Featured Spiritual Truth and Doctrine

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14

 

Yea, I know. You view yourself as having achieved a higher level of understanding, a secret knowledge, therefore not judging the servant of Another does not apply to you.

You walk a thin line between Calvinism and free-will theology. More liberal than a moderate Calvinist but more Calvinist than the majority of Christians.

You can claim all day long that our spiritual life depends on our understanding, but Scripture states otherwise.

What if you are wrong about your theology? Given your theory, if John Calvin made a mistake then you do not have spiritual truth.

 

I prefer Scripture.

Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

I think you are confusing terms in Scripture.

When the Bible speaks of natural man as having a spirit it means the spirit of a natural man.

When the Bible speaks of God Spirit in us this is not speaking of natural man's Spirit but of God's Spirit.

Scripture primarily uses the terms "flesh" as opposed to "Spirit". This does not mean one is either made of flesh or one has a spirit.

 

Thanks.

My point is I do not know of any Christian ,who believes that Adam was created without a spirit. Some believe Adam had a body, soul, and spirit (I lean in this direction) while others believe the Spirit and soul are the same (Adam was created with a body and soul/ spirit).

But I am unaware of anyone who believes Adam was just created with a body (no spirit). I am not exactly sure how this idea came about.

 

No, I have not redefined atonement. I just disagree with your view.

I believe that most of Christianity had a better grasp on the Atonement than the Reformers and the RCC.

So what? We disagree on atonement.

And yes, I do believe foundational doctrines (doctrines upon which we build, or which influence, other doctrines should be in the text of Scripture

I believe testing doctrine against the actual text of Scripture is the only objective text if our faith.

You disagree. So what?

There is no reason for you to act as you do over disagreements.

 

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

 

I understand. You don't know what I am saying.

I am simply saying the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

Some believe the fruit of the Spirit is merely accepting what is written in Scripture (which is important). But it is lived out in our lives.

A man can believe Scripture yet not have a "mind set on the Spirit".

Look around this board and you will see it. Men claiming to be Christian, affirming biblical doctrine, yet insulting and slandering the brethern (void of "spiritual fruit').

 

No. Scripture tells us it is spiritual words combined with spiritual thoughts (spiritual combined with spiritual).

A "nominal Christian" can memorize Scripture. They can understand doctrine. But not being saved they are unable to combine spiritual words with spiritual thoughts (resulting in spiritual deeds....I e., The "fruit of the Spirit").

 

I can agree with this.

I agree. We can see who evidenced bad fruit but we cannot know if the "good" fruit is legitimate. Tares grow among the wheat.

My belief regarding the Atonement does not amount to guilt. My view is traditional in terms of Christianity. It is the "classic view" of Atonement that has existed throughout Christian history (the "classic view" vs the "Latin view'). And it is held by Baptists.

It is just not a popular view among evangelical Baptists today.

But neither is Calvinism (your view).

Should you expect to be called out, insulted, slandered because you hold a minority view among Baptists?

No. It happens but it shouldn't.

What I expect (among the brethern) is a conversation and debate of views. I expect each to seek an understanding of the other. And I expect it to be done in a Christ-like manner.

What I expect (among the "goats") is backbiting, insults, and calling opposing positions foolish. That is the way of the world.

I agree that bickering is not good. But you have to understand that he has started threads telling people what I believe based on decontextualizing my posts and rejecting my explanations of what I believe. No member has that right. That said, I take quite time. I am not bickering with him. I'm done with him.