/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>deny the possibility of repentance

For REPROBATES. If you believe that Judas could have been saved up to the second he killed himself, you're delusional.

>denied the Trinity

we're talking about Anderson here, not tyler baker. where are you reading this?

>held up the KJV as literally God

I haven't looked into this one

>>555166

wrt judas that's an orthodox position

Ven. Fulton Sheen says this explicitly

>>555166

Had Judas repented, he would have been saved.

>>555171

Lie.

>John 6:70 Jesus answered them, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"

He was already given over to Satan.

>>555172

If you believe that Judas had no choice, then you must therefore concede that Judas did the Will of the Father and, thus, is in Heaven. You can't have it both ways. Either he had free will and chose to not repent or he had no free will and served the Will of the Lord.

>>555174

I never said that; I'm not a Calvinist.

If you read Romans 1, you see that someone becomes reprobate by their own actions, having a heart of hate towards God.

>>555178

As always, the answer to Romans X is Romans X+1. The whole epistle is taking two opposing ideas and showing how they come together. Getting stuck on a few verses in Romans is not a good idea. We are all saved by grace through faith, not keeping the law.

Romans 2:

12 All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14 When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. 15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all.

>>555178

Judas was overcome with remorse for his actions, thus he did not have hate toward God. He didn't repent, but he did regret. Reprobates do not feel regret.

>denied the trinity

The hell are you talking about? He fired Baker for not believing the trinity.

>>555183

Romans 2 doesn't talk about reprobates

I kekled.

>>557302

Sounds like an issue of semantics. My old baptist church always taught that homosexuals could indeed achieve salvation through repentance before God just like anyone else. But the way we worded it, we'd say homosexuals can't be saved because they're still unrepentant, and the ones that were repentant were not actively homosexual anymore.

>>557302

As late at the 1950's homosexuals were being arrested and put in jail even in California of all places.

>IV. What has been here observed, especially with regard to the manner of proof, which ought to be more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence of a still deeper malignity,–the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast; a crime which ought to be strictly and impartially proved, and then as strictly and impartially punished. But it is an offence of so dark a nature, so easily charged, and the negative so difficult to be proved, that the accusation should be clearly made out; for if false, it deserves a punishment inferior only to that of the crime itself.

>I will not act so disagreeable a part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate, in this respect, the delicacy of our English law, which treats it in its very indictments as a crime not fit to be named… Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.

>This the voice of nature and of reason and the express law of God determined to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance long before the Jewish dispensation by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven; so that this is a universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our antient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burned to death,(n) though Fleta(o) says they should be buried alive; either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the antient Goths.(p) But now the general punishment of all felonies is the same, namely, by hanging; and this offence was made felony without benefit of clergy by statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6, revived and confirmed by 5 Eliz c. 17.

— Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England

>>557309

I hope that's the case. I've spoken to a few Baptists here–much different from the Baptists I encounter day-to-day–who have said that the idea of a gay person repenting is like a demon repenting and it's so unlikely that you shouldn't even try to convert them. I've even seen some who say that all people who have any homosexual temptations are reprobate and can't repent.

>>557315

Well that's a nice quote but it has nothing to do with churches teaching reprobate theology

>>557320

So if we arrest them and give them capital punishment I'll be fine. You can even choose the form of execution, I don't mind.

>>557328

>That's terrible. You can't just kill gays like that. They can always repent and turn back to Christ.

That's a new concept. Stemming from the 1960's like I said.

>And besides, even if you did carry out this plan of yours,

Not so fast there. It's God's plan. Let me post something for you.

Romans 1:32

Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

2 Peter 2:6

And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Jude 1:7

Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

>people would just pretend to convert instead of making an actual conversion just to save their lives,

I'm pretty sure the death penalty is enforced by the justice department of the State regardless of who converts. Their crime wasn't one of being unrepentant. They had a definite crime, which is homosexual perversion.

>If you kill them they go straight to hell and don't even have a chance. That's just plain wrong.

So you think we should have no death penalty. That's a different argument in itself, and it didn't exist 100 years ago or more.

>>557339

> Stemming from the 1960's

What is a Molly House?

>>557339

What happened to "soul winning"?

>>557339

>That's a new concept. Stemming from the 1960's like I said.

So you don't think that gays can repent and turn back to Christ?

>Not so fast there. It's God's plan. Let me post something for you.

Those verses are clearly about the day of judgement and burning in hell. No shit, I don't deny that gays burn in hell. But if they repent then they can be saved.

Also, you have yet to prove that "virtually all Christians before the 1960's [sic]" believed in the death penalty for gays. The United Kingdom was the ONLY Christian country to pass a law having death penalty for gays, and the only reason that the US and Australia had those laws is because they copypasta'd British law once they became independent. Even then, though, the death penalty was taken away for sodomy by the 1860s in Britain and was repealed also in the United States in the 1870s. So your whole meme about "virtually all Christians until the 1960s" is just junk.

>>557347

Romans 1:24-2:2 must be taken into account.

>>557349

>Those verses are clearly about the day of judgement and burning in hell.

Not just that. They were singled out for their going after strange flesh as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

So likewise if it spreads here as it has in these later years, the wrath of God abides on us for allowing these literal beasts to access our children. If we won't kill them, God will. Also Romans 1:32 again repeats the fact they specifically are worthy of death for this.

>>557355

Do you think gays can repent and return to Christ? If you do then there's no way that you could teach this false doctrine unless you simply WANT them to suffer in hell.

>>557361

>Do you think gays can repent and return to Christ?

No I do not. I solemnly believe the word of God in Romans 1:24-32, particularly verse 28 which tells us in clear words what God allowed to happen. It is no accident, friend. That's what the Bible has told us here.

And as far as being reprobate is possible in general, see John 12:39-40. They were unable to believe also.

>>557365

And now you reveal how satanic and unbiblical your doctrine is, and the fact that it is factually incorrect. None of those verses, NONE, say that homosexuals can't repent. In fact, the Bible says the opposite:

>And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

It's also factually incorrect because I know people who were once homosexual but returned to Christ. So you are teaching a false gospel that is completely heretical.

>>557377

>1 Corinthians 6:11

Read on to 1 Corinthians 10:13.

>>557380

I knew it was going to come to this. I still don't understand the argument here. Are you saying that people can't overcome homosexual temptations? Because they obviously can and I've seen homosexuals repent.

>>557388

>Are you saying that people can't overcome homosexual temptations? Because they obviously can and I've seen homosexuals repent.

Two things here, first off you have to ask yourself whether you believe 2 Peter 2:6-9, especially that last verse. Once you've done that, then you have to ask whether you believe the word of another fallible person more than 2 Peter 2:6-9.

The only conceivable way out would be that they didn't have the lusts to do it, they were coerced into it or prostituted their body or something like that. Which is what I believe 1 Corinthians 6 is talking about. There are several more points I could bring straight from the Bible why I know sodomites are definitely unbelieving and abominable, but I haven't needed to refer to them yet.

I think there are reprobates creeping into churches unawares (Jude 1:4) and are changing what doctrine has always been and it's getting to an extreme point these days where sodomites are running sunday schools and getting married in sanctuaries. We used to exclude them from society altogether, so this problem was never needed to be addressed.

>>557391

This will be my last reply. None of those verses say that homosexuals can repent. You haven't proved, either, that "virtually all Christians" before the 1960s believed this teaching. That's simply false. The Orthodox, Catholics, and most Protestants never held this view that homosexuals cannot repent.

>>557419

I didn't need to.

>>557506

Anderson says so many contradicting and confusing things it's really hard to comment on the guy without stepping on someone's toes.

I suspect the real reason there's so much heat on Anderson is he called out the Jew. There's tons of silly pastors out there but they didn't make Marching on Zion.

>>557562

Anderson's only popular because Marching on Zion in the first place.

>>557564

I think his border incident was before that which got him some attention, but Marching on Zion was when the media started blasting him. Then he got famous for fag bashing. The media and Anderson are using one another regardless of if they realize it or not. Interestingly I looked at some of his old videos on his alternate channel and he used to be involved with the Tea Party. I may have my order mixed up but that's how I see him, a media figure fanning controversy in the hopes it will bring attention to his preaching. His doctrine can be refreshing because he's so blunt about it, but it's also shallow so I don't take him very seriously.

>>558299

He explicitly identified the Bible as the Logos. If we hold the KJV as the Bible and the uncorrupted Word of God, then logically we can infer that in the beginning was the KJV, and the KJV was with God, and the KJV was God.

>>558309

Does he weigh the same as a duck?

>>555172

>He was already given over to Satan.

No one was "given over to Satan". This meant that Judas, at the time, WAS satan, in terms of, adversary to God. And yet yes he could repent. In fact, if you would look over patristic works, Judas shouldve been symbol of repentance instead of Peter, but he refuses this and killed himself.

>>557355

I like you

>>557506

This may be it.

>>557506

>2. It's fairly believable they're just /pol/lacks determined to divide and conquer /christian/ and should be told to fug off back to their containment board.

/pol/acks would not be anti-Anderson to any more degree they'd be against any other pastor. /pol/acks agree with him on the Synagogue of Satan, which is issue #1 on /pol/.

Anderson is fine with miscegenation among believers, which /pol/ is against, but no one here is knocking him for that. I doubt it's /pol/acks.

>>557302

>anime poster

>knows former homosexuals

Something is fishy about this poster

>>557365

>>557355

>>557391

S U C H W E R E S O M E O F Y O U

U

C

H

W

E

R

E

S

O

M

E

O

F

Y

O

U

*inb4 I fuck up the red text*

Sodomites should be treated as mentally ill however and receive psychological and spiritual nourishment from professionals in a hospital where they are not a threat to society.

>>568401

nope I fucked up the spoiler instead