| Author | Message | ||
     easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1546 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.4 |
The Baptism with the Holy Spirit by R.A. Torrey What The Bible Teaches by R.A. Torrey Copyright 1898-1933 By Fleming H. Revell Company Chapter VII – THE BAPTISM WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT Section 1 pg. 269-273 I.What the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is. (1) Acts 1:5, 4:8, 10:44-46 Compare 11:15-17, 19:2-6, Heb. 2:4 1 Cor. 12:4, 11, 13, Luke 22:49 FIRST PROPOSITION: A number of suggestive phrases - “Baptized with the Holy Spirit,” “Filled with the Holy Ghost,” “The Holy Ghost fell on them,” “The gift of the Holy Ghost was poured out,” “Received the Holy Ghost,” “The Holy Ghost came on them,” “Gifts of the Holy Ghost,” “I send the promise of My Father upon you,” “Endued with power from on high,” are used in the New Testament to describe one and the same experience. (2) Acts 19:2 SECOND PROPOSITION: The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a definite experience of which one may and ought to know whether he has received it or not. Compare Acts 8:15,16 & Gal. 3:2 (3) Acts 1:5 Here is a company of regenerated men pronounced so by Christ Himself. John 15:3, 13:10 And yet the baptism with the Spirit lay for them some days in the future. Acts 8:12 In this company of baptized believers there were certainly some regenerated people, but we read in 15:16. Regenerated but not baptized with the Holy Ghost. We see the same thing in Acts 19:1,2 THIRD PROPOSTION: The Baptism with the Holy Spirit is an operation of the Holy Spirit distinct from and subsequent and additional to His regenerating work. A man may be regenerated by the Holy Spirit and still not be baptized with the Holy Spirit. In regeneration there is an impartation of life, and the one who receives it is saved; in the Baptism with the Holy Spirit there is an impartation of power and the one who receives it is fitted for service. EVERY TRUE BELIEVER HAS THE HOLY SPIRIT. Rom. 8:9, 1 Cor. 6:19 But not every believer has the Baptism with the Holy Spirit, though every believer, as we shall see may have. The Baptism with the Holy Spirit may be received immediately after the new birth – as in the household of Cornelius. In a normal state of the church every believer would have the Baptism with the Holy Spirit, as in the Church at Corinth. 1 Cor. 12:13 In such a normal state of the church the Baptism with the Holy Spirit would be received immediately upon repentance and baptism into the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. Acts 2:38. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1547 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.4 |
But the doctrine of the Baptism with the Holy Spirit has been allowed to drop out of sight, and the church has so little expectancy along this line for its young children, that a large portion of the church is in the position of the churches in Samaria and Ephesus, where someone has to come and call the attention of the mass of believers to their privilege in the Risen Christ and claim it for them. (4) Acts 1:5,8, Luke 24:49, Acts 2:4, Acts 9:17-20, 1 Cor. 12:4-14 FOURTH PROPOSITION: The Baptism with the Holy Spirit is an experience connected with and primarily for the purpose of service. 1. The Baptism with the Spirit is not primarily intended to make believers happy nor holy, but to make them useful. In every passage in the Bible in which the results of the Baptism with the Holy Spirit are mentioned they are related to testimony and service. The Baptism with the Holy Spirit has no direct reference to cleansing from sin. It has to do with gifts for service rather than with graces of character. The steps by which one ordinarily receives the Baptism with the Holy Spirit are of such a character, and the Baptism with the Holy Spirit makes God so real that this Baptism is in most cases accompanied by a great moral uplift, or even a radical transformation, but the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not in itself either an eradication of the carnal nature or cleansing from an impure heart. It is the impartation of supernatural power or gifts in service, and sometimes one may have rare gifts by the Spirits' power and few graces. 1 Cor. 13:1-3, Matt. 7:22,23 It is indeed the work of the Holy Spirit to cleanse from sin, and to empower one for the lead one into a life of victory over the world, the flesh and the Devil, but this is not the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. It is, however, more fundamental and important. It is well to remember also that Jesus promised a twofold baptism, “with the Holy Ghost and with fire.” The cannot be interpreted to mean two contrasted baptisms, one of blessing and the other of judgment. The Greek does not permit of this interpretation. It is one twofold baptism. Many seem to get only part of it, “the Holy Wind,” but the “fire” is for us too, if we can claim it. And fire searches, refines, consumes, illuminates, makes to glow, energizes, spreads. “Fire” is what many need to-day, and it is for us. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 780 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: May I ask a simple question? Better yet, can I get an honest answer? 1. Why did you/your religion take the words of a well-respected theologian and run it like a sow’s belly through a sausage grinder to garner support for your religion’s doctrinal statement? 2. Why did you/your religion take the words of a well-respected theologian and run it like fish through a mincer to batter out what appears like your belief system? 3. Why did you/your religion take the words of a well-respected theologian and run it like flour through a sifter to extract tiny morsels of support for your doctrine? 4. Why did you/your religion drag these great writers through the mud to achieve your desires when you could have taken direct quotes from fellow believers such as Jim Jones, Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell, to name but a few? If Dwight L. Moody actually agreed with you/your religion, why aren’t you Baptist? “Just the facts, ma’am,” to quote Joe Friday. | ||
| arron Senior Member Username: arron Post Number: 3732 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.119.39.156 |
tatm and why dont you quit attacking pentecostals who have done nothing to you except may be preach the gospel to you and you got mad about it and one fanatic said something or did something to hurt you. whay dont you tell the name of the church you attend and the denmanation you are. whay dont you tell where you got your doctorate if any at all where did you get the authority and who gave it to you to punish or talk about pentecostals who live right. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 782 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Just one more question . . . again to quote a movie line. M(r)(s). easeltine: I am baffled! Mr. Arron and certainly myself, use poor grammer (worster spelling) all the time. You on the other hand portray yourself as well educated, meticulous in writing styles. Yet, you wished someone on another thread half a sentence. Why? Why did you quote only Mark 16:17? That is like wishing everyone "Happy." It simply does not make sense. So why? Were you ashamed of the rest of the sentence? | ||
| saygoodnightgracie Intermediate Member Username: saygoodnightgracie Post Number: 326 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 72.64.222.20 |
Easel.. great books by Tozer and Moody as well on the baptism of the Holy Spirit... In another great (look for it on Amazon) old book, called "Christ the Healer", there is a lot of info in the first few chapters where the author outlines in detail several mainline denominations who taught the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as a seperate and subsequent experience to Salvation - but haved moved away from this doctrine in the "modern" church era (if you want to call what Rick Warren and Bill Hybels do, "church"). You should read it, it is excellent. Also, why argue about tongues - who cares? Someone doesn't want to speak in tongues, they shouldn't. Big deal. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1550 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 72.164.43.195 |
This is just Section 1 - Section 2 is coming tonight and I just can't wait for the responses I will get. I believe in speaking in tongues and the prayer language, but what I see more and more at Pentecostal Churches is exactly the point that Say is talking about. They are just praying for people to receive the "prayer language". At the Body Life meeting I finally had an opportunity to say, "Call me an old time Pentecostal, or a person that believes as Finney, Moody, or Torrey, but the point is not whether one has the prayer language, the point is, Have you been Baptized in the Holy Spirit?! That's the point and a Baptecostal or a Catholicostal is just a label. I'm just a simple clerk who knows how to type, and have been in the Church all my life. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 784 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: My questions can be answered quiet easily. Just a few simple words. Quoting: ". . . a person that believes as Finney, Moody, or Torrey, . . ." End quote. Why not as Jim Jones, or Charles Taze Russell, or Mary Baker Eddy, or Joseph Smith? | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1552 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 72.164.43.195 |
I think that you would agree with these points as well - Finney, Moody, or Torrey believes as I do in the following points: * Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh, as defined in Scriptures and explained by the Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasian Creed. * That the Bible is the Inerrant, Infallible, Word of God. Jim Jones - Rejected both of these points. Charles Taze Russell - The founder of the Jehovah Witness organization rejects John 1:1 and the fact that the Word, God, became flesh and dwelt among us. Mary Baker Eddy - The founder of the Christian Science organization main belief system can be stated as, "sin and disease are all unreal". The Christian Science organization reject the points stated. Joseph Smith - The founder of the "Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints", have a different idea of God than Christianity. They believe that "god" was once a man as we were, that Elohim became man...oh brother Sandy...I am not going into this science fiction adventure of Mormonism...lol Jesus Christ is God Almighty Come in the Flesh. Romans 10:9 states, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the LORD, (God of the ages), Jesus Christ, and believe in your heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, ("...and in three days I will raise it up."), thou shalt be saved." That's the difference between the three men, Finney, Moody, and Torrey, and the other heretical cult leaders you mentioned. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 786 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: Ye do err! Quoting: "Jim Jones - Rejected both of these points. Charles Taze Russell - The founder of the Jehovah Witness organization rejects John 1:1 and the fact that the Word, God, became flesh and dwelt among us. Mary Baker Eddy - The founder of the Christian Science organization main belief system can be stated as, "sin and disease are all unreal". The Christian Science organization reject the points stated. Joseph Smith - The founder of the "Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints", have a different idea of God than Christianity. They believe that "god" was once a man as we were, that Elohim became man...oh brother Sandy...I am not going into this science fiction adventure of Mormonism...lol " End quote. All base their belief system on the Bible. In fact, they are more in line with you than the men you quote. Now answer my question, honesty. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1553 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.249 |
I have erred in presuming that you agree with the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the Inerrancy of the Word of God? That's my honest answer and I will not change it. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 787 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: Thank you for being honest. Now anyone reading your post will know the truth. Your religion quoted these men in order to give them (your religion) credence. Within the past year, I have sat in one of your churches and watched an old Jim Jones sermon. Your religion worships Jim Jones but can not quote him publicly for good reason. Anyone willing to know the truth can easily find an LDS.ORG website. One of the primary belief's of the Mormon church is "We believe in tongues and faith healing." Why is the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism ashame to quote Joseph Smith? Take three guesses and the first won't count. Mary Baker Eddy introduced the world to faith healing. Why would the pentecostal faithhealers be ashame to quote her? Again, take a wild guess. The great actor, Michael Landon, exposed the fraud of 'faith healing' on an special two hour episode of "Little House on the Prairie" entitled "The Prophets." Anyone who ever watched David Koresh, for example, knows he used the Bible to support his belief's (all of them). In fact, the Bible has been used to support many bogus religions, not just pentecostalism. Fred Phelps uses the Bible to teach hatred. The Roman church uses the Bible to support worshipping of Mary. TheWatchtower Bible & Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses, Bible Students, etc) use the Bible to deny the deity of Jesus Christ. The Adventist Movement uses the Bible to teach soul sleep. The long list of frauds goes on forever. The pseduo-christian cult of pentecostalism's use of the Bible to support its garbology is in line with a long history of deceit. The vicious cold-blooded character assassination of these great men to achieve their goals is certainly in line with the desires of Sataan. Think for a moment, put yourself in a doctor's office. If a man came in looking like he had just crawled out of a sewer and ordered you to disrobe, would you? What "if" the man was wearing an immaculate lab coat with a stethoscope wrapped around his neck, would you disrobe at his request? Now you know why the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism would rather drag these great men through the mud than use direct verbatim quotes from those who believe as they do. (Message edited by the apostolic truth ministries on November 22, 2007) | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1556 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.48 |
What a nut you are! No Pentecostal likes Jim Jones! Jim Jones was a Cult leader who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity. All Pentecostals, (with UPC as exception - Sebellius ideas), believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. See the Foursquare and Assembly of God website. Jim Jones was an evil person. Mary Baker Eddy - The Founder of Christian Science was a nut, rejecting the Infallability of the Word of God, and the Doctrine of the Trinity. Go to the Foursquare and Assembly of God websites to see what they believe. I disagree with you on the Adventists! All I am doing is showing Scriptures by a great man of God, R.A. Torrey to show the Pentecostal that Holy Scripture supports the secondary experience after salvation called the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. I am giving the Pentecostal Scriptures to defend themselves against your 20 year old challenge, since they must not know the Scirptures to answer you. We need the Word of God to answer these John Mac Arthurish-type Hank Hanegraffites, (however you spell his name), people that say that, "Every person that speaks in tongues is not saved." Just a couple months ago a missionary couple was at my mother's church who knew the Foursquare Missionaries that were killed by the Islamic Extremists. This missionary couple had also discovered the secondary experience of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of the prayer language. Folks, most missionaries believe in the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, even fundamentalists ones. The couple was in a prayer group and another Mac Arthurish-type heard this missionary speaking in toungues and said, "Why he is not even saved. For we heard him speaking in tongues." She asked the lady at the house why she didn't do anything and she said, "I cannot do anything, this man is a man of God." No, the lady who had the prayer meeting at her house did not speak in tongues, but she knows that the idea that all people that speak in tongues are not saved is just IDIOTICALLY STUPID. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1557 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.48 |
Pentecostals are currenly diluting their dialog to be more compromising to these sorts of Dispensationalist, Mac Arthurish, Hank Hanegraffites, types. The Pentecostals have compromised their wording to, "Release of the Spirit", Filled with the Spirit", and they no longer pray for the Baptism with the Holy Spirit, rather just prayer for the person to receive their "prayer language." They say to the kids that receive it, "Now you have your prayer language and don't let anyone tell you differently." Well, the compromise is wrong also. As Stacy Keach said in the Luther movie when he is putting up the 95 Theses - "Someone has got to bell the cat. You have to be made to know the truth." Here in the simple language of R.A. Torrey we have it. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit - see above and the Scriptures above... Again from the Luther movie, "Posted so all may know." | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 789 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: Your belligerence will not work. I have/have not said anyone was saved/not-saved. That theatrical performance is strickly your's. I find it amazing that someone with your knowledge and experience spend more time selecting the underwear you have on than the religion you fell sucker to. Quoting: "(2) Acts 19:2 SECOND PROPOSITION: The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a definite experience of which one may and ought to know whether he has received it or not. Compare Acts 8:15,16 & Gal. 3:2 " End quote. This passage was dealt with/disproven under the thread entitled "Charism . . . What pentecostalism does not want you to know." The reason John Wesley stated that he was convinced there is not a second or subsequent event to salvation, is the Bible does not support one. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1558 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.48 |
For the record: I am one of the few people I know on FactNET that like John Wesley. Most posts I have read have people describing him in a negative light on FactNET. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1559 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.48 |
Reverend Sandy, Thank you for making it clear that you are not in that category that state that all people that speak in tongues are not saved. If you believe that people that speak in tongues are doing so by either their flesh or Satan, then you have to come to the conclusion if by Satan then they are demonized. If you believe that a person that speaks in tongues is demonized than you must believe that a Christian can be demonized or anyone that speaks in tongues is not Saved. That is your two choices. Coming from my background of the ideas of Derek Prince, Maxwell Whyte, Don Basham, Charles Simpson, Bob Mumford, Hammonds, The Billy Graham Christian's Worker's Handbook etc. let the reader know where I stand on that issue. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 790 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Quoting: "(3) Acts 1:5 Here is a company of regenerated men pronounced so by Christ Himself. John 15:3, 13:10 And yet the baptism with the Spirit lay for them some days in the future. Acts 8:12 In this company of baptized believers there were certainly some regenerated people, but we read in 15:16. Regenerated but not baptized with the Holy Ghost. We see the same thing in Acts 19:1,2 " End quote. This claim was also dealt with under the above named thread. To the point, this claim makes Jesus Christ look like a fool. "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with ou for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you." John 14:16 - 18 (KJV) Go back to your Bible and study the passage. Ask yourself the questions taught to you in school. Who? What? When? Where? Why? Ask yourself, why did Jesus promise to send the Holy Spirit to someone who already had the Holy Spirit? Judas, ever hear of him? Did he have the Holy Spirit? Careful. I am going to show you something no pentecostal has ever read. "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve." John 6:70,71 (KJV) Do you really believe the devil had the Holy Spirit? The main difference in Christianity and the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism, we believe every single word in God's (w)Holy Inspired Inerrant Word for the Ages, not just those we can conveniently use. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 791 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). easeltine: My introduction to your religion came in a Discount Bible catalog while I was in school. The catalog had a section entitled "Psyhcology." Every title in that section was labeled pentecostal. Your claim of two choices is misleading. Anyone who has ever attended one of your religion's psyhcodramas, knows the true problem. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1569 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.48 |
Here is my current take on your post in light of Scripture. I see you quoting in the KJV, you probably are one of these Textus Receptus people, so I will do in Rome as the Romans do. Pulling out my KJV...oh there it is... Salvation is continent upon the following: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9 - That's actually the way my mind memorized it KJV. A: Confession with your mouth that Jesus Christ is LORD. That LORD there is God Almighty of the O.T. The Isaiah 9:6, the Us of Genesis. B: Believe in your heart that God hath raised Him from the dead. Incidentally, Jesus said He raised Himself from the dead, showing is Unity with the Father. With the Scripture of 1 Corinthians 12:3 --- Ok, my girl wants to use the Internet. Bye for now. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 796 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Easeltine: Acts 8:12? Were these people saved according to your formula? Book, chapter and verse, please. "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." Acts 8:12 (KJV) | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1573 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.254 |
Of course they were saved! Romans 10:9! According to the theology of Assembly of God, Foursquare, First Church of God in Christ, and Holiness Pentecostal...all of them they were saved. It's only UPC and other weirder branches that would say that they were not saved. Amazing?! | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1574 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.254 |
As even one "Extraordinary" Pentecostal Evangelist put it: "The grace of God, which brings salvation, has appeared to all men, through the preaching of repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ; man is saved by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, and, being justified by grace through faith, he becomes an heir of God according to the hope of eternal life (Titus 2:11; Romans 10:13-15; Luke 23:47; Titus 3:5-7). The "inward" evidence to the believer of his salvation is the direct witness of the Spirit (Romans 8:16). The "outward" evidence of his salvation to all men is a life of righteousness and true holiness." | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 800 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Easeltine: May I suggest a good Bible and not your religious guide book? Disproving these people's salvation is easier than falling off a log. In fact, you thrushed the arrow into the heart of the beast yourself (1 Corinthians 12:3). As for UPCI (the Roman church, John Wesley, James Ariminus, the Church of Christ, The Adventist Movement, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, the Church of God, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints, etc. all who believe in baptism = regeneration) , they claim these people were saved (baptized in Jesus' name only Acts 8:16). | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1577 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.51 |
Back to the point of Romans 10:9. Judas Iscariot was never saved, and never had the Holy Spirit. To be saved and have the Holy Spirit requires confession and believing that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. He does not meet the requirements. Therefore, Judas, cannot be used as an example of a Christian having a demon, which was done in one of the books on deliverance that I read. The deposit of the Holy Spirit is given to the disciples by Jesus Christ, the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit, before Pentecost when He says the words in John 20:22, "and when He said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit." Here the two requirements are completed for the disciples, (ten of the twelve). They have already confessed Jesus Christ as LORD, the other repuirement of the belief that Jesus Christ rose from the dead is completed. Also, in the same Chapter of John, before Pentecost, we see the following words by Believing Thomas: "And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" John 20:28 Jesus then calls Thomas a believer in John 20:29 - "Jesus said to Him, "Thomas, because you have seen me you have believed..." We can always trust the LORD'S words. He has given the Spirit to the Disciples before Pentecots and called Thomas a believer. The Disciples in the room in John 20, and Thomas have a measure of the Holy Spirit as per the following Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 12:3 - "...no one can say that Jesus is LOrd except by the Holy Spirit." and 1 John 4:2 - "By this you know the Spirit of God: Every Spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God..." The best source for the idea that there is to a secondary experience of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is the example of Acts 2, the Disciples receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. John 20, after the resurrection, Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to the Disciples, the Disciples believe that Jesus arose from the dead, and they confess Him as LORD and God. The requirments of Romans 10:9 are finally met after the resurrected LORD in this chapter of John. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 808 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Mr. Easeltine: hehehehehehehehe! to the max!! | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 811 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
For those who may not be following the full discussion on tongues, I dealt with the scriptures given under the title "Charism." I would be a fool to offer money to anyone who can show a second or subsequent event to salvation in scripture if there was one. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1587 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.201 |
"I would be a fool to offer money to anyone who can show a second or subsequent event to salvation in scripture if there was one." Yes, you would be a fool to offer money to anyone who can show the seconday experience, (since there is so much Scriptural evidence), and yes you did offer money. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 819 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
So where is it? | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1590 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.143 |
Do you read what you actually wrote in your post? Do you read what I wrote in my post? No, or else you would understand how stupid your post was! What's the point in going over the verses with you again, since you don't even read your own posts, much less mine? | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 824 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Mr. Easeltine every verse you misquoted was dealt with under "Charism." Your religion's plan of salvation was also disproven under the same title, sorry. Had you read any post written to you, you would have known that. | ||
| kobegone Junior Member Username: kobegone Post Number: 28 Registered: 11-2007 Posted From: 66.74.43.210 |
"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire." Pentecostals didn't make this up, John said it. Many people were already saved and later on received the Baptism of the Holy Ghost. "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" said Paul." "We haven't even heard if there be any Holy Ghost." Paul then laid his hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. It is simple; Jesus baptizes with the Holy Ghost, and with FIRE (power). It's just like a police officer having the badge, but no gun. He has a badge showing that he is an officer and has authority, but that gun gives him that extra power to back it up. I really like ATM and Easeltine. But I think instead of attacking each other, we should help each other out with controversal scriptures and teachings, by rightly dividing the word of truth. We are all for the same cause, but lets be Christians, and love one another. I know we aren't always right, but we are not enemies. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 827 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). kobegone: I forgot if I addressed you as Mr. or Ms. I see you have redefined words in the hope of making your beliefs fit the Word of God. AND warped and twisted what I said. I know of no Christian who lacks the power to please/serve God. Unfortunately, faked infantile gibberish is not in scripture. | ||
| kobegone Junior Member Username: kobegone Post Number: 29 Registered: 11-2007 Posted From: 66.74.43.210 |
Yes my friend you are right. No Christian lacks the power to serve and please God, because it takes faith to please God as stated in Hebrews, but as far as power, they only have a measure of the Spirit, not the fulness of Spirit from on high. That's why Jesus said tarry ye in Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high. And that's why Peter had that sudden boldness on the day of Pentecost when he preached his first sermon. I believe the word of God. Since everybody else is wrong, and you are not, back up what you say using the word of God with your belief's since your belief's are the right ones. I don't really use the term Mr. because I'm in the military (U.S. Marines), and we don't really use that term, so Kobegone would be fine. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 831 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
My friend, Quoting: "And that's why Peter had that sudden boldness on the day of Pentecost when he preached his first sermon." End quote. Peter had no problem with boldness. Many incorrectly have Peter walking around with his foot in his mouth all the time. Actually, I see Peter's humanity. Peter, as a pirate, would have been described as a swashbuckler for his character. Peter was truly the center of attention throughout the ministry of Christ. Quoting: ". . . they only have a measure of the Spirit, not the fulness of Spirit from on high." End quote. Would you show me in scripture where God only fulfilled half a promise. Marine? Lejune or 29 Palms? Centuries ago I use to hang out in Ocean City. Obviously, you are a no-body until you set foot on Paris Island. I saw in the paper where a DI was court-martialed for using profanity in front of recruits. I can see a great of great men rolling over in their graves! Oh, I am 100% DAV (Vietnam). | ||
| kobegone Junior Member Username: kobegone Post Number: 31 Registered: 11-2007 Posted From: 66.74.43.210 |
I went to bootcamp on Paris Island, I am stationed in 29 Palms. I joined in 2001, and you are right things have changed for recruits now; most DI's don't use profanity, but that a good thing; I don't either. And oh yeah, I was a part of the Iraq invasion, and participated in OIF 1 and 2, and am going back next October. You got me there, I can't show you where God only fulfilled half a promise, because God fulfills all his promises. And I can't show you a verse that says they only have a measure; forgive me for that. I'm not against you, but I was taught a lot of this from seminary, but people like you can actually help me, and I'll consider it. But Peter, before the day of Pentecost was afraid of a silly girl, and denied Christ thrice. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 833 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Aye, sir, ye misunderstood Peter! Quoting: "But Peter, before the day of Pentecost was afraid of a silly girl, and denied Christ thrice." End quote. Talk to someone who has had or has been diagnosed with a life threatening disease. All will explain “It can’t happen to me. I am too ????? young? Rich?? Good looking??” Peter showed his humanity through denial, just as you have or will at some point in life. Peter was by far the most human of the apostles. From his denial of Christ to his arguments with Paul, Peter is just exactly like you and me, human. We have the same pride, the same hopes, the same dreams, the same weaknesses, and many of the same failures. God does not give half promises. At the moment of salvation you have the power to cry “Abba,” father. Would your earthly father give you a wheel from a bicycle for Christmas? And the rest after you earned it? Or as Jesus put it: “And he said unto them, Which of you shall have a friend, and shall go unto him at midnight, and say unto him, Friend, lend me three loaves; For a friend of mine in his journey is come to me, and I have nothing to set before him? And he from within shall answer and say, Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee. I say unto you, Though he will not rise and give him, because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth. And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” Luke 11:5 - 13 (KJV). I have been told, by competent authority, that the only bullet you have to watch out for are those with your name on it. However, in ‘nam, I saw several addressed “to whom it may concern.” I remember one boy who went to bootcamp with me. Townsend was his name. He was from Texas. After we left boot camp I went near direct to Travis Air Force Base. He went home for two weeks. We met again in Da Nang. One morning the corpsman was giving shots. Townsend went crazy. We all laughed at him for being afraid of a needle. When the corpsman wiped Townsend’s arm with the alcohol gauge, he passed out. We rolled on the floor laughing at him. Pretty quickly, we realize he was not playing. Townsend was allergic to alcohol. After he was treated and released, we picked on him for being the only black guy in the world who could not drink beer. He and I spent a great deal of time together during the “Tet” offensive. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3575 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
easeltine wrote: ***** Judas Iscariot was never saved, and never had the Holy Spirit. ***** Mat 27:3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, I thought salvation is God's province, alone. I find nowhere in the scriptures where it declares that betrayal is the unforgiveable sin. So, how does easeltine know something that God will or will not do with respect to Judas? Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. So as man judges other men to the Lake of Fire, so shall God judge man. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1600 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.254 |
"It were better if he were not born." | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1602 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.254 |
In the Christian sense salvation is Romans 10:9 Judas Iscariot never confessed Jesus as Lord, nor was he around for the Resurrection or Pentecost. He could therefore not have the Holy Spirit based on the Words of Holy Scripture. As for the idea that the Son of Perdition as being saved, I just leave that to the obvious conclusion of Scripture. Christ calls Judas Iscariot "Lost", we know because the Word of God tells us. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 837 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: You bring up an interesting point of contention within the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism. On one hand, they need Mr. Iscariot to loose his salvation in order to defend carnal salvation. Yet on the other, they need him to never have been saved to defend their second and subsequent event to salvation. Either way, it is fun to watch the decieve argue with themselves. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3584 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
easeltine, You do err greatly in your understanding. In the Biblical sense, salvation is given in John 3:16. There is no evidence that Judas betrayed Christ because he did not believe that Christ was the only begotten Son of God. Christ only issued a 'woe' onto His betrayer. As I pointed out previously, Judas repented and betrayal is not the unforgiveable sin. So, if you are a Christian, you have to believe in repentance and forgiveness. It is certainly Christ's province to forgive Judas for betraying Him. You also err in claiming that Judas is the "Son of Perdition". Nowhere in scripture is Judas sentenced to perish. So, I suggest that you stop judging Judas and allow the true Judge to exercise His sole authority. You might also consider doing your homework before posting on a subject. The ease in which you claim whom is and whom is not saved is ridiculous and a great sin! Since when did God cede authority to any man to judge salvation? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3585 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, I am not familiar with all the specifics of pentecostalism. So, I will take your points regarding easeltine at face value. There is an element of truth to carnal salvation [which I am assuming means salvation here in the flesh body]. It is the first resurrection. However, it is the belief of many professed Christians that the flesh existence is the sole opportunity for salvation for everyone. Since there are many that do not ever get an opportunity to know Christ in the flesh body, such carnal salvation only theology would thereby doom all Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and other non-Christians a sure ticket to the Lake of Fire. I find such theology astoundingly ignorant and unbiblical. It would mean that we serve a God that is not fair -- only those blessed to be placed in an environment to know Christ have the opportunity of salvation. All others perish without an opportunity. Of course, the Bible does not support such theology either. Likewise, the secondary salvation that easeltine posts about lacks support as well. There is no evidence that the malefactor that hung on the cross next to Jesus was baptized in water or by the Holy Spirit; yet, he was saved. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 853 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: I think you missed both post. Carnal Salvation is the opposite of Eternal Salvation. In other words, the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism needs Mr. Iscariot to loose his salvation to explain the great mircles he did. Then flip the coin to declare Mr. Iscariot was never saved to explain the theory of a second or subsequent event to salvation. I would also point out an errror in understanding salvation. God and God alone grants salvation. But it was God who chose the Israelites, not the Israelites who chose God. You need to study the Old Testament. Salvation was only available to the chosen of God. God has not changed. You point to John 3:16, the Bible tells us even the devil believes. Is the devil going to be saved? Why? Why not? Salvation is by God's grace (alone) through the faith of Jesus christ (alone) to the glory of God (alone). Period. From the sounds of things, you listened once too often to Billy Graham. God is not fair. He is just. OOPS! The second event Mr. Easeltine is trying to find is "baptism in the Holy Spirit/Ghost with evidence of speaking in tongues." | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3589 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, Thank you for edifying me on Pentecostalism. I certainly have not studied the specifics of church sects as I spend my time and effort focusing on the Word of God. You wrote: "God and God alone grants salvation." I apologize if anything that I have written led you to conclude otherwise. I fully agree. Regarding salvation, if I understand you correctly, you are claiming that salvation is only accorded to the 12 tribes of ancient Israel. If so, I must respectfully disagree. I find such belief to be wholly unbiblical. You wrote: ***** the Bible tells us even the devil believes. Is the devil going to be saved? Why? Why not? ***** One needs to place John 3:16 in correct context by reading the earlier verses. Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. The word 'again', properly translated, should be rendered 'from above'. Jesus is making a distinction here. Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Here, Jesus clarifies the matter for Nicodemus. The two bodies, flesh [born of water -- thru bag of water in mother's womb] and spiritual/soul, are defined as a requirement for entering into the kingdom of God. Hence, when we read John 3:16 in proper context, we know that the 'whomsoever' declared for salvation is referring to flesh man. Satan, and the fallen angels, are not 'born of water' and, therefore, can never enter the kingdom of God. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 854 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: Me thinks what? who? Which? Come back again. I am lost. Are you saying the good angels can enter heaven because they are not born again but the bad angels can not enter heaven because they were not born of flesh? How do you tell which angel is flesh and which one isn't? I strongly suggest you run the word "chosen" through a good concordance sometime. God chose the Israelities. The Israelites did not choose God. In fact, the Israelite worshipped several gods. Quoting: "Hence, when we read John 3:16 in proper context, we know that the 'whomsoever' declared for salvation is referring to flesh man. Satan, and the fallen angels, are not 'born of water' and, therefore, can never enter the kingdom of God." End quote. You may want to revise this comment also. "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" John 6:70 (KJV) You claim Mr. Iscariot was forgiven and saved, now you say he could not be saved for he was not born of flesh. Or God lied. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3592 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, I have reviewed my prior post above and think that is was quite clear -- not sure of the nature of your inquiries. Your post above is unintelligible in light of what I posted. Nonetheless, I will attempt to clarify it for you. I am sure that you are aware that mankind cosists of two bodies -- a flesh body and a spiritual body [1 Cor. 15:44]. The spiritual body is what is referred to as an 'angel'. Since the fallen angels refused to be born through woman [water], they can never enter the Kingdom of God. Satan, the chief fallen angel, was sentenced to perish prior to this earth age. >>>>> I am not arguing that God did not choose Israel -- it was His covenant with Abraham. >>>>> I have never claimed Mr. Iscariot was forgiven and saved. Please read my posts carefully as I try to be very clear in my writing. >>>>> Again, it is my understanding that the Bible, properly interpreted, indicates that salvation is available to all -- not just the 12 tribes of Israel. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 856 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: Quoting: "Since the fallen angels refused to be born through woman [water], they can never enter the Kingdom of God." End quote. Could you go into detail here. Scripture references, quotes or commentaries from recognized authorities, etc. Quoting: "As I pointed out previously, Judas repented and betrayal is not the unforgiveable sin." End quote. That is your post 3584 from above. It sounds to me like you believe Judas Iscariot is saved. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1617 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.183 |
"You also err in claiming that Judas is the "Son of Perdition". Nowhere in scripture is Judas sentenced to perish." The words of Jesus Christ - John 17:12 "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is LOST EXCEPT THE SON OF PERDITION, that the Scripture might be fulfilled." | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3594 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
easeltine, I didn't say there was not a Son of Perdition -- it just isn't Judas Iscariot. | ||
| mcmstaff78 Senior Member Username: mcmstaff78 Post Number: 1951 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 167.193.134.61 |
Watch out, we will have some serious scripture twisting going on in a moment, even more than what the Charismacostals do. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3595 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, Last part first. It is God's province whether Mr. Iscariot is saved -- not mine or anyone else's. All I am saying is that those that say he is not saved are improperly [sinfully} judging him. He repented of his betrayal and his sin was not the unforgiveable sin. If one claims to be Christian, one should know Christ paid an awesome price for all of our sins -- including Mr. Iscariot's sins. >>>> Regarding fallen angels, it is quite the lengthy study and correlates to many other topics that also are lengthy. So, I will hit the highlights and allow you to direct the discourse thru your questions. Jude 1:6 gives us the punishment for the fallen angels. What they did was described in Gen. 6 -- tried to disrupt the blood line from Adam to Christ by impregnating the daughters of Adam. Instead of being born thru woman, they chose to seduce women. As described in Gen. 6, their offspring were the geber/giants. The fallen angels have already been judged to perish; but, they have further purpose in the end times as they return prior to or with Satan. That is why the reference 'unto the day of judgment' in Jude. These angels play endtime roles as addressed in Rev. 12, 13, 17 and other places. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 866 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: Quoting: ". . . improperly [sinfully} judging him . . . " End quote. Let us take a piece at a time. Did St. Paul sin when he judged the gentleman in 1 Corinthians 5? "For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed," 1 Corinthians 5:3 (KJV) Or are you going to give me a rooster and hen story that St. Paul had the right to judge but not Christians? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3597 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, It is Mr. Watchman. Check out the meaning 'judged' - G2919 kree'-no Properly to distinguish, that is, decide (mentally or judicially); by implication to try, condemn, punish: - avenge, conclude, condemn, damn, decree, determine, esteem, judge, go to (sue at the) law, ordain, call in question, sentence to, think. The topic is an adultery and boasting about it. Of course, it is every Christian's right to call into question violations of God's commandments/laws. However, in 1 Cor. 5:3, Paul, in no way, was judging whether the man was saved of destined for the Lake of Fire. Of course, such unrepentent sin will likely get one there; but, Paul was not judging salvation. In fact, it was Paul's desire that the man have a change of heart. See 1Cor. 5:5. He declares judgment to take place in the day of our Lord -- not by man. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 868 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Mr. Watchman_2: Are you sure St. Paul did not judge salvation? He ordered the man booted from the church? Now you are waffling. Which is it? Is it a sin to judge? Yes or No. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 723 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Watchman_2: If I understand you correctly, you seem to suggest that Jesus suffered needlessly for people who will never be saved. It seems that the Father accepted Christ's payment on the cross and yet not everyone is saved. As a consequence, both Christ and the unsaved end up paying for the same sins according to your theology. As for Judas: "The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born" (Matthew 26:24). Could you explain how you would reconcile this verse with the notion that Judas was saved? Surely one who is saved eternally would profit more than one who was never born. Otherwise, what does that say about salvation? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3598 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, If Paul judged the man's salvation, then there would be no need to turn him over to Satan for destruction of his flesh in order to save his soul. See 1 Cor. 5:5. If Satan has his way with the man, perhaps the man will have a change of heart and repent. Of course, it is the duty of the church heirarchy to boot such people out lest the whole membership be harmed. See Mat. 5:29. Sir, there is no waffling here -- it is a sin to judge salvation. God alone decides. Discerning sinful behavior, and taking appropriate salvation, is certainly within our province. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3599 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** If I understand you correctly, you seem to sugIf I understand you correctly, you seem to suggest that Jesus suffered needlessly for people who will never be saved. ***** You sound just as bad as easeltine and tatm -- judging our fellow man. How do you know whom will and whom will not be saved?? Are you another one that believes God is not fair? When you cite Mat. 26:24, where does it state such individual will 'perish'? It only states 'woe'. Besides, you don't know which 'man' Christ is referring to. We know from Luke 22:3 that Satan entered Judas. Christ could just as well be speaking of Satan as He was Judas. Of course, the defeat of Satan, being the Son of Perdition, was ordained before the first day of creation in Gen. 1:2. The death of Satan was first set forth in Gen. 3:15. So, since Satan was responsible for Judas' betrayal, logic dictates that the 'woe' of Mat. 26:24 was issued to Satan. Nonetheless, we have no right to judge Judas' salvation. I have, never said that Judas will or will not be saved -- that's God's decision, Judas repented, and Judas did not commit the unforgiveable sin. It is certainly a forgiveable sin. >>>>> You wrote: ***** Surely one who is saved eternally would profit more than one who was never born. ***** A study in the Greek regarding the word 'born' - G1080 ghen-nah'-o From a variation of G1085; to procreate (properly of the father, but by extension of the mother); figuratively to regenerate: - bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring. The rendering 'born' is figurative -- not a literal birth. This is further evidence that Christ is not speaking of Judas. Hence, your question is nonsensical. Birth in the flesh has nothing to do with this matter. The rendering is best considered as 'brought forth' or 'made' instead of 'born'. >>>>> You wrote: ***** If I understand you correctly, you seem to suggest that Jesus suffered needlessly for people who will never be saved. It seems that the Father accepted Christ's payment on the cross and yet not everyone is saved. As a consequence, both Christ and the unsaved end up paying for the same sins according to your theology. ***** No, you don't understand me correctly. I would never suggest such a thing. Christ paid an awesome price and it was necessary. God would not subject his creation to anything He would not be willing to go thru Himself. Since the purpose of this second age is to cull out the unworthy, it was necessary for God to go thru the death process via Jesus so that it would be fair for God to cause the death of the ungodly at the end of the Lord's Day. God is fair. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1624 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.185 |
Watchman, We have given you two very solid Scriptures showing that Jesus stated that Judas Iscariot was not saved. John 17:12 is clearly Judas Iscariot, and Christ is talking about the rest of the Disciples. Judas Iscariot also hanged himself, he committed suicide. You sound like you lean to the doctrine of Carlton Pearson and his doctrine of inclusion. The fact of the matter is clear that the main point is true, and that is the Judas Iscariot was never Baptized in the Holy Spirit. Judas Iscariot commits suicide before Christ rises from the dead. He is clearly in the Old Testament, and does not fit in the main topic of this discussion. It's pretty clear from these Scriptures that if Judas was saved he lost his salvation, but Judas was never saved in the first place. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 724 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Watchman_2:
First of all, I do not know who will and who will not be saved. However, it is a given that some people will be saved and some people will never be saved. You can only argue against this if you held to universalism, whereby the entire human race will be saved. I don't believe you do so I do not see why you would be offended at my commment that some people will never be saved. Secondly, perhaps you would care to define "fair". As far as I am concerned, fair would be God executing His wrath upon all of us because we are all sinners. This is the thing that always gets me. When people try to oppose the doctrines of grace they play the "fair" card. What's fair? Who are we to dictate that God provides salvation for all people? Salvation is not something owed to man. It is an undeserved mercy.
Again, the verse says that it would be more profitable that the one who betrays the Son of Man had never been born. It is a logical deduction that if it is more profitable for someone to never have been born, then they are reprobate. Otherwise, you seem to be suggesting that this person still has a chance of being saved. Why is it more profitable if they had never been born? Or do you believe that never being born is more profitable than being saved.
Satan is not a man. Satan is a fallen angel. Secondly, Satan never was born, he was created. You are forcing a most unnatural rendering upon the text to suggest that even though Judas betrayed Jesus, and Judas was a man and Satan was not, and Judas was born and Satan was not, that somehow this verse is not referring to Judas at all.
Only your "logic" dictates the woe being issued to Satan and not to Judas. You already admitted that Judas's betrayal was ordained. Ordained by whom?
If the bible says that it was more profitable for someone to never have been born, I interpret that as saying that such a person is condemned and will never be saved. I believe the bible itself provides sufficient data, and you do not. I'll leave it at that. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 725 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Watchman_2:
You provide possible renderings of a Greek word, then assume that the context demands a figurative birth instead of a physical one without actually providing any basis for forming that conclusion. Then, drawing upon your baseless conclusion you assert that my argument is nonsensical. Simply saying that the best rendering is "brought forth" or "made" does not make it so. You need to do a much better job than that. Even if someone is to accept your faulty premise, it still does not rule out Judas instead of Satan. Or are you telling me that Judas was not made, nor brought forth, but Satan was? I'm only seeing holes in your arguments. You're going to have to do better than this.
Let me guess, you consider yourself a worthy person? And what is it exactly that makes you worthy and another person unworthy? You also asserted that it was necessary for God to go through the death process so that it would be fair for Him to cause death of the ungodly. Why is that? Are you suggesting that it would not have been fair for God to cause death of the ungodly if He had not gone through the process of crucifixion? Why would that be? The bible simply says that the wages of sin is death. Since all have sinned in Adam, it is completely fair that all in Adam die. It is not God's fairness we want, it's His mercy, because mercy is undeserved. Otherwise we'd all be condemned.
The "fair" God would have us all justly condemned. It is the merciful God who chose to save some. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 439 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
(Please see Matt. 18:32-35) Note the lord in this parable (the Father), makes the wicked servant pay all his due because of his sin, even though the servant had already been forgiven the debt (his sins) by the lord. This makes it very clear that God does not necessarily consider it unfair or "double jeopardy" (punishment inflicted twice for the same crime) for payment to be received more than once for the same sins – since it's not paid for by the same party. Even so, those who reject God and do not appropriate the payment already provided in Christ will pay for their own sins, even though God already paid the price for their sins in Christ. The payment provided by Christ must be applied for it to be effective for an individual, just as for many commands of the Scriptures. They are all flawlessly true, but the promises are only actualized to individuals by grace, through faith. People can 'charge' their sins to Christ's infinite account through His unspeakable gift, but if they foolishly refuse then they still owe the debt and will pay every penny. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3600 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
easeltine, You wrote: ***** We have given you two very solid Scriptures showing that Jesus stated that Judas Iscariot was not saved ***** I have thoroughly debunked your interpretation thereof. Nowhere do the scriptures state Judas Iscariot will perish. It is only a tradition of man, thereby making void the Word of Truth, to assert that Judas is not saved. Moverover and most important, it is a sin to judge salvation! See Mat. 7:1-2. Either you believe in the Bible or you don't! If you do, then stop judging mankind -- that is God's province alone. ***** John 17:12 is clearly Judas Iscariot, and Christ is talking about the rest of the Disciples. ***** Perhaps, you did not catch my previous point. Yes, Christ was speaking to God in earshot of the disciples; however, there is no indication that one of them is the Son of Perdition. it is just another classic misinterpretation of scripture to presume Christ is speaking of Judas. Let's examine John 17:12 more closely. First, one must pick up the subject in verse 1. Christ is speaking to God. Then, one can discern that the 'them' spoken of is the entire world -- all souls. Christ himself declares that not any one of them have been declared unsaved ['lost'}, except the Son of Perdition. All other souls will not be judged until the Lord's Day. So, the key is understanding whom is the Son of Perdition. You claim it is Judas because of a 'woe'. This reasoning is errant on two counts. First, there are many 'woes' issued throughout scripture; yet, there in only one Son of Perdition. Logic dictates that a 'woe' does not necessarily cause one to perish. Second, as I pointed out in my previous post, the woe is most likely issued to Satan, whom entered Judas [Luke 22:3]. Christ left no doubt as to whom the Son of Perdition is. With the words, "the scripture might be fulfilled", we know that it is in reference to a single prophecy. Nowhere in prophecy is it declared that Christ must suffer due to a betrayer. The 'scripture' spoken of by Christ is Gen. 3:15. Christ's suffering was required to fulfill this scripture -- crush Satan's head. In fact, the scriptures declare whom is the Son of Perdition. See Eze. 28, 2 Thes. 2:3, Rev. 17:8. Of course, the Son of Perdition can be none other then Satan. ***** The fact of the matter is clear that the main point is true, and that is the Judas Iscariot was never Baptized in the Holy Spirit. Judas Iscariot commits suicide before Christ rises from the dead. ***** I already proved that Baptism, whether in water and/or by the Holy Spirit, is not a prerequisite to salvation. If Judas committed suicide [I know the scriptures state he humg himself], he had plenty of help -- hanging oneself does not split one's body open to allow the inwards to spill out onto the ground. The Chief Priests could not allow him to live and tell people of the conspiracy to have Christ killed. ***** It's pretty clear from these Scriptures that if Judas was saved he lost his salvation, but Judas was never saved in the first place ***** How many times do I have to edify you?? Judas repented -- the scriptures declare it. Was his betrayal the unforgiveable sin?? Answer: NO! Nno one but the Son of Perdition has lost salvation at this time. The very scripture you posted proves it. | ||
| mcmstaff78 Senior Member Username: mcmstaff78 Post Number: 1953 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 167.193.134.61 |
The problem all you all operate under is interpreting Christ's redemptive work as a forensic or financial transaction. It is basically Augustinian through Anselm is precisely what led the Latins to sell indulgences. While Luther discarded the fruit, he kept the root. It has dogged Western Christianity ever since and is one of the big reasons, IMO, (along with sola scriptura) that you now have 30,000 plus Protestant sects one one form or another. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 873 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 12.217.145.168 |
Mr. Watchman_2: It is aparent that a number of people want to get in on the action. I will defer any further discussion to their excellence wisdom and knowledge. After you put them into their places, let me know so we can finish our discussion. Oh, a lot of your opinions sound like Gerald_the_watchman | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3601 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** First of all, I do not know who will and who will not be saved. However, it is a given that some people will be saved and some people will never be saved. You can only argue against this if you held to universalism, whereby the entire human race will be saved. I don't believe you do so I do not see why you would be offended at my commment that some people will never be saved. ***** Of course, there will be people not saved upon Judgment. The entire purpose of this second age is to cull out the ungodly. Nonetheless, it is still God's will that all make it. Christ came to be sacrificed for the whole world [John 17]. We don't know whom, at the last minute, repents and is saved. So, we have no business judging salvation. ***** Secondly, perhaps you would care to define "fair". As far as I am concerned, fair would be God executing His wrath upon all of us because we are all sinners. This is the thing that always gets me. When people try to oppose the doctrines of grace they play the "fair" card. What's fair? Who are we to dictate that God provides salvation for all people? Salvation is not something owed to man. It is an undeserved mercy. ***** I don't know if you are like easeltine and tatm whom believe that salvation is only available to select groups. John 17 certainly indicates that Christ's sacrifice was for the whole world. It is unbiblical to conclude that Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and all other non-christians are unsaved. The opportunity for salvation for many comes in the millennium [Lord's Day]. So, to judge to the Lake of Fire all such individuals just because their souls were placed in a codition to never have a proper opportunity to know Christ would mean that God is unfair. One should keep in mind that the purpose of this age is God's act of love in effort to save some souls that, based upon their actions in the first age, God would have to destroy. God's unmerited mercy extends to all souls -- except Satan's. ***** Again, the verse says that it would be more profitable that the one who betrays the Son of Man had never been born. ***** Thank you for confirming that Judas was not sentenced to perish. I covered the Greek on 'born'. See post above. I also covered the fact that this scripture could equally be speaking of Satan -- the word 'man' meaning 'countenance' or 'soul'. Satan entered Judas. So, who is really culpable -- Judas or Satan?? Satan is the Son of Perdition. See post above. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3602 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
cont'd ***** You already admitted that Judas's betrayal was ordained. Ordained by whom? ***** Do you think that Christ did not know how, when, and by whom he would be crucified? Of course he knew. Judas Iscariot was chosen as a disciple for just such a purpose. Other then the fact that Judas is not the Son of Perdition and should not have his salvation judged by man, he was fulfilling a necessary role to bring forth the fulfillment of Gen. 3:15. Christ knew that Satan could use Judas to accomplish the crucifixion. ***** I'm only seeing holes in your arguments. You're going to have to do better than this. ***** I have proven that Judas is not the Son of Perdition. See post above. It is you folks that lack credibility on this subject. ***** Let me guess, you consider yourself a worthy person? And what is it exactly that makes you worthy and another person unworthy? ***** Let me guess -- you are like tatm and easeltine in your desire to judge mankind's salvation. Our good deeds are nothing but filthy rags. For salvation, see John 3:16. God, alone, can judge this -- not man. See Mat. 7:1-2. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3603 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
tatm, I am fully capable of continuing our discussion while addressing the others as well. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 727 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Everyone is ungodly. It is only Christ's righteousness that makes anyone acceptable before God.
If that is so, then why are you saved and another person is not? Could there have been circumstances whereby you would not have chosen God and others who now do not believe would believe? Could God have done anything that would cause people not to perish? You see the problem with your theology is that it is very man-centered. I had a discussion on these very points with Trsinheaven, who basically said that the reason why others are not saved is because they have a hard heart, or they're influenced by culture, or they don't understand the scriptures, etc... The corollary to this is that the saved are those who have a soft heart, are not influenced by culture, and understand the scriptures. You see, this elevates the saved above the unsaved. This is problem number 1. Problem number 2 is that you end up having a God who basically pushes the "play" button and just watches everything unfold. He "desires" every single person to be saved even though He knows that in this universe, with these people and these circumstances, a good portion of these people will never ever be saved, and there's nothing He can do about it. Problem number 3 as I mentioned before, and searchlight has addressed this, and I wish to deal with that response, is that according to your theology, God executes judgement upon Christ for sinners and then executes the same judgement for those same sins upon those who are not the elect. Searchlight does not see this as a problem because supposedly it's ok for sinners to receive judgement for something that has already been judged. I see it as a huge problem to the justice of God. If a criminal is convicted of a series of crimes and receives a death sentence and someone comes along and says to the judge, "Will you accept my death in place of his as payment for his crimes?" and the Judge says "Yes." Then you have a righteous contract. If then this person suffers the death penalty for the crime, and the criminal later on says "I don't care about that guy, he's got nothing to do with me." It's too late. That judge has no right to execute the punishment upon that criminal because the price has already been paid. There are many many more problems with your theology but I'll just let you deal with these 3 for now. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 728 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Watchman_2:
Let's take a look at John 17 shall we? 1 Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, 2 even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 3 "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4 "I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 "Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. 6 "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. 7 "Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You; 8 for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me. 9 "I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours; 10 and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them. 11 "I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. 12 "While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled. 13 "But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves. 14 "I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 "I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one. 16 "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17 "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth. 18 "As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. 19 "For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 729 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
20 "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; 21 that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; 23 I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. 24 "Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. 25 "O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; 26 and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them." | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 730 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Jesus Christ is speaking clearly about those whom the Father has given to Him. It is to these ones (v2) that He gives eternal life. If you think the Father gave the whole world to Jesus to be saved, v9 disagrees with you. Jesus makes it clear that His prayer to the Father is to to ask Him concerning not the whole world but only those whom the Father gave to Him. Regarding Judas vs Satan, verse 12 says not one of them perished except the son of perdition. Then He prays in verse 15 that this same "them" would be kept from the evil one. If we are to follow your line of reasoning, Satan would have to be included in the them in verse 12. Apparently then Satan perished. This makes little sense because in verse 15 the "them" is prayed for to be kept from the evil one (Satan). Why would this be if Satan has already perished? The burden of proof falls upon you that the "them" that Jesus prayed for is the entire world rather than those elected by God before the foundation of the world and given to the Son. The burden of proof falls upon you that the same "them" includes perished individuals apart from the son of perdition even though verse 12 says not one of them perished. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1628 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 72.164.43.195 |
Termin8d, I think you would find Carlton Pearson's website and his heresy of the Doctrine of Inclusion interesting. This is what Watchman is teaching. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 731 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Watchman_2
So people who worship false gods and never heard the gospel are saved? Perhaps you could provide scripture to back up your position. You are preaching a similar doctrine as the Catholic doctrine of Invincible Ignorance. It is a logical consequence of your theology but not a biblical one.
Those who are dead during the millenium have no chance to repent. The bible says that it is appointed to man once to die and then the judgement. There are no second chances.
Why would this make God unfair? Does God not have the right to make one lump of clay, vessels of wrath fitted for destruction and from the same lump vessels of mercy? Who are you to demand that God extend His mercy to all of humanity? Have you not read Romans chapter 9? 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory This is what I was talking about before. God does not owe humanity anything. The entire human race deserved His wrath, and God would not have been unfair for executing His wrath upon us all. If 10 criminals are convicted of the same offence and 1 person is released on bail. The 9 who remain have no ground to accuse the one who paid bail as being unfair. He was not obliged to pay bail for anyone, and yet by His mercy He paid for one of them. In the same way, it is a dangerous thing for you to charge God with being unfair simply because He extends His mercy to some and executes His perfect and just wrath upon others. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 732 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
The gospel has nothing to do with man's actions. It has to do with the fact that man is born with a sinful nature due inherited through Adam. Whether man is saved or perishes hinges not upon the actions of man but upon God's wrath or mercy.
This contradicts Romans 9 which specifically tells us that God prepared some unto destruction and others unto glory. In any case, please do tell me what you believe is the reason that you are saved while another person might not ever be saved? | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 440 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Hi, and dealing with "problem #3" only: "Problem number 3 as I mentioned before, and searchlight has addressed this, and I wish to deal with that response, is that according to your theology, God executes judgement upon Christ for sinners and then executes the same judgement for those same sins upon those who are not the elect. Searchlight does not see this as a problem because supposedly it's ok for sinners to receive judgement for something that has already been judged. I see it as a huge problem to the justice of God. If a criminal is convicted of a series of crimes and receives a death sentence and someone comes along and says to the judge, "Will you accept my death in place of his as payment for his crimes?" and the Judge says "Yes." Then you have a righteous contract. If then this person suffers the death penalty for the crime, and the criminal later on says "I don't care about that guy, he's got nothing to do with me." It's too late. That judge has no right to execute the punishment upon that criminal because the price has already been paid." SL: I would be more likely to agree with this reasoning if it were a one-on-one transaction, i.e. if one person gave their life for one other person, but it's not. In this case, Christ, as the unique source and essence of all life, is the only One who can give His life for His entire corrupted creation. The punishment He willingly took on our behalf did not vary according to who the elect was and wasn't. His sacrifice is effectual for multitudes, even if not for others by their own choice. I think the parable I referenced addresses this kind of situation even more strongly, does it not? This in itself does not resolve the bigger question, of course, but I don't think argument #3 makes the case for limited atonement. I know it is widely used as such. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 441 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Maybe the following will be helpful ... If man's will is independent and a part of salvation, isn't this a works oriented view? Aren't people who are saved then better than those who are lost, because they accepted the Savior's love and forgiveness? Faith is not a work! Speaking of salvation, the Bible declares in Rom. 4:16 “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace” (see also Heb. 6:1, James 2:14-26, Rev. 2:19). Faith has no merit or goodness in itself, but merely enables the object of faith (in this case, God) to channel His good and perfect character and nature through us. This question may best be answered by a simple illustration, as in the following mock newspaper article: HERO PERFORMS MIRACULOUS RESCUE, SAVES MAN FROM FIERY DEATH Yesterday, two lost, degenerate boatmen on different vessels were shocked to be informed that the uncharted river they were on was leading them inexorably towards a fiery inferno at the base of an upcoming, towering waterfall. Although the boatmen perceived no imminent danger, they were warned of certain destruction and death when a lone pilot who had undergone unimaginable torture to reach them, spoke from above via a helicopter loudspeaker system. Defying death, the brave pilot reached his arms around one while hanging from the 'copter to save him, pulling him from the doomed vessel. After rescuing one, the pilot attempted to reach the other boatman. Although the hero reached out to the other boatman, incredibly, this proud sailor insisted on his own way, kept fighting off the rescuer, eventually went over the falls and is now presumed dead. What would we say about the hero and each boatman? The Hero - How wonderful he is, what love he must have, what hardship he went through to save them. Saved boatman - Nothing (we wouldn't even think of saying he did something meritorious because he allowed himself to be saved). Lost boatman - How ungrateful, proud, and foolish he was, how tragic it was that he went to a torturous death by his own choice. It would be the height of absurdity and arrogance to focus on the boatmen in this story at all. All the glory rightly goes to the hero. How perverse it would be to present the saved boatman as having done something worthy for allowing himself to be saved, detracting from the hero's glory, and how equally perverse to ignore the personal responsibility of the lost boatman for his own demise. When one assumes that man can earn salvation, man takes the glory rightly and completely due God. However, when man's will is declared to be completely absent from the salvation process, God's character is indirectly slandered and blasphemed as well. This is because man denies any true individual responsibility and accountability before God for the eternal consequences of his actions, whether lost or saved. On an individual, if not on a corporate basis, the lost become hapless, helpless, eternally hopeless, and fatalistic victims before a capricious God, due solely and completely to the sin inherited from our first forefather, Adam. Despite holy-sounding denials to the contrary, both of these views (the works-based, self-righteousness of the saved, and the fatalistic, eternally hopeless condition of the lost) are false, slander the character of God, and are not once taught in the Holy Scriptures. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 739 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Dear Searchlight, thankyou for your response:
There are two points that we must be careful to address here. Firstly, the parable of the unforgiving slave is dealing with believers not unbelievers. Otherwise you would have to explain why the slave begged forgiveness from His master and thus received it after His master was moved with compassion. On the other hand, if you still wish to assert that this passage is talking about salvation and yet now concede that the person is a believer, then you would have to agree that your theology supposes that one can lose their salvation, and in this case it is due to not forgiving someone of a debt owed. Secondly, the passage is not dealing with salvation, but rather about forgiveness itself. If you do not believe in the eternal security of a believer's salvation (because you think they can lose it by not forgiving someone for example), then I would direct you to passages that specifically deal with salvation, such as Psa 115:3, Psa 135:6,Isa 46:10,John 6:39, John 10:28-29, John 11:26, Acts 27:34, Rom 8:30-39, Phil 1:6, 1 The 5:9, 1 Pet 1:4). As a rule, it is better to base one's theology upon clear specific passages concerning items of the faith. Once the concrete passages have be established, one can interpret parables more accurately. (Message edited by termin8d on December 02, 2007) | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 740 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Searchlight. Thankyou for the boatman analogy. I remember you bringing it up before with Trainedobserver I believe. There are a number of points that I wish to address with it and I don't quite have the time at the moment to do so. Please bear with me, and I will provide a response when time allows. Grace and peace. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 443 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Hi termin8d. The parable is indeed about forgiveness, but the principle of forgiveness shown (i.e. no logical conflict of double punishment from God to multiple parties when a party refuses forgiveness) applies whether it is in the context of salvation or not. The net result is the punishment is only applied once, either to Christ or a specific individual, but not both. I believe in the eternal security of the believer, and the eternal insecurity of the make believer. A seed planted in shallow earth or thorns gives every appearance of genuineness until it bears no fruit, withers, and dies. The 'elect' cannot lose genuine 'salvation' (from God's eternal perspective), but one certainly can lose the appearance of 'salvation' (from our temporal perspective), and many assumed 'saved' in our limited understanding are not. The parable I provided is consistent with other Scriptures clearly dealing with salvation, for the purposes of this application. No rush on the response. Blessings to you as well. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3604 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** Everyone is ungodly. It is only Christ's righteousness that makes anyone acceptable before God. ***** I think it is important to distinguish between flesh and spirit/soul in determining acceptability before God. With respect to spirt/souls, some have already been judged acceptable to God. They have already been written in the Lamb's book of life prior to the foundations of this world age. Of course, the flesh is corrupt and all, even the elect, are ungodly in their flesh bodies. Since even those that are already judged acceptable must go through this world age [flesh existence], God conforms [intercedes in their lives] them onto Christ. The rest have free will to choose. That is the purpose of this second age. ***** If that is so, then why are you saved and another person is not? ***** Nice try! But, I am not even going to judge my own salvation. God, ALONE, judges salvation. It is a sin for man to judge salvation [Mat. 7:1-2]. You cannot cite one instance in which the disciples or apostle Paul judged their own salvation. So, why do you?? I will address the rest of your points in future posts. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3605 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** Could there have been circumstances whereby you would not have chosen God and others who now do not believe would believe? Could God have done anything that would cause people not to perish? ***** First question - Yes. God could have placed my soul into a baby born to Hindu's in India. Likewise, the sould placed in baby of Hindu parents could have been placed in Chritian parent's baby. Second questiion - Yes. God could have made us all as mind-numb beings that have not choice but to serve God. Given the fact that God created our souls with free will, the inevitable resultant is that some shall choose to not love God. ***** You see the problem with your theology is that it is very man-centered. ***** No -- my theology is purely Bible-based. It is not influenced by man at all. You have yet to discover my theology in error. The problem with your theology is that it is not bible-based. It is riddled with traditions of man [church teachings], which make void the word of God. BTW, was the Bible written for God's benefit?? I don't think so. Therefore, it is pure nonsense to declare my theology man-centered. ***** Problem number 2 is that you end up having a God who basically pushes the "play" button and just watches everything unfold. He "desires" every single person to be saved even though He knows that in this universe, with these people and these circumstances, a good portion of these people will never ever be saved, and there's nothing He can do about it. ***** Please read my words carefully and not read your crap into them. There is nothing that I have written that would lead one to believe that is my theology. In fact, it is you with the push-button mentality. You think that you can declare whom is and whom is not saved based upon a set of circumstances that you observe, which is in complete ignorance of the scriptures. God knows what is truly in the hearts of all people and, alone, is qualified to judge salvation. You sin greatly when you judge salvation. ***** \iProblem number 3 as I mentioned before, and searchlight has addressed this, and I wish to deal with that response, is that according to your theology, God executes judgement upon Christ for sinners and then executes the same judgement for those same sins upon those who are not the elect.} ***** Do you speak tongues??? This is pure gibberish! When did I ever state that God judges Christ?? Again, read my words carefully and don't place your spin on it. First, you need to learn whom the elect are. They are those that were judged favorably in the first earth age. All Christians are not elect. ***** There are many many more problems with your theology but I'll just let you deal with these 3 for now. ***** So far, you only pointed out your own theological defects. I think that you really need to study your Bible before you attempt to point out any more -- you will only further embarass yourself. | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 2628 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.255.151.176 |
hey watchman, i see you continue to bully people where ever you go. if you would use that intellect of yours to help people rather than beat them down, you could actually be an asset to the human race rather than a liability. you are a typical bully. your challenges get met by one, and you run and look for someone else weaker than yourself. i have no intention of following you around watchman so don't worry about that. i was just feeling bold enough to let you know that i have not forgotten that you ran out on our discussion of angels. you claim to have so much knowledge and authority but you turn tail and run when people show you real facts instead of illusion. i am not ignorant of the bible that you say is your authority watchman. i am not afraid of your supposed ability to have interpreted the bible perfectly. you think you understand exactly how it all fits together and you are out to let every one know it. i am out to let every one know that you are here to bully people and nothing more. your challenges can be met, and have many times. you just keep prowling around to find new sheep to tear apart. don't bother to come running back either watchman. i have no interest in anything you have to offer. you will be ignored. no amount of your bullying is going to cause me any harm. (Message edited by fatherofaking on December 03, 2007) | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3607 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, I apologize for taking so long to reply. I read your analysis of John 17 and have the following comments: You wrote: ***** Jesus Christ is speaking clearly about those whom the Father has given to Him. It is to these ones (v2) that He gives eternal life. ***** It is clear that Christ is speaking of the 'elect'. See verse 6 -- "thine they were". Christ is speaking of those that were judged favorably in the first earth age. The scripture does not state that salvation is only confined to the 'elect'. John 3:16 states clearly that salvation is for "whosoever believeth". Your exclusivity theology does not square with scripture. ***** If you think the Father gave the whole world to Jesus to be saved, v9 disagrees with you. Jesus makes it clear that His prayer to the Father is to to ask Him concerning not the whole world but only those whom the Father gave to Him. ***** Yes, Christ's prayer was for the 'elect'. However, you fail to construe why He prayed for them. See verse 18. Christ sent them out into the world. It is the non-elect that is the principle focus of this earth age. The elect are not of this world age as described in v. 16. ***** Regarding Judas vs Satan, verse 12 says not one of them perished except the son of perdition. Then He prays in verse 15 that this same "them" would be kept from the evil one. ***** I have already proven that Judas is not the son of perdition. See my posts above. It is pointless to continue to argue this issue unless you can demonstrate that the beast of Rev. 17:8, 11 is Judas. You have that burden of proof. Otherwise, the scriptures can never be squared with a theology that Judas is the son of perdition. If you do a deeper study of John 17:12, you will conclude that the rendering 'but' is meant as a comparison. Christ is stating that none of the 'elect' has committed the unforgiveable sin, which would cause them to perish like Satan. As I previously pointed out, the wording " that the scripture might be fulfilled" should clue you into the fact that it is not Judas referred to. You have a burden of proof to demonstrate a prophecy of God's purpose to have Judas perish. Yes, the 'elect' are here for a reason -- they have work to do. That work is to bring the Word to the rest of the world. Christ's salvation is available to the entire world. Your exclusivity theology is unbiblical. Moreover, it is nonsensical in that it infers that God is wasting this entire earth age saving an exclusive group that was already justified in the previous age. | ||
| ultimate1 Advanced Member Username: ultimate1 Post Number: 544 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.194.182.119 |
Just a few of the many historical records of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. AD 130 Irenaeus makes a reference to the "charismata": "Wherefore, also, those who are in truth the disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles].... Some do certainly and truly drive out devils.... Others have foreknowledge of things to come; they see visions and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them." AD 156 Montanus fought against the liturgical and official ministry swing in the church of his day. He called upon his followers to live in a state of frequent ecstasy and vision." AD 160 Tertullian also makes reference: "Now all these signs (spiritual gifts such as psalm, vision, prayer in ecstasy) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty." AD 345-407 Chrysostom. Charismatic gifts Speaking in tongues associated with a gift of languages provided to missionaries like St. Francis Xavier and others, languages to be used in their missionary work among strange people. AD 5th century to Reformation. Manifestations and clergy who were themselves rather quick to respond to what they thought were the direct impulses of the Holy Spirit." 16th century Radical Anabaptists in Germany - speaking in tongues were reported. 17th century Camisards and Jansenists in France - speaking in tongues. 18th century Shakers in America, often found singing or praying in an unknown tongue." 1830 Irvington movement, Port Glasgow, Scotland. Tongues and healings. Edward Irving was like John the Baptist, preparing the way. Going against his "Kirk Session", he continued to allow speaking in tongues. The Regent Square church became closed to him and the other charismatics, so in 1832 he began services in the Exhibition Hall. Irvingites believed that their "speaking in tongues" was the same as reported at Pentecost, and evidence of Spirit baptism. Speaking in tongues was deemed to be a prerequisite for the operation of the nine gifts. For them, the "Charismata" are a permanent possession of the church, withheld at times due to unfaithfulness. They were forced to withdraw from the Presbyterian Church, and so established a new denomination called the "Catholic Apostolic Church." | ||
| ultimate1 Advanced Member Username: ultimate1 Post Number: 545 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.194.182.119 |
..............continued just some of the many historical accounts of manifestations of the Holy Spirits gifts including speaking in tongues. 1906 W. J. Seymour became convinced of the truth of the Pentecostal message while sitting under Parham's teaching in the training school in Houston. In LA the pastor of the First Baptist Church, Joseph Smale, after visiting the outstanding "Welsh Revival", began prayer meetings in 1905. These included spontaneous worship and many people were healed. His enthusiasm caused difficulty with his board, and Pastor Smale left the church to start "New Testament Assembly." There continued to be much prayer for revival in this church as well as in numerous "cottage prayer meetings." Neeley Terry was associated with a small Nazarene church in LA She visited Houston in 1905, and when she return she told about the "very godly man" she had met while in Houston, W. J. Seymour. This Nazarene church then invited him to preach in their church. His first sermon was on the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4), That same afternoon, when he returned to the small church, the door was locked, and he was told that the church believed that he was teaching false doctrine, and that he was no longer welcome. So he moved his meetings to a private home of some Baptists on Bonnie Brae St. On April 9, 1906, the Spirit fell upon this small group of African American believers. A former Methodist church building was arranged for at 312 Azusa Street. (The building had been converted into a tenement house.) A space on the first floor was cleared out to accommodate 30-40 people, planks set on nail kegs. The revival continued for three years. W. J. Seymour served as the leader. He was humble, simple, relatively uneducated, obscure, and had a notably defective eye. A news reporter was sent with the obvious intent of exposing this event as a ridiculous "circus". However, during the meeting a woman began speaking out in tongues, the very language of this foreign born reporter, confronting him with his sin. Afterward he found this woman, and verified that she had not know what she was saying, and the reporter declared that he would accept Jesus. He told his supervisor that he could not write the article as instructed, but would be willing to write an accurate account. The newspaper didn't want that, and terminated his services. Visitors came from many parts of the nation, as well as many Christian workers and missionaries. One such person was Elder Sturdevant, an African American preacher on his way to Africa, brought the Pentecostal message to New York City in December of 1906. Word spread throughout the states as well as Canada, and Norway. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3608 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** So people who worship false gods and never heard the gospel are saved? Perhaps you could provide scripture to back up your position. You are preaching a similar doctrine as the Catholic doctrine of Invincible Ignorance. It is a logical consequence of your theology but not a biblical one. ***** I suggest you study your Bible before you equate my theology with "Ignorance". As you should know by now, I back up everything in the Word of God. To answer your question, whom is or is not saved is God's decision. However, we can learn from the Bible that many of these groups will be saved. What did Christ do during the 3 days between his crucifixion and resurrection? He went and taught those that had not been saved and whom died before the time Christ walked in a flesh body. Many were saved. What is the millennium of the Lord's Day for? It is a time of teaching. All souls will know Christ at this time. Those that don't make the first resurrection may get their opportunity to overcome in the millennium. That is why it is wholly unbiblical to declare those in the non-christian religions 'unsaved'. ***** Those who are dead during the millenium have no chance to repent. The bible says that it is appointed to man once to die and then the judgement. There are no second chances. ***** I agree that there are no second chances. It is just your definition of 'chance' is debatable. Those in other religions really do not get a fair 'chance' to know Christ. They have been corrupted from birth in their respective religions. That is why the millennium is a time of teaching. Those that never received a 'chance' in the flesh will get their 'chance' in the millennium. ***** Why would this make God unfair? Does God not have the right to make one lump of clay, vessels of wrath fitted for destruction and from the same lump vessels of mercy? Who are you to demand that God extend His mercy to all of humanity? Have you not read Romans chapter 9? ***** Again, you show an inability to read. No where did I demand God do anything. In fact, His cup of wrath will be delivered. It is His purpose for this age to allow all souls to decide to follow Satan or love God. Those that follow Satan will be culled for the third age. BTW, I read Rom. 9. What is your point? ***** This is what I was talking about before. God does not owe humanity anything. The entire human race deserved His wrath, and God would not have been unfair for executing His wrath upon us all. ***** It is quite evident that you don't know what you are talking about. Even in John 17, Christ refers to the 'elect' and that they do not belong in this world age. See verse 14. See also Rev. 17:8. The 'elect' were chosen before this earth age and do not deserve God's wrath. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3609 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
termin8d, You wrote: ***** The gospel has nothing to do with man's actions. It has to do with the fact that man is born with a sinful nature due inherited through Adam. Whether man is saved or perishes hinges not upon the actions of man but upon God's wrath or mercy. ***** The souls that God placed in flesh man sinned long before Adam. There was Satan's rebellion which drew one-third of the souls away from God in the first earth age. The exact purpose for this second age is for those that were not justified in that first age to choose in this age. ***** This contradicts Romans 9 which specifically tells us that God prepared some unto destruction and others unto glory. ***** No -- there is nothing in my position that is contradictory to Romans 8. God is long suffering to shew his mercy. Only those that reject will be destroyed. ***** In any case, please do tell me what you believe is the reason that you are saved while another person might not ever be saved? ***** God judges salvation -- not you or I. See Mat. 7:1-2. God gives us a book of instruction -- it is called the Bible. I suggest you read it for edification. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 742 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Searchlight, I will attempt now to address your boatman analogy. Thank you for taking the time to interact with me on these issues as I believe they are important and impact on the way we live our lives as Christians and worship God.
I believe this does not present an accurate representation of what the bible teaches. Scenario: Boatmen are alive and are required to respond. Bible: Unsaved are spiritually dead. It is God Himself who makes us alive. Ephesians 2:1-5 1 And you, though dead in your offenses and sins, 2 In which you once walked according to the age of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, of the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience; 3 Among whom we also all conducted ourselves once in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the thoughts, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest; 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great blove with which He loved us, 5 Even when we were dead in offenses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved) Colossians 2:13 13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, Romans 8:10 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. To be true to what the bible teaches, you would have to have both men already being dead. Then the hero would perform CPR or something to revive them. Scenario: One boatman wanted to receive salvation, while the other boatman did not. Bible: Man is incurably sick, blind, and evil He does not seek God nor desire the things of God. Genesis 6:5 5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Jeremiah 17:9 9 The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it? 1 Corinthians 2:14 14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 743 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
It appears to me that this "Hero" was not powerful enough to save the lost boatman. Was the boatman drunk? Insane? Dead perhaps? Did the Hero intend to save that boatman or not?
I agree that the saved boatman deserves no recognition, but think about your assertion. Basically you're saying that he had to enable the Hero to save him. So by your definition, the Hero was not able in Himself to save Him or anybody.
This is where you are now putting the lost boatman on a lower level than the saved one. You're making the saved one more worthy of his salvation. Why? Because the saved one was not ungrateful, proud, or foolish. I actually happen to think we are all ungrateful, proud and foolish. This is sinful nature which applies to all of us.
Unlike the hero in this scenario, my God is not limited by man. My God actually saves all of those he intends to save. Although it is unintentional for you to place the two boatmen at odds with one another, you have done this, and it detracts from the sole praise due to the hero.
Ok so now apparently I am a blasphemer. Romans 9 disagrees with you. God prepared some vessels for destruction by His wrath and some vessels for glory by His mercy. It is not up to us to question Him for doing so but simply respond with amen because He is the potter and we have no right to answer back to Him. | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 744 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
I've run out of time again, I'll try to provide more follow-ups soon. Watchman_2, I want to respond to your posts as well. Thanks for your patience. Grace and peace.  | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 444 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
The illustration of the potter and the clay is often used to teach the sovereignty of God, and that man has no part in the process of salvation. Let's take a more thorough look at what the Holy Scriptures teach about God as the potter, and us as the clay ... Isa. 29:13-16, 45:9-12 - God compares these people's rebellion against Him and reversal of His ways to a potter's clay rebelling against the potter who made it. Isa. 41:24-25 - God says that One is coming who will come upon princes (in judgment) as the potter treads clay Isa. 64:5-8 - God had judged Israel severely, because they rebelled against Him and perverted His ways. Isaiah, as intercessor for Israel, now acknowledges God as the potter and people as the clay as an act of submission to Him. Jer. 18:1-19:15 - Although Israel trusted that God would never destroy them, God was ready to judge the house of Israel, and compares them to clay that was marred in the hand of the Potter. God lets them know that He can stop working on a marred vessel, and turn His attention to make another good one (v.4). Although He had chosen Israel, He likewise reserved the right to stop working on Israel who was rebelling against Him (v.6). To make things perfectly clear, God further emphasizes the same point by informing them that even though He pronounces judgment against a nation, that if that nation turns from their evil, God will repent of the judgment He was going to bring upon them (v.7-8). Conversely, even though God promises blessing to a nation, then if that nation turns against Him, God will likewise repent of the good He was going to bless them with (v.9-10). Verses 7-10 are probably the clearest statement in the Old Testament regarding the conditional nature of God's prophecy for judgment or for blessing, that He accounts for the will of man as an independent, free choice to be accounted for. Therefore, God tells them that he plans to do evil against them, and urges them to turn from their evil ways, and do good (v.11). However, they would not (v.12). Therefore, God would indeed destroy them (v.18:13-19:15), just as a potter would break a vessel that cannot be made whole again (v.19:1, 10-13). The clay has hardened itself and resisted the loving hand of the potter to form it into something beautiful, so the potter discards the useless vessel. Lam. 4:1-6 - After the destruction of Judah by Babylon, the sons of Zion, who were comparable to fine gold, are now regarded as clay pottery. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 445 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Rom. 9-11 - This is about Israel (v.9:1-5). After Paul is lifted to glorious heights when he reflects on the love and salvation of God (in Ch. 8), he remembers his countrymen/brethren of Israel, and is very grieved over their spiritual condition, in contrast (v.1-5). However, Paul shows how God's promises to Israel are still having some effect despite Israel's temporary rejection - the children of the blessed promise are counted as the seed of Israel, not necessarily the children of Israel after the flesh (v.6-8). Isaac was the chosen seed, not Ishmael, and likewise Jacob was the chosen seed, not Esau. Before her children were born, God told Rebecca that the elder (Esau) would serve the younger (Jacob), and makes it clear that this was God's choice according to election before the children had done any good or evil, based on God and not on works (v.9-12). Long after Jacob and Esau had lived and died, God declared that He loved Jacob, and hated Esau (v. 13, Mal. 1:1-3). The point here is that even though Ishmael and Esau were the chosen seed after the flesh (like the nation Israel), Isaac and Jacob were the ones chosen by God (the children of promise, after the Spirit). This might lead man to conclude that God is unrighteous in this choice, but Paul declares emphatically that this conclusion is completely wrong (v.14). In explanation, Paul tells how God says to Moses that He will have mercy on who He chooses (v.15), and therefore emphasizes again that this blessing is based on God's mercy, and not on man's will (v.16). Pharaoh is also used as an illustration of this, in that God raised him to power to show His own power and to proclaim His name throughout all the earth (v.17). All of these examples are about the nation Israel: Isaac vs. Ishmael, Jacob (Israel) vs. Esau, Moses (Ex. 33:17-23, 34:5-7, asking for the life of Israel), Pharaoh vs. Israel. Here is Paul's conclusion: God has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens (v.18). Man's response to this is to ask why God condemns nations/people for sin, since it looks like He was behind it all anyway (v.19). Paul's answer is that man does not have the right to accuse God of this, since God created us, as a potter created the clay, and as such, if He was willing to reveal His wrath and power through endurance and great long-suffering of the vessels of wrath appropriate (not "fitted" as in the KJV) for destruction, and conversely, that the riches of His glory may be revealed on the called from both Jews and Gentiles, the vessels of mercy (v. 20-24). Paul shows how the salvation of non-Jews (Gentiles) was prophesied in the Old Testament (v.24-26), but that a remnant would be saved of Israel also (v.27-29). Conclusion: faith is the true path to righteousness - the Gentiles did not seek it, but received it, but Israel did not find it because they sought it by the works of the law and not by faith. Paul continues on about Israel in Chapters 10 and 11, speaking of salvation by faith (not law), and the ultimate restoration of the nation. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 446 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Rom. 9-11 (continued) - In perspective, Paul is grieved over Israel's fallen condition, and man would question the righteousness of God in rejecting the people whom He had chosen. Paul answers that God is the Creator, and that He endured with great difficulty those who were evil, but revealed His grace on the saved, and used all of this to reveal Himself. God will not stand accountable, on trial before man. When man questions God's right to do something, God always answers that He has this right because He is our Creator (see also Job 38-40:2, where God never answers Job's questions as to why the events happened, but instead describes in majestic detail His role as Creator). God always answers the bigger problem of our disrespect of our relationship with Him in this case, rather than provide us a direct answer to our questions (the direct answers are given elsewhere in Scripture, such as other "potter and clay" verses, especially in Jeremiah). This is similar to a child impugning the character of their parent by asking them an accusatory question, and the parent responding only "because I'm your Father." In our case, we should consider ourselves when such a question is asked, as the impugning may be partially or wholly justified. In God's case, however, this indirect slandering of His character is never justified. Until and unless our heart attitude is right before God, He will not answer the deeper questions of His own heart, wisdom, and character as revealed in salvation and damnation. Therefore, these verses are grievously misunderstood when they are used to "prove" that man's will is not any part of the salvation process, as this is not even the topic at hand here at all. It is therefore understandable why the common interpretation of this passage is so contradictory to all the other "potter and clay" passages in Scripture - the common ‘limited atonement’ interpretation is false. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 447 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
God is reaching out to save the lost, not just at the times of election and the cross, and He implores us to pray for their salvation. It is blasphemous to think that God is merely an accomplished actor (hypocrite), apparently longing for the salvation of all mankind and teaching us to do the same, if in reality the outcome was completely predetermined by God in the past without consideration of man's will at all. Deut. 30:11-15, 19 - The Lord set life, good, and blessing vs. death, evil and cursing before His chosen people, Israel, and specifically declared that they were able to do what He was asking them. According to God, the choice was up to them, and their sole responsibility. God felt so strongly about this that He called heaven and earth to witness to their responsibility and accountability. Jer. 11:1-8, 13:11, 15-17 - The Lord had done His part, but the people of Israel would not do theirs, in that they would not hear (v.11). Even yet, the Lord warns them to give Him glory, before He brings darkness and destruction to overtake them (v. 16). However, if they would remain proud and still refuse to hear this last warning, the Lord's judgment would surely come (v.17). II Kings 17:7-23 - The Lord testified against Israel and Judah by all the prophets and seers, but they would not hear. They hardened their necks, rejected His statutes and covenant, and followed after vanity. Therefore the Lord was very angry with them, and removed them out of His sight. Isa. 1:1-20, 65:2 - Note carefully the Lord's heart of grief in the judgment of Judah and Jerusalem. Although the Lord had disciplined them to bring them to repentance, He mourns that more discipline will only cause more rebellion at this point (v.5). Yet the Lord tells them that even now, if they will repent, their sins will be forgiven (v.16-19). However, if they still refuse and rebel, the sword of judgment awaits them (v.20). Why would God grieve if the people involved had no choice in the matter? Would the Holy One, in whom there is no darkness at all, plead in sorrow for them to repent, if there were no chance for them to do so? | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 448 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Matt. 23:37- Similarly, many centuries later, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem, who has rejected God and His servants. However, our Lord's will so strongly and often would have been to gather them together under His wings as would a mother hen her chicks! But, despite the Lord's will for their good, who would not? The people decided to reject God even though His will was clearly to save them. Mark 12:1-6 - Note the Father's heartfelt intent in sending His prophets and finally Jesus to Israel: "they will reverence my Son." The Father was continually reaching out to Israel, although He knew that His Son would die for the sins of the world. Psa. 119:176, Matt. 10:5-6, 18:1-14, Luke 15:1-32, John 10:11-16 - Jesus Christ loves the sheep so much that He laid down His very life for the sheep. God, as a loving and devoted Shepherd, always seeks after the sheep when they stray, not desiring any to perish, and will do everything possible to lead them back to the path of fellowship and righteousness with Him. God is extremely patient with and faithful with us, and rejoices when we repent and return to Him. Although God will actively and repeatedly pursue after a lost sheep, He will not force it to return time after time, if the sheep willfully and persistently leaves the Shepherd as a manner of life. When this happens, it reveals that there is no Spiritual life present/remaining, by failure to respond to the Shepherd's voice. There is a limit to God's patience, although it is so very great as to be immeasurable. II Cor. 5:18-6:2 - Although the mercy and grace of God is manifest, God beseeches us not to receive it in vain. I Tim. 2:1-4 - God exhorts as a priority that prayers be made for all men (v.1-3). He makes it clear that these prayers are regarding their salvation in v.4, which states that God wills all men to be saved, and to come to a knowledge (lit. clear and exact knowledge, which always powerfully influences spiritual life) of the truth (as in II Pet. 3:9). Our willing response and obedience to God by our prayers and our will for other's salvation (or lack thereof) can play a powerful role in their eternal salvation or damnation. (Message edited by searchlight86 on December 03, 2007) | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 746 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Dear Searchlight. I would like to challenge you to a formal written debate on the doctrines of grace. I can see us posting past each other at the moment and I'd like us to deal with this in a more interactive way. Can we arrange a set format, number of words, and exact topic? If you're more comfortable continuing as we are, that's fine. I hope I can find the time to keep up with your posts | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3613 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Saul [Apostle Paul] was told to go to the Gentiles and turn them from darkness to light [Acts 26:15-18]. Act 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. Here we see that salvation was meant for the Genitles as well -- those that will receive the message. Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. There is no restriction to only the elect. Here we see how those non-elect can obtain salvation. Joh 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. Here we have the distinction for the elect. As one can see, for the elect, it is not a question of gaining salvation; but, it is one of losing that salvation. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 449 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
temin8d, either way is fine with me, formal debate or informal. By the way, regarding the boatmen, the important thing is that the Savior is reaching out to them, not the other way around. They are indeed spiritually dead before the Hero's call, but both are roused to hear His voice, to make a conscious choice. One effectually unto new life to the Hero's glory (not that the rescued boatman is better in any way than the other boatman, because faith is not a work according to the Bible!), and one continuing in his state of spiritual death to its natural conclusion, by his own choice. The story conveys what I intended it to, and just doesn't read as well with dead boatmen going down the river (accurate or not)  . (Message edited by searchlight86 on December 04, 2007) | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 747 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Searchlight, my email is oliver@futuremedia.co.nz I hope we can come to an agreeable arrangement. Grace and peace to you. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 450 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
t8d, I have much more I can say but will refrain for now. If you have ways you prefer to structure the conversation feel free, at your convenience, and as you feel the Lord leads you. God's richest blessings to you and yours also. My email is rory@miraclesormagic.com and website is www.miraclesormagic.com. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1663 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.100 |
Ultimate1, Typical bloviations by Intellectual/Dispensationalists that have rejected the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, as Scripturally explained by R.A. Torrey. They just talk, and talk way off track of the Tread. | ||
| mcmstaff78 Senior Member Username: mcmstaff78 Post Number: 2025 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 167.193.134.61 |
easeltine, you're watching to much O'Reilly!!  | ||
| mcmstaff78 Senior Member Username: mcmstaff78 Post Number: 2026 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 167.193.134.61 |
easeltine, you're watching to much O'Reilly!! BTW, disagreeing with Charismacostal theology is not synonymous with "rejecting" the Baptism with the Holy Spirit or anything in the scriptures. What is "rejected" is the Charismacostal interpretation of those terms and scriptures. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1679 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.177 |
Mcmstaff78, We don't get TV reception, we only watch movies at my house. Now, O'Reilly is my mom's favorite show, so maybe I am getting lessons from her?  Did I understand it correctly that you are going to the Eastern Orthodox Church Mcmstaff78? Several people I have known in my Home Church that were "Charismatic" left to go to Orthodox. If you are Orthodox your church does not "reject" the Charismatic interpretation that strongly. Now, if we wanted to talk about some doctrines that I have a problem with the Orthodox Church that would interesting...  | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 451 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
termin8d, I'm not quite sure but I think we've been insulted. Huh. I guess we've both been put in the same boat, so would you grab an oar? It must have been predestined. Row! Row! | ||
| mcmstaff78 Senior Member Username: mcmstaff78 Post Number: 2032 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.99.130.74 |
Ease, the Church doesn't reject the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, but it does reject the idea that what is going on in Charimacostal circles is the Holy Spirit. (Message edited by mcmstaff78 on December 09, 2007) | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 751 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
searchlight: Probably my fault because I posted off topic here. I'll keep matters pertaining to our written debate through email with you. This is going to be something which will take some time to put together but hopefully we should get some good dialogue out of it. Grace and peace. | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1684 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.93 |
That's right Terminex!  | ||
| termin8d Advanced Member Username: termin8d Post Number: 752 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 60.234.129.189 |
Blessings to you Easeltine. | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 452 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
(rowing) ... | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1694 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 72.164.43.195 |
Ok, I will join you both... | ||
| searchlight86 Intermediate Member Username: searchlight86 Post Number: 453 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 71.105.80.57 |
Welcome aboard. |
