeer agrees with me. Ask him.

Jesus's sacrifice is sufficient, but it still has to be applied to us individually.

So "all" doesn't mean "all"?

"Sufficient" means "sufficient". Another word he could have used was "able". But just because something is able to do something doesn't mean it always put into affect. Do you understand now?

sufficient
adjective & determiner
enough; adequate.
"he had a small private income which was sufficient for her needs"


able
adjective
1.
having the power, skill, means, or opportunity to do something.
"he was able to read Greek at the age of eight"


They're entirely different words. Sorry, but you don't get to rewrite Geogeer's words to suit your agenda. That would be dishonest, right?

Ok. Let's go with "enough". If the USA has "enough" nuclear weapons to kill everyone living in Canada, does that guarantee the USA will kill everyone in Canada?

Lol. That sentence bears no relation to anything Geogeer said. Try this:

He took all sin onto himself in the sense that the one sacrifice on the cross was enough to pay the price of all sin.

Which doesn't mean all sin will be forgiven.

The USA took all blame onto itself in the sense that one devastating nuclear strike on Canada was enough to destroy all human life.


Which doesn't mean it will happen.

Yeah, all means all. I still don't see any problem.

Yeah, and "enough" doesn't mean "guaranteed to happen". So there is a problem with your reading comprehension.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
graceofgod
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 10:55:16 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 2:43:13 AM, Stupidape wrote:
My opponent made one of the weirdest claims about the Bible in this debate.

"If Jesus took all of man's sins onto himself, then how could we all be sinners? "

This makes no sense to me, I think what my opponent is stating it is impossible for a Christian to sin, because Jesus already took all the sin away. Thanks for the response.


http://www.debate.org...

Jesus paid the price for the sin of all men, to benefit from the price paid you must accept Jesus as your Lord and saviour...

Christians still can and do sin but blessed is he to whom the Lord imputes no sin...