Featured Free Grace Theology: Mocking God?

This thread is not intended to create discussion. It is simply to be inflammatory and defame those with whom the author disagrees with. When you disagree with him/her in any reasonable way then he/she acts as if you have attacked him. The title is simply false. No one listed is mocking God. When anyone disagrees with the author in the slightest way he/she wants to use the strongest rhetoric possible to attack them, and its inappropriate. His/her first response to me was nothing but personal attacks and false accusations that I had attacked him/her. The author is not capable of having a reasoned discussion with those who do not hold his/her views.

 

No need to question my intelligence. That only shows your lack of debate skills.
I not only read and understood the OP, but I took the time to read through the entire thread before I posted anything. Then I did what you didn't do--found out what FGT really is.

In this entire thread you haven't referred to FGT to anything remotely similar as to the definitions I have given you.

I am quite aware what you wrote. You gave your opinion unsubstantiated by any link as all were able to see.

You are wrong. According to those links those that believe in FGT do not believe in the LS camp, but simply believe in salvation by faith. Not so difficult is it?

Your ad hominems are a weakness of those unable to address a point in debate, or have nothing more intelligent to say.
Phil Johnson wrote in the 80's as you noted, about the same time that MacArthur popularized his view of LS. Coincidence? No.

 

Keep in mind, that by definition (that given by me on page four) the FGT does not mock God. Therefore this is an inflammatory OP right from the very beginning.

Who teaches that one can apostatize from the faith, and demonstrate how that falls in the boundaries of the FGT camp.
Who denies Christ, denies the gospel, and is still saved? Who believes that? Document your information.
--All you have so far is opinion and hearsay. Hearsay is one of those seven sins that God hates and is an abomination to him. He only calls it by a different word.

You have made many assumptions and accusations and all without any documentation.
BTW, even Jesus made a difference between a new believer and a disciple.
LS advocates don't get that and don't seem to understand what progressive sanctification is.

The above is not a description; the above is defamation.

That which is theological and biblical is what I quoted to you already. But you dismissed it.
Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

 

Observational questions:

Is there a post by the author of the OP that specifically points out the violated Scriptures that those in whom he quotes have trampled underfoot?

Is the author of the OP not basing his posts upon what various people have stated, and used terms that would lead the reader into considering the author of the thread is scorning those positions?

Where is the offering of Scripture alternatives or even support?

Is the author deceitful in the design and objective desired, or merely wants to see who would slip on the banana peal he left laying in the path?

Suggestion:
The author of the OP should progress to using Scriptures in which all may participate and come to agreement or disagreement.

Imo, the author of the OP should begin with:

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. (Hebrews 6)​

Show how these believers are not under the judgment of God who will require of them (most certainly) to answer, but are not indeed surely saved.

Demonstrate how (if the author considers them not believers) how such are made "partakers of the Holy Spirit?" Are not such partakers only those of the redeemed?

For (imo) in the analysis of this thread, it would seem to me that the author is questioning the validity of this passage.

Or, is the author suggesting that believers can ultimately be erased from the "book of life" based upon what they do and say?

Is the author suggesting that, when one is redeemed by the work of God, circumstances and oppression can convene together to construct such conveyance as to thwart or in some manner cancel the work of God?

 

Sorry. Typo on my part. I went back and fixed it.

 

FWIW I am not interested in the personal side show that has taken center stage in this thread. My responses are directed to the theological implications of FGT and LS.

 

honestly, the "implications" argument seems to be all there is:
discounts holiness
mocks God
teaches Antinomianism
yada
yada

everything that has come from this supposed "internet theologian" has been based on his perceived implications. Then the worst part is when he blatantly and dishonestly claims that these "implications" are being taught explicitly.

 

what you've posted in the quotes of Dillow and Hodges are their respective teachings. One of which is a bona fide Free Grace position (Dillow). The other was met with much criticism even from within the Free Grace camp. Did you know that?

you're whole argument is nothing but quote mining and Lordship talking points.

that's not debate, and that most certainly isn't theology.

 

Yep. I also find the charges of opponents erecting strawman and not understanding Free Grace to be ironic.

But I was told to stay out of this thread by IT, so I'll fade into the background.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

Ummm, wrong. You haven't "dealt" with anything. You have falsely accused me of teaching something I don't, and hurled anathema based on your perception of implications.

have you responded yet to my "dealing" with your false accusation that a heinous "sinner's prayer" is synonymous with Free Grace theology?

 

you have leveled a charge against "those" who espouse and teach Free Grace theology. That includes me.

 

Millennial Exclusionists of which those men listed in the op are part of.

 

As I posted above, imo, the Hebrews 6 passage is stating that very scenario. When a believer has so embraced apostate thinking and views and have "fallen away."

Their is no room to consider such a believer will be sent to some millennial exclusion / kingdom exclusion flames for punishment. Such thinking is out of energy when it comes to being found Scriptural.

So, what then awaits that believer? Not rejection, but shameful admission of unworthiness.

Because "shame" has become almost non-existent in this modern world system, few now comprehend the depth of shame Peter felt when the Lord Jesus Christ looked at him after the rooster crowed.

No matter of good works stands the flames found at the judgment of Christ, and the shame of the apostate causes the stink of burned work to cling to them (imo).

The question ultimately resolves to whether the apostate is a faker or believer.

God knows those who are His.

 

Seems many are sensing a familiar M.O. from the O.P.

My guess: 'preacher4truth'