(11 replies, posted in Ruby on Rails)

The power in Ruby and thus the power in Rails, is that everything is an object.    You can stack methods pretty easily and it requires much less typing than CI.  Now I have better examples than that and more examples of the more typing and less DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principles.  In CI, I see that you have to type more things out and it is less "intuitive", in my opinion -- plus your still limited by PHP's limitations.  But this is not a proper argument for Ruby, I don't have the time right now to give you a proper comparison, the bottom line was I am not pleased with CI and my personal framework in PHP is simpler and better suited for me, I just like Ruby better than PHP (and I've been with PHP since PHP/FI days back in '95/96).


(11 replies, posted in Ruby on Rails)

I looked into codeigniter before, I don't like how it mimics RoR, it doesn't do it as good as RoR.   If I'm just going to continuing using PHP then I don't need the framework, as I have one that I created myself.  But I am wanting to use RoR for the advantages it has over PHP, specifically in the realm of server management (Ruby being a real language, not just a web language). 

Anyhow, I'd still like to know what other people did to get them motiviated to learn RoR or CodeIgniter.


(11 replies, posted in Ruby on Rails)

How did you get motivated to learn Ruby and Rails?  I am astounded by what little programming I've done in Ruby and Rails, just little apps for work -- like network monitoring stuff.  I just can't seem to get motivated enough to start doing all my web programming using it.

Also, as a web host, I've noticed it seems pretty difficult to get a stable and easy to configure ruby/rails platform up and running for my customers; anyone have any suggestions on this?

I think a lot of this type of discussion borders on belief of adaptation, or not.  Let me explain this, unlike my evolutionary buddies I do not believe that we were once animals (of some sort, I noticed they are rejecting the monkey theory now) that 'evolved' into what we call humans today.  However, to a lesser degree, I believe in adaptation and believe that the world as we know it shows this.  It's important to note the difference between adaptation and evolution, Evolution says we evolve from one distinct species into a new distinct species; adaptation on the other hand makes no such claim, adaptation merely says we adapt to our environments and surroundings and thus incur changes, but fundamentally and biologically we are still humans and never make that leap to a new species.  A great example of adaptation is the fruit fly, or the common cockroach (you've heard they can survive nuclear bombs because they reproduce fast enough to adapt to the new atmosphere changes).  Now many evolutionists love to twist the fruit fly into a "proof" of evolving, but the fruit fly, while changing, never does become a new species.

Now all that just to say that you could have had an eagle that ate fruit, or a piranha that ate plants that 'adapted' to the changes of the earth after the fall. Adaptation such as having those teeth or what have you.  Also, did every single creature we have today exist back then?  I mean every single type?  I'm not sure, it's hard to say I think.

On a side note anyone who thinks that the earth was not affected by the fall of man needs to re-read Genesis, God clearly stated that he cursed the ground man walked on because of Adams fall (Gen 3:17, Gen 5:29, Romans 8:20-22).  I think it's safe to say that just like us, Animals had to start eating meat to survive, as stated earlier after a flood of that magnitude what plant life would be available for the animals or humans to eat??  Too much water kills plants. 

Getting back to the cursed earth; That is why the earth is falling apart this day, it was given a time-line like men.  Obviously metaphysical things changed in the earths pattern that I believe caused many plants and animals to adapt. 

Any thoughts?


(12 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

I posted that, not in the sense that we should do all those things and run around like a chicken with our heads cut off.  The idea and reason for posting that was to make you acutely aware of how some people view Christians, most importantly in the light of the new "lazy" age.  The thing I take from this letter is not to be raving mad, but do I even care about them, do I even attempt to reach them, do I swallow my pride and my fear and face them head on with their accusations and questions.  Do I even pray for them...   Why does my heart not grieve for them as I do my own kids?  Matthew 22 35-40 kinda dictates that I should, I mean if I do in fact love myself.

35 One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him,

36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"


38 "This is the great and foremost commandment.

39 "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.'

40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

What I gather from this letter is this, God commands us to love our neighbors as ourself, in this regard what are you doing to further the kingdom of God; in fact what are you doing to reach your neighbors whom you should be loving like yourself.  Ask yourself one question, if you didn't know God and the saving grace of Jesus Christ, what would YOU want yourself to do to show YOU the way? (not meant to be answered here)

This is more aligned with self reflection and leading a Christ centered life...


(3 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

I'm a fan of Andy Stanley as well.  He does a good job getting the information out there, of course he does tend to repeat himself, a lot, but that aside he teaches truth.


(12 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

This was a letter Ray Comfort (many know him from the Way of The Master series with Kirk Cameron) received from an atheist, read it and meditate on it.  Do you fit into the category of what this atheist is saying?

"You are really convinced that you've got all the answers. You've really got yourself tricked into believing that you're 100% right. Well, let me tell you just one thing. Do you consider yourself to be compassionate of other humans? If you're right, as you say you are, and you believe that, then how can you sleep at night? When you speak with me, you are speaking with someone who you believe is walking directly into eternal damnation, into an endless onslaught of horrendous pain which your 'loving' god created, yet you stand by and do nothing.

If you believed one bit that thousands every day were falling into an eternal and unchangeable fate, you should be running the streets mad with rage at their blindness. That's equivalent to standing on a street corner and watching every person that passes you walk blindly directly into the path of a bus and die, yet you stand idly by and do nothing. You're just twiddling your thumbs, happy in the knowledge that one day that 'walk' signal will shine your way across the road.

Think about it. Imagine the horrors Hell must have in store if the Bible is true. You're just going to allow that to happen and not care about saving anyone but yourself? If you're right then you're an uncaring, unemotional and purely selfish (expletive) that has no right to talk about subjects such as love and caring."


(16 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

Do you mean jeer, as in when they see the junk that the world shows off as Christianity?  If that's the case then I usually explain to them that not everyone who claims to be a Christian is one.  I also remind them that we, like them, still succumb to sin and disobedience.

If you mean, just jeer at me personally when I talk about Christ.  Well, I haven't had my friends do that too me, but I have experienced that from other people.  I lovingly explain to them that I care sincerely for their soul and that I will face any of their comments, if they give me the same amount of talking time.


(16 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

The other sad thing is that most of these things that are coming off in the name of Christianity, lately, have been coming from the Episcopal Church denomination.  Earlier this month there was a story about a woman who was ordained as a woman pastor, who recently was re-ordained as a male pastor because she had a sex change (Episcopal).  No matter what you believe about woman pastors, the sheer "idiocracy" that surrounds this story is a hit against Christianity, around my unsaved friends they see this stuff and just laugh at the whole Christian movement.


(16 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

One of the problems, and one that is not very known, is that Allah in old-Islamic was a Moon-god ....   About a year ago I had someone say, who cares if you say God or Allah, they are the same thing right?  So I decided to do some extensive research into the Allah of Muhammad and Islam, come to find out Allah was an ancient Moon-god -- who was believed to have married the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.  If anyone is interested, I think I can still dig up some of the old Islamic links that talk about this.

Anyhow, that right there cleared up any confusion I had about whether calling God, God or Allah.  Of course the Islam faith goes to great lengths now-a-days to hide that fact.


(2 replies, posted in CSS Discussion)

It seems like you have fixed this problem, yes?


(3 replies, posted in Content Management)

Can anyone who has used Expression Engine, and other CMS's like Drupal, Wordpress, PHP Nuke; chime in and tell me what are the advantages and disadvantages of using EE compared to the other CMS's, to create an online community?  I am trying to get as much information as possible before I dish out the cash for EE.

Thanks in advance


(10 replies, posted in PHP Discussion)

C.Barr wrote:

yeah, i suppose I should just add another column to my SQL.  I'm just going a general update to my CMS right now so i'm not going to lose any information.  i was just hoping I wouldn't have to actually change my table once I implement this new version on current sites that use ann older version of it.

The way I'm hoping to do dates is with a nice date picker script I found, but it requires dates to be in the format of DD-MM-YYYY (the author is Dutch and thats how dates are displayed over there), so I'd have to get it back to that anyway if you are editing a date.

I suppose I'll still have to do some explodes and string re-organizing to get it into the format the script needs, but I'll store it as YYYY-MM-DD just so it can be ordered that way.  Kind of a pain, but it seems to be how I have to do it for now, or at least until the author can update the script to display dates in a customized way.

If you save the date using MySQL's datetime, then you can use PHP's date() function to return the date in the desired format DD-MM-YYYY, and you can use mktime() to store the correct date/time in the MySQL datetime field.

That would be the best solution, without having to write a bunch of explodes and string re-organizations.

I can give you a better example if you have a question about the methods I mentioned above.

Tom,  I never thought about it as a motivational thing versus an inspirational thing.  All I know is that I perform tons better at my home office, I contribute that to the comfy chair, low ambient noise (music), no distractions, and colored walls.  I could be wrong about that, but it seems to ring true.  I work on the same project at work in a cube farm, surrounded by gray dull walls, uncomfortable $29 chair and noisy environment, at 5pm I am ready to go home; mentally exhausted from trying to remain focus.  I get home and goto the office to continue working on the project and I get more done in those 2-3 hours then the entire 8 hour day at work.  I am no less motivated, in the sense of wanting and desiring to get it done, I just have a better work environment.  Maybe inspiration is the wrong word, but what would you call it?  As a developer most of my work is mentally challenging (which I thoroughly enjoy), anyone (I think most people here) who does any programming knows the mental capacity required.  While working on a bit of the code and thinking about it's functions, you are also at the same time thinking about 20 - 30 steps a head of where you are to ensure what you are doing now will also fit the next 20 steps.  An interruption while I am in "the zone" can cost me 30 minutes of work time, easily, trying to get BACK into "the zone".  I also find it more difficult to get into "the zone" at work than at home.  Even dismissing distractions, where the first hour I am basically alone in the cube farm -- I still can't hit "the zone" very well.

I have just always summed that up into an 'inspiring' work environment, or inspiration.


(8 replies, posted in Content Management)

It looks like the work section is not necessarily setup like a "blog".  In fact there is only 6 projects, it would be really easy to input that in just a regular "page" in wordpress.  However, if they are individual blog posts, then like gibson said.  Wordpress is highly customizeable, you can easily make only certain categories show up on certain pages.  In his categories section, if you go through all of them you will not see any of his "projects" from the work page there; this leads me to believe that it is probably just a page that he edits to add new projects.

Just my opinions and observations of course.

My main argument is that Inspiration manifests hard work.   When I am inspired I work doubly hard without conscientiously forcing myself to apply.  I catch myself spotting problems and errors faster and easier than normal.  Uninspired it sometimes takes me longer to overcome a problem, where as inspired the solution jumps right out at me.  It's almost magical.  When inspired time flies, and productivity skyrockets.  This is actually track able in my personal projects.

Part of the inspiration for me is my work environment.  If I am in a noisy cube-farm, or in a cluttered office, my performance is reduced, I am not inspired by my surroundings.  Whenever I am in my home office, with a nice comfortable chair, ambient noise and colored walls my performance is greatly enhanced.  I am inspired.  There is something uninspiring about gray cube walls, constant interruptions and cluttered/unorganized rooms.

Am I the only one who sees inspiration and productivity so interlinked?  And that work environment greatly affects the overall performance?  Your tastes for inspiration (as in wall hangings, colors, etc) may be different.  But does your working space affect your productivity?

I have recently been engaging in conversation with my partner about whether hard work or inspiration equates to success.  He is stoutly declaring that hard work equals success.  He consistently argues with me about my desire to have an inspirational work environment, stating that I need to work harder, not have an inspired environment.  We come from two different backgrounds, he is not a developer -- whereas I am.  I tried to convince him that hard work is a by product of inspiration, at least in regards to developers.  Here are a few snippets of a recent discussion I had with him, I am asking what do you believe?  Do you believe, as I do, that inspiration lays the foundation for hard work, therefore stating that hard work is a by product of inspiration; or do you believe that success does not rely on nor need inspiration, only hard work?  Remember this is in relation to being successful, not completing tasks.

My Partner wrote:

I saw this thing last night on Fox News that reminded me of you. They were interviewing this guy who is ultra successful and owns various types of businesses. They asked him to give viewers one piece of advice and he said success is driven by 1% inspiration and 99% hard work. That totally got me thinking about you. Not that you are not a hard worker but you are usually worried about inspiration.

I wrote:

I disagree with the 1% inspiration and 99% hard work, as a developer.  Coding is an art and just like any other kind of art, like painting, it requires inspiration. Why is it that a painters need for inspiration is not debated, but a developer's need for inspiration is?  Their task is the same, they are trying to turn nothing into something.  I have witnessed and seen what inspiration versus just plain hard work does.  The inspiration out performs just hard work every time.  Hard work says I have a job and I work hard to meet those requirements, inspiration says I totally enjoy this and therefore I think of more ways to improve and enhance the job.

Now inspiration does not negate the need for hard work, instead it fuels hard work (a by product of).  Inspiration makes that hard work seem less hard and more fun and enjoyable.  Which relates itself in dedication and time.  I can be working very hard, diligently on an application, but if I am not inspired then at 5pm I wrap up and go home.  Take that same application and add in inspiration, I still work very hard and diligently on the application, except I don't think about the time.  5pm turns into 7pm, then I am leaving simply because I need to get home to my wife and kids.  Inspiration drives me to push the envelope and excel above the requirements.

Most developers inspiration is greatly enhanced or degraded based on our surroundings, our working environments.

What say you?


(8 replies, posted in Shoot the Breeze)

http://www.cs-cart.com/ is probably the best solution for a low price that I have seen in a LONG time.  Check out the demo, especially the admin section.


(9 replies, posted in Website Critique Area)

Really nice looking site, it's attractive.    It looks like it could be helpful information for me as well.  My wife and I are thinking of adopting soon (within the next year), so I need all the advice I can get, especially about the process (which I heard could be painfully long and emotional).  We also have the question of when we should adopt.  Currently we have 3 children, 2 boys (will be 4 and 3) and 1 girl (newborn, 3 weeks old), but the idea of adopting and providing a loving Christian home to an otherwise unfortunate child is a strong desire for us.  When do you know your ready?  How difficult is it to adopt a child?  Are there lots of red tape involved?

Anyhow, I am hoping this new site can answer these questions; plus the few friends I know who have adopted can possibly become authors (or gain knowledge from the site as well).

Overall great site, great concept.

Speaking of the fact that God killed the first animal, the question that next needs to be asked is then:  If death was not inherent in earth then what did the carnivorous animals eat?  Which could plug right into what maspick said, Did God change the nature of the animals?   Well if you believe that God killed the first animal, thus claiming the first death, then what did those animals eat?  Plant life seems like the only logical conclusion, either that or we misinterpret God's meaning when He said he killed the first animal.

I am really enjoying the conversation we are having.  Let's keep on discussing this.

Hey BroChris, speaking of having Ribs, I just had a nice juicy steak for lunch ... so yes I agree with that praise. smile

Just a note, all of these are opinions and a lot of inferences and maybe's; just as BroChris said.  So take these in stride and don't think that if you disagree with someone's point of view that they are wrong or that you are wrong.  We should not take offense in discussing our Lord and his good Word.  We are each told to discern the truth and with that we have the Holy Spirit; rejoicing and admonishing us as the Lord wills.

I have to agree with Larry Tomlinson, it does not seem to have the intended effect.  I'd say it's time to go back to the drawing boards and rethink about the message you are trying to portray.  Obviously you feel very passionate about this law, express that, but do it in a manner that does not automatically offend the viewers you are trying to attract.  Seriously,  I think what your aiming to do is very admirable --- your method just sucks.

On the flip, I read the law and then did some digging around.  It is a pretty broad law, when I read what the law is really about (my inspiration came from outside your site, unfortunately.  Because of the reasons listed above), it prompted me to write this quick note to my ABF.  I have already received many replies of concern.  There is, I believe, something here to be concerned about.  Just re-formulate your message.

The email I sent:
I found an interesting bit of news about a new law in Orlando.  According to articles it is supposed to be targeted at the homeless, however I can see this law being used against church gatherings and things like the "Men's Wildlife" suppers.

Here is the excerpt:
Section 18A.01, of the newly revised Code of the City of Orlando:

    * "(a) It is unlawful to knowingly sponsor, conduct, or participate in the distribution or service of food at a Large Group Feeding..."
    * "(23) ...Large Group Feeding is defined as an event intended to attract, attracting, or likely to attract 25 or more people, including distributors and servers"

Yea, pretty wide open for interpretation.  Anyone else get a sick feeling about this law?

In Christ,
Tony Devlin

Thank you Nathan and BroChris for both of your replies.  This is exactly the kind of discussions and opinions I was wanting to hear.  I obviously don't know exactly what the correct answer is or not, but thought it would be an interesting conversation piece.

Nathan, you fell on the exact text that I fell on when confronted with the question, but you could argue that it was still a result of the fall and not necessarily an acceptance of such habit.  A perfect example of this kind of thought pattern is with divorce, God said he was against divorce but told Moses because of their harden hearts he "allowed" divorce.  What about that perspective?

BroChris,  I really love your personal example!  It is true that many things are not said, maybe it was not emphatically said because it was of no value.  Bringing up Abel's sacrifice is a really good point and definitely leaves something to discuss.  Like you said it's hard to distinguish what made it acceptable or what it implied.  You could move from that analogy to infer that he ate the other portions of meat.  I mean how would he have known to kill the animal and offer the fat?  I never thought about Abel's sacrifice in that way.

On the other hand, why did he later have to emphatically tell Noah to eat meat?  As if it was not a common thing..?

Thanks for the differing perspectives and this is exactly the type of conversations I am hoping comes as a result of these topical discussions.

Make comments only available to those who login.  Then you can match comments to accounts.  Not very "free" feeling but will definitely cut down, if not stop, the slander.  People like to hide behind the pseudo anonymity.

Let me start this study with an introduction.  My name is Tony Devlin, I am a 29 year old father, husband and servant of the Lord.  I have only been saved for a short period of time (5 years), but I have an ever increasing yearn to learn the word of God.  I hope to start a tradition here at Godbit that generates "Study Groups" with discussions utilizing the forums and people here.  One of the greatest ways I learn is by comparing thoughts and notes with other people and to have an open discussion about various Biblical topics.  I know that doing this will invite a wide range of differing opinions, but I do not feel that to be a bad thing.  Opinions are good and hearing others opinions can help reinforce your own thoughts or help educate you in others.  As with any of these study groups I intend to do, there is no right or wrong answer.  This is merely for discussion purposes and hopefully from it we can all learn and grow in our sanctification process.  I will try my best to avoid topics that are salvational in nature, the intent with these discussions are not to reach the unsaved but to equip the saved and generally learn more about each other and our Saviour.

Now in context of today's study, I am a meat eater, I love my steak and potatoes.  I am in no way advocating a society without meat, I am merely examining the scriptures and learning something about our earliest ancestors in the process.  With that Let's begin:

Genesis opens up with the creation of everything, including our ancestors Adam and Eve.  One of the very first things that struck my attention when I started to read about Adam and Eve were their living conditions, or more precise their eating habits.  God says in Genesis 1:29 "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you".  The interesting thing we find here is no mention of meat.  At this point it's safe to say that they were vegetarians, or at least to the extent of what the Bible tells us.  But did this truth only pertain to man?  Did animals have a different set of standards, I mean what else would a shark be eating if not meat?  Well, let's allow the Bible to answer it for us, verse 30 says, "and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food".  Another verse that dictates a vegetarian lifestyle is found in Gen 2:16 "The LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;'", again no mention of meat.  In fact the first mention of eating meat comes to Noah after the flood, Genesis 9:3 "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.".  So our next question is why?  Why now?  He had given them plant before and they sustained life very well and assumedly healthy as they lived longer years than we do now.  I think to answer that question we need to think about what the environment was like at this point, I mean the world had just been flooded.  What happens to vegetation that becomes flooded?  If anything, the farmers in the US, have taught us that just as a drought destroys crops, so does over abundance of water.  It is therefore possible that God allowed man to eat meat because there were not enough edible vegetation to sustain life, or at least sustain it long enough to produce more vegetation. 

Personal conclusion:
God's initial intention for us was to not be meat eaters, imagine if Adam never sinned and God did not curse the ground because of it.  Where would we be right now?  In the Garden of Eden and what do you think we would be eating?  Based on the facts above we would probably be eating fruits and veggies.  However because of our fall and because of the flood we are now meat eaters.  We have been given the ability to eat it, therefore do not take this study as a persuasion of turning vegetarian nor any kind of condemnation thereof.  God clearly allows us to eat meat now.

Does this resonate with your mind as well?  How do you feel about this topic?  How about this analogy?

I want to thank you in advanced for participating in this new study group.  Depending on the attention this gets I may make this  a weekly or bi-weekly event.  We can even suggest Topics so that we all can spend the week studying a certain topic and then coming on the prescribed day to discuss it here.  Let me know what you feel about this idea and this study course.


(9 replies, posted in Theology Discussion)

Two things, one to the idea of "Eternal Salvation, or the ability to lose it" and second to the OP.

I believe salvation is an eternal thing, and as such once you have it you can not lose it.  Let's look at some biblical proof of this.

In John 6:37 Jesus says, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out."  And in John 6:39, “This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of ALL He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day."  If you look at the context, you’ll see he is talking about us. Then, look at what He says in chapter 10, starting at v. 27: “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of my Father's hand."

Jesus says, "I give them eternal life".  Give, it is a present term meaning now (or in relation to the context when you receive Christ).  We use the term Give in a present tense, you do not say "I give you such and such" when thinking about something you do in the future, you would say "I will give" or "soon I will give" or some added term that means in the future, clearly this was spoken in the present form.  What about the word "Eternal"?  Eternal describes something that lasts forever, forever is a terminology that our mind is hardly capable of understanding -- yet we were created to last forever.  Eternal, means never ending, Eternal is a measurement of time that has no mathematical equation, thus can not ever end.

In passage above, I wanted to point out one thing, Jesus said, "and no one is able to snatch them out of my Father's hand."  I am someone, therefore even I myself can not snatch me out of the Father's hand.  I like to think of it like this, Jesus has his hands wrapped around me and then over top of Jesus hands his the Fathers hands, in their omnipotent power no one is able to pull me out from Them.  Jesus has always spoke of an eternal salvation of a now nature.  If it's eternal and I can have it now, then it must be concluded that once I take it is eternally mine.

John 5:24, "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life."  It says the one who trusts in Christ has everlasting life. Not "will have"  or “may have if he endures."  He has salvation in the present tense. And how long is everlasting life? Forever, not temporary, according to Heb. 10:14 “For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified."

Also, notice that John 5:24 says "has passed from death into life."  The perfect tense for the verb indicates that John sees this as a completed action. It is, in other words, an accomplished fact. Paul says in Col. 1:13: “He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love."  This transfer from one state to the other is a major theme in the New Testament.

Think about the act of Salvation, it is a transformation.  John 3 says we are born again spiritually, It is impossible to reverse our human birth and become unborn. You may become estranged from your mother and father, but you can never genetically cease to be their child. So it would also be impossible to reverse our spiritual birth and become unborn. Another word for this new birth is ‘regeneration’ in Titus 3:5. When that word is used in a wider sense in Matt. 19:28 it is for the millennium. The millennium will involve the total transformation of the earth to the Eden-like state it had originally. Can our spiritual transformation in the new birth be reversed any more than this millennial transformation?

when we are saved we become a new creation, according to 2 Cor. 5:17: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."  This is the new state of being resulting from the action of the new birth. Where the new birth emphasizes the radical transformation we undergo, the new creation emphasizes the radical new person we become. How is it possible to become an old creation once again? Can we be uncreated? Now if we had any doubt as to the extent of this creation, Paul dispels it by specifying that the old things have passed away. All things have become new. If I go out and buy a new car and decide I don’t like it, I can give it back and continue using the old one. But if I have rebuilt the old car, sanded off the old paint and repainted it, torn out the upholstery and had it reupholstered, replaced the old engine, tires and electrical system and taken the old parts to the dump—how can I possibly untransform it and make it back into the old car? God’s work in this new creation is more than restoration, it is actual creation: we have been created a “new man�  in God’s image (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10).

God gives salvation to us as a gift. That is said very plainly in Rom. 6:23: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."  If He gives us salvation in the first place, does it make sense for Him to take it back--for any reason? Now notice what Paul says in Rom. 11:29: "For the GIFTS and the calling of God are irrevocable."  What cannot be revoked is secure to us, no matter what we do or how we change.

Think of the logic behind God’s salvation. If we are unable to work for our salvation (Rom. 4:5; Eph. 2:8-10; Titus 3:5), why should we have to work to keep it? If we needed to be saved by grace, does it make sense that the keeping of our salvation would depend on something other than grace? Salvation was secured for us by Christ’s death on the cross. There He paid the price for our sin. Was it only for SOME of our sins; was it only for the sins I committed before salvation? That would be ridiculous, absurd--especially when the Bible never says a word to that effect.

God will not give up His glory (Isaiah 48:11). If the keeping of our salvation depended on us, then we would share in the glory for our salvation, and that is not possible. If salvation is the Lord’s work, then we cannot share in that work. The condition for entering into salvation may be ours--believing in Christ--but the saving is His. And eternal life is a decree--our name cannot be blotted out of the book of life!

So what about sin?  Can a Christian sin and still be saved?  I think one important thing we forget is that God stands outside of time, therefore when He speaks of our sin he is talking about ALL of them; past, present and future.  He sees them as all happening at once.  When you understand that it makes versus such as these that much more easier to comprehend; Romans 5:10 says, "For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life." , There is no ‘except’ clause here--no "unless you sin too much or lose your faith."  Why would He reject a person for sin when they had been saved as a sinner in the first place? In fact, 1 John 2:2 says that Christ paid the complete debt for our sin before we were saved: "And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."  All the demands of the righteousness of God have been met by Christ’s sacrifice in our place. Therefore God can forgive our sins, not by being lenient, but by accepting Christ’s atonement. If we had to keep from sinning after salvation in order to keep our salvation, then Christ’s death on the cross would be incomplete.  Paul talks about this very nature in Romans 7:15-25, I encourage you to read that.

Hugely the idea of losing your salvation has come from misinterpretations of the bible.  To read the statements above and then to assume that you can lose salvation would declare that the bible is contradictory and in such how then can you know what is true or what is false, it would then be left to each individual to decide and that my friend is chaos.  I would love to talk more about this and go even further but this is not the place nor time.  If anyone has any questions about eternal salvation and whether or not you can lose it, please send me a reply.  Include any "Biblical" passage that you think disagrees with Eternal salvation or the lose their of and I will try my best to show biblical passages that support or dismiss your theories.

Now to the Original Poster:  I recently did a Mens Bible study on Colossians 3, which I think clearly demonstrate the "new" person you are searching for.  Paul clearly states that we must Put to death the old self, specifically verse 3:5 "Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry."  Consider your earthly body as dead, well if something is dead than it can no longer function, it is passed away, gone, behind us.  The principle here is that because we are new creations we should deem our old self as dead and now renew ourself in the new, renewing is a constant process it takes time -- but we are not left with an unknown goal, further in Colossians 3 Paul states what we are to replace the old self with.  Before this is mentioned, does Paul elude to the idea of never sinning again?  Most definitely not for it was Paul in Romans who stated that he does the things the he wants not to do and does not do the things that he wishes too.  Ergo, it's a constant battle.  Thankfully Christ left us the Holy Spirit who strengthens us and admonishes us, Thru Christ and the Holy Spirit anything is possible.    To over simplify that passage, the idea is to not linger on your sin, but rather focus on the things that Glorify Christ.

As a side note, I think something that could hugely benefit anyone who is interested in learning how you can accomplish the new person that Paul describes in Colossians 3 (as well as in Ephesians 4) is to do a word study on 3:14 on the word Love there that Paul tells us to put on.  The word is Agape and is the only word ever used to describe God's love to us.  Study it, use a concordance to cross reference with other passages that talk about that Love and specifically God's love.  As Paul states that Love is above all those other things he mentioned, Jesus used that word when asked what the greatest commandment of all was, And He said to him, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.  This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.  On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."   The word Agape is used to describe both of those commandments.  How important is Love to God?  Just read John 3:16 a couple of times, over and over.

If anyone is interested in my study I did titled, "Be Transformed by Your Salvation", let me know and I will email my notes to you.

I hope this help answers your questions and enlightens anyone else to God's word.  First and Foremost, Do the research yourself and do not trust anyone to read it for you.  You must search the scriptures yourself!

God Bless,