Can someone explain the whole "Repenting of Your Sins is Works" controversy?

Such a clever thing.
You could do with a bit more scripture and a bit less ego. How about you quit thinking about how smart you are and cut to the chase, why not start with a chapter and verse?

Thanks in advance.

You .. you really need scriptural proof that today is Monday?

Please forgive me, you're right it is monday. I repent of this foolishness.

Godspeed, my brother.

That sounds like a works based salvation to me. Why don't you just go worship Mary while you're at it!

I don't think anyone disagrees that it is works (outside of other Protestant circles), Catties and Orthos don't see this as a problem though. Anderson is a perfect example of the void that results from Protestantism.

I just did a quick check - ESV does not use "repented of the evil". Why does the KJV use that language? Seems pretty inappropriate…?

The people who claim this don't know the difference between works and fruit.

This is the natural consequence of following Martin “Sin Boldly” Luther’s heresy of Sola Fide

Many words in the English language have multiple meanings. In the context of that verse evil is the intent to do harm or something that is harmful. I agree it would seem inappropriate if you're unaware of the context that the word is being used in.

I don't get it. So all you have to do is believe in Christ for a moment and say a prayer (as he seem to do in his 'soul winning' home visits) and you go to heaven? After he leaves you can kill people and have abortions and it's all good? This doesn't make any sense. Why does he say all the time then that Catholics go to hell? What if they also say the little prayer and believe in Jesus?

No
No
Heresy
They wouldn't be Catholics

Attached: 33132.jpg (1316x952, 590.02K)

Because he's a heretic, and heretical "theology" is inconsistent. Check Vatican Catholic's (yes I know they're Sedes but its still good) video on him to see him get absolutely demolished.

That's what the general vibe is from people, how can a man be saved if he doesn't even do anything to be saved.
You know he's talking about how your tribe tries to say that you could murder until the cows come home and you'll be saved because sin isn't even a concept for you.

Nothing you do can come close to the glory of God, and nothing you do on earth can save you from your sins. I could build a million orphanages and still not earn my way into heaven because there is no way to earn your way into heaven. It all comes down to true belief in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Of course, this is just my view on it.

Wait, really? That's crazy.

I don't mindlessly follow Anderson like he's a prophet, but he makes a lot of sense to me.

Heaven isn't earned, it's worked for by the hard work you put into this life so you can be rewarded in the next.
Again, that's what the general vibe is. If you say all I have to do is accept Jesus Christ into my heart and truly believe in His sacrifice, then the natural conslusion here is that sinning is a non-issue, because you already believe in him with all your might.

I don't see how that is insane. If its true that doing good actions has nothing to do with your salvation it then follows that you can do bad things without any consequence. Mind you, I don't agree with the previous statement, and I doubt Anderson would too, but that is what he is saying.

You still suffer the natural consequences that sin has in this world. Not taking away your salvation != no consequences. Murderers, drunkards, and adulterers are not happy people.

But they still go to Heaven as well. How can you justify that?

None of us deserve to go to Heaven. Only God's grace can save us, and it can save people you think are worse than you.

So what you are saying that murdering innocent children is okay and fine with God? Because God's grace will save you even if you commit the most henious of crimes?

That's exactly the opposite of what I said. All sin is abhorrent to God. Some sins are worse than others, but any sin is enough to damn us but for the grace of God.

No, that's exactly what you said, you clearly stated that God's grace can save anyone, ``anyone`` can be saved. So if that's the case, even a person who commits the most foulest, the most unspeakable crimes can be saved. How can you be okay with saying that?

Anyone can be saved, but they have to repent and show penance for their previous sins.

This is the strange thing about Andersonite "theology" individual people will believe they are "saved" and this belief is strong like an anchor, but every other person's salvation is like a boat rocking in a hurricane. There's no way of knowing whether or not others are saved, but you always know you are saved.

Is your best argument against him really that he thinks his parents are honest people? That's beyond dumb. There are good reasons to disagree with the guy, that one is stupid

The word "Evil" has changed connotations over the years. Obviously God is not evil in the way it is used now, but in the way the word was commonly used in the 1600s God commits many evil acts. It's just a linguistic problem, part of the issue with insisting that a translation made in 1611 is the eternal only proper translation

Because all of us have committed sins that are foul to God. If you want God to give everyone what we deserve, that means you want everyone to be damned. You don't get to say "Oh, his sins should damn him forever, but my sins are forgiveable, they aren't really that bad." They are that bad.

That's not what the argument is about, it's the fact that anyone can just believe in God and call it good, no ethics, no work towards Him, you can just waltz right in if you accept Him, even if you commit the most henious of crimes.

No the argument is that his theology is inconsistent. How can he say on one hand that you can't be sure people are saved, and then on the other hand say that he knows for sure both that his parents were saved and when they were saved. It's inconsistent.

Yes we all have committed sin, but Anderson is saying that we don't have to repent of that sin, but if we don't repent of the sin then we won't be forgiven of those sins.
Somewhat off topic question, but does Anderson consider Baptism to be works?

That's literally what the penitent thief did. Even the Catholics won't deny that he was saved.
You're not reading my posts.
All our sins are heinous. No work you can do is capable of making up for them. Only Christ can.

Penitent thief did work and is in Heaven, why do you people deny the idea of trying to actually be a good person and instead say that your saved?
Why is work so abhorrent to you that you avoid it like the plague?

The penitent thief repented and received absolution of his sins.

Because his definition of saved isn't the same as yours. He says you are saved the moment you accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior. When he says "we can't know for sure if someone else is saved" he's saying that that person could be lying, and not really accept Jesus as their savior. He said it because he was certain that Tyler Baker was saved by he later revealed himself to be a nontrinitarian heretic. He believes his parents, so what?
Yes, he even considers saying the Jesus prayer to be work.

Again, why do Andersonites try to avoid it like the plague?

Literally the only thing he thinks isn't work is belief. I don't know why he doesn't count the neurons firing in your brain and the heart pumping it oxygen to be work
Picking sola fide and sticking their boots in. Watching him exegete James 2 is really painful cause he does everything he can to dance around the clear point

Who said works are abhorrent and who is denying that you should try to be a good person? The way you people argue in bad faith is disgusting. Anyway, what work did the thief on the cross do before dying that day? Surely you'll tell me he did more than just some mental exercise because you seemed to have a problem with that earlier ITT.

People who tell me that doing anything for God and trying to improve myself and become closer to Him. Praying for help, asking for forgivness, all that, that's work. According to what you stated, I can do nothing to try to clean my soul and still enter heaven, just like that.
Hell, using the logic of the baptist church that I could live the most hedonistic life style and commit the worst of the worst but still be saved by God's grace.
Asking Christ our Lord to remeber him. He put the work into it and in his time of dying.

Well how does he really know if his parents were saved? For all he knew they were holding some beliefs in their hearts that didn't jive with his churches doctrine on the Trinity. Should I just assume someone is saved until they prove otherwise? Why should I assume anyone is saved in that case?
So…does he not baptize? Is holding a church service works? Is going to church works? Is evangelization works?

People who hold to Sola Fide often do dismiss works.
Anderson said that you could be an adulterous murderer and still go to heaven without repenting or penance.
>The way you people argue in bad faith is disgusting.
How is quoting what Anderson says arguing in bad faith?
Repenting of his sins and receiving absolution.

He did? What video?

Because they told him
Because they're his parents and he trusts them
That's what Anderson does

But how can he know that they are saved if he doesn't know they are saved. Isn't it dumb to say that one person is saved when you aren't supposed to know who's saved or not?

Saying that works won't save you isn't saying works are abhorrent or that you shouldn't try to be a good person. I don't see a single quote in your posts. Anderson says you should do works and repent. According to him God will bless you on Earth and in heaven for good works and that God may spare you from his wrath if you repent.
How is telling Jesus to remember you when he's in heaven "repentance"? How is receiving something a work?

It's the next logical step in the argument.
Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. Matthew 7:7

So you could go on a murder spree and then tell God to remember you to be saved. You really aren't distinguishing yourselves from Anderson in any significant way.

That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying if you put forth the effort to do something, you shall be rewarded.

If you want to talk about logic this sentence is a non sequitur. You can reach any number of conclusions. For example that works are good because they pleasure God
Funny thing is that in Anderson's conception of salvation you have to ask Christ to save you. He says calling on the name of the LORD isn't works though.

Isn't that considered work? Why don't you just accept Jesus Christ at the start?

I can't find the exact quote, but in "Repentance and Salvation." he says that "Salvation is by faith alone in Jesus Christ" and that "We don't have to turn over a new leaf and stop sinning we just have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." Is this not saying that no matter how deep you are in sin that you can still go to heaven as long as you profess that you believe in Jesus Christ?
How he squares this away with his doctrine on homosexuals I don't know.

What is the necessity of works if not to lead to your salvation and the salvation of others?
"We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong" "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." How is this not repenting of his actions even if he agrees that the sentence he has received is just? "“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.” and how is this not an act of absolution of the thief's past sins?

How? If good works aren't necessary for salvation then I don't have to do good works to be saved.

Oh, easy, Homodexuals aren't humans so they can't be saved.

I do not fully understand his beliefs on this matter. He attempts to explain it in this video.

Why is loving God not a good enough reason for you to do works?
In your theology you can sin all you want just remember to admit it was bad afterwards to be saved. How is this significantly different from Anderson's theology if you can still sin a lot and get saved in the end?

I wish I could edit my own posts, *Homosexuals

I don't either, at this point I was assuming this thread was about Sola Fide and lack of works.

I believe love of God is enough. Anderson is the one who seems to believe that you can love God while not following his laws.
John 8:11 "Go and sin no more" that is my theology. One should constantly be attempting to further align themselves to Christ through prayer and good works as a way of showing their faith and love of God. If a man commits a sin through his free will then he should repent of that sin, give penance, and resolve to sin no more.

Like many others, he just cherry picks the letters from Paul. I can't even imagine the mental gymnastics he must do for James 2:14–26
I mean for all his criticism of liberal America his theology strikes me as the best example of the liberal mindset, ' I can do what I want and still go to Heaven'. Ridiculous.

youtube.com/watch?v=C3QCpp2J5M0

Attached: what.jpg (326x352, 16.5K)

Whatcha whating about?

You can do better than that son.

What do you consider repentance other than your effort to reject sin and embrace Christ?

There's no way that I can know what is in another person's heart. All I really know is what I believe in my own heart. And yet, my own heart is not the assurance of my salvation; it's the fact that I've put my faith in Christ who gave me the gift of eternal life the moment I believed. It's the fact that God will never break a promise to us, once we have fulfilled our end of the bargain, which is to simply receive Him by faith.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

2 Tim 1:12 For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

...

Vade retro