1JN.2:2...A.W.Pink

[Zaatar71]

Yes, you have.

You offer passages and then your conclusion about what those passages really teach. That is by definition a theory.

To evaluate your theory you would have to explain how you get from God's words to your conclusions (something you have consistently proven unable to do). But even if you could evaluate it, it would still be a theory (it cannot be proven with the Bible as the standard).

So your theory could be right, or it could be wrong.

But since you are unable to even explain how one goes from the biblical text to your conclusions you simply claim it is not a theory at all.

But if it is not a theory then it is the biblical text.

You have already called the biblical text as a belief "foolishness".

No Johnc, once again...I like the biblical teexts, they are great. Your ideas I find to be foolishness. See the difference?

Now you are elevating your understanding to Scripture itself and yourself to the position of God.

No, Johnc Not doing that either.

You have not even done the very basic task in explaining your theory.

I do not have a theory, I have the faith once delivered to the saints as Jude spoke of. Jude said contend for the faith, not contend for the theory, maybe you missed when I offered that scripture.

You have not explained why legal justice is divine justice. You have not explained how punishing Jedus for our sins would allow us to escape punishment. You have not explained how forgiving our sins would somehow make us reconciled to God.

I just read and believe the scriptures on these matters. All the other men believe those scriptures also.

You can't because you merely believe the conclusions the men you worship gave you.


Penal Substitution Theory is far too superficial. It does nothing to reconcile God and man. It merely tries to address how God can not punish evil acts.


If you could take a step back and look, you would see the flaw. But you can't any more than a Mormon can step back and objectively look at the teachings they have been taught by their "God-given" teachers to believe.

 

[JonC]

No Johnc, once again...I like the biblical teexts, they are great. Your ideas I find to be foolishness. See the difference?


No, Johnc Not doing that either.

I do not have a theory, I have the faith once delivered to the saints as Jude spoke of. Jude said contend for the faith, not contend for the theory, maybe you missed when I offered that scripture.

I just read and believe the scriptures on these matters. All the other men believe those scriptures also.

The problem you have is your theory is not in the actual biblical text. No text states God cannot forgive sins upon repentance (several state He does), no test states Jesus experienced God's wrath (to the contrary, God glorified Him), no passage states Jesus bore our sins instead of us (again, to the contrary, the Bible says we die in our bodies because of sin).

Is there any part of your theory that is actually in the Biblical text, or is it all just man's understanding about what the Bible "really" teaches?

 

[Zaatar71]

The problem you have is your theory is not in the actual biblical text. No text states God cannot forgive sins upon repentance (several state He does), no test states Jesus experienced God's wrath (to the contrary, God glorified Him), no passage states Jesus bore our sins instead of us (again, to the contrary, the Bible says we die in our bodies because of sin).

Is there any part of your theory that is actually in the Biblical text, or is it all just man's understanding about what the Bible "really" teaches?

Millions of saints see what I see in scripture. Sorry you have not seen it yet. Who see's it your way? I have never seen any theologian see what you see. Maybe Van comes close sometime. Seriously, did anyone see what you claim?Did Charles Finney believe part of your idea? I do not remember. Who in the last 50 years has your stated beliefs?

 

[JonC]

Why are Christians even entertaining the idea that Christ's blood was shed to pay God the penalty for our sins?

Christians should be offended that Christ's blood is viewed so lightly. They should cry "heresy" and insist on Christ as actually accomplishing the reconciliation of God and man, something that goes far deeper than helping man to avoid the consequences of his behavior.

But to see they have to take a step back from theory, and they won't because their has become their tradition.

So, like @Zaatar71 , they will condemn those of us who do adhere to God's words and who believe the blood of Christ shed for us actually accomplished the reconciliation of man rather than merely making us unaccountable for our sins.

 

[JonC]

Millions of saints see what I see in scripture.

Oh...you misunderstand.

I know millions share your theory and millions are opposed to it. I do not care.

I have seen what you see, and it is not in Scripture. That is why you find it impossible to highlight it in your Bible.

You trample the blood of Christ by devaluing the cross. You teach Christ as dying do that men can escape accountability.

 

[Zaatar71]

Oh...you misunderstand.

I know millions share your theory and millions are opposed to it. I do not care.

I have seen what you see, and it is not in Scripture. That is why you find it impossible to highlight it in your Bible.

You trample the blood of Christ by devaluing the cross. You teach Christ as dying do that men can escape accountability.

Maybe you are too smart for me. I just see the scriptures and believe what I see. You with all your studying must have gone past me. I will just seek to learn me from the teachers at church.

 

[Zaatar71]

Why are Christians even entertaining the idea that Christ's blood was shed to pay God the penalty for our sins?

years ago I saw an older man on TV. He said the blood of Christ never saved anyone, then he repeated it. It was some large church, I think the man was Herbert Armstrong.Is that what you are saying??

Christians should be offended that Christ's blood is viewed so lightly. They should cry "heresy"

Why are Christians even entertaining the idea that Christ's blood was shed to pay God the penalty for our sins?
So this is a heresy???
I have only heard that other man Hebert Armstrong say this? Is that where you got this idea?

 

[JonC]

Maybe you are too smart for me. I just see the scriptures and believe what I see. You with all your studying must have gone past me. I will just seek to learn me from the teachers at church.

No, I don't not think myself smart at all.

That is where we differ. I read the Bible and believe God's words. I can take a highlighter and highlight what I believe in my Bible.

You were blessed with the intelligence to find a group of people who understood what the Bible really teaches.

If I relied on my understanding that much, given that there are all sorts of groups saying what God really teaches, who knows where I would have ended up.

God blessed you with a mind such as you do not need to lean on His words. Good for you.

But don't condemn those like me who are of lesser capabilities, who were given a lesser intellect so that we are limited to God's words.

You may pity us for our naivety, our lack of prowess when it comes to understanding what the Scriptures really teach.

You have the God-given mind to root out which teachers God has provided to tell you what the Bible really teaches. I am fully confident when you stand before God He will say "well done. You have used your intelligence and those men will make you to stand". All we have, in our mentally incapacitated stupor, to rely upon is God and His Word.

So pity us, but don't condemn us because by trusting in His Word rather than the understandings of the men you discern are the oracles of truth as He will make us to stand. He is simply enough for many of us, and His words have not yet failed so I have no reason to think they will at Judgment.

 

[JonC]

So this is a heresy???

Yes. And I don't not know Armstrong.

It is heresy because it diminishes the blood of Christ to making is not accountable for our sins. We are forgiven, but the cross is deeper than you are allowing.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I do agree that a condemnation will fall upon those who teach Calvinism (this was Paul's warning about people wanting to teach).

And yes, those who teach Calvinism should be removed from Christian congregations as they teach a faith other than "the faith once delivered".

But this applies to anybody who chooses to teach their own understanding rather than God's words. I would say the same if people chose to teach Luther's theory.


Think of the damage that has been done to Christian theology simply because this theory was allowed. At one time most Baptists rejected this theory. Now most accept it.

IMHO this failure to guard against this theory has contributed to a lot to our faith being downgraded in many congregations. It has led to easy-believism (as Calvinism is the ultimate form of easy-believism). It has led to a concentration on sins rather than a focus on Christ and sanctification.

Anytime we choose a superficial "gospel" we become a lukewarm church at best. Anytime we replace the gospel of Jesus Christ with this superficial substitute we cease being a church.

That is why I point out that a person can be a Christian and a Calvinist, but they can also just be a Calvinist.


Look at you. Do you really believe that if Jesus suffered the punishment for your actions God would be just to allow you to escape the wrath to come?

He wouldn't. If Jesus suffered your punishment for your sins this would not make a hill of beans difference when God separates the people as a shepheard separates goats from sheep. You would still fall short of God's glory. You would still face the second death.

Why? Because your faith was misplaced. You thought all you needed was somebody else to be accountable for your actions. But you ate not condemned for your actions. You are condemned because you fall short of God's glory. You sin because you fall short of God's glory.


What you need is a Savior who would reconcile man to God. This would by necessity mean forgiveness of sins. But it would be much deeper. You could have faith in this Savior, not because He was punished instead of you but because He is the reconciliation of God and man.

At Judgment you would then stand before God as a new creation in the very image of Christ. You would not be looking for somebody to give you their righteousness in order to cover your unrighteousness but you would actually be righteous.


But to answer your question, "yes". I agree with Scripture and those who teach Calvinism (as I once did) need to be cast out of the congregation. They need to repent. Teachers will be held to a higher standard. And if churches did thus centuries ago we would not have the issue today (although we may have other issues....men always have theories and men always want a type of easy believism).

JonC,
You really need to stop making a fool of yourself. You sound like some medieval pope passing ot anathemas on anyone who opposes his dictats.
What we all notice is that the more shrill and angry you get, the less your posts have anything to do with Scripture. We also notice that whenever someone points out your rater blatant errors, you completely ignore them and go off on another rant.
You are convincing no one. You have dug yourself a great big theological hole, and it's time for you to stop digging.
The biggest joke of all is this:

No, I don't not think myself smart at all.

This would be the wisest thing you ever wrote, if only it were true. But in fact you think yourself wiser than all the REformers and Puritans, and wiser than quite a few of the Church Fathers.

 

[JonC]

JonC,
You really need to stop making a fool of yourself. You sound like some medieval pope passing ot anathemas on anyone who opposes his dictats.
What we all notice is that the more shrill and angry you get, the less your posts have anything to do with Scripture. We also notice that whenever someone points out your rater blatant errors, you completely ignore them and go off on another rant.
You are convincing no one. You have dug yourself a great big theological hole, and it's time for you to stop digging.
The biggest joke of all is this:

This would be the wisest thing you ever wrote, if only it were true. But in fact you think yourself wiser than all the REformers and Puritans, and wiser than quite a few of the Church Fathers.

I do not mind being considered a fool for pointing to God's Word. The gospel is to many, actually to most, foolishness. But to us it is the power of God to salvation.


Do you remember what you said when I pointed out that Scripture, in speaking of justice, says both clearing the guilty and comvicting the innocent are abominations to God?

You said that only applies to man's justice.

I pointed out what God states (over 50 times) as His basis for forgiveness. You dismissed that for your theory.

I pointed out that God told Adam what happened due to his sin in Genesis 3:19, defining the consequences of Genesis 2:17. You decided the Catholic Church came to a better option.

I pointed out that in Psalm 22 God never abandoned the Servant and never turned His face from the Servant although He was forsaken to suffer.

You dismissed the Psalm by saying Jesus was not quoting it.

You have avoided Scripture at every turn. You quote passages but then deny those passages in your explanation. Even Satan knows the Scripture he twists. The difference is he also believes it.

Your quest for an "easy believism" faith has paid off. You found it in its ultimate form. The problem is it is not "the faith once delivered".


The ONLY thing you have criticized me for over the last decade and a half is for not accepting your understanding about what the Binle teaches. And that is a fair criticism because I absolutely do not accept your faith. BUT you have never been able to criticize me for not accepting God's words.

 

[JonC]

But in fact you think yourself wiser than all the REformers and Puritans, and wiser than quite a few of the Church Fathers.

No, not me. I think that God is wiser than the Reformers and the Purituans.

You are not scoring any points, BTW. I am not Reformed. I am not a Puritian. I am not a Mormon or a Jehovah Witness. I am not a Catholic.

I am a Christian. This means that I do not submit to the authority of the Reformers, the Puritians, Mormons, etc. I submit my understanding to God and to His Word.

I wish you were a disciple of God's Word rather than of the Reformers you agree with. Then we could have a decent conversation. But we have very different authorities for our faith.

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning This thread will be closed no sooner than 0430 GMT (Fri) - 1030 pm EST / 730 pm PST

 

[JonC]

The reason @Martin Marprelate rails against Scripture is all he wants is for Christ to have taken away his accountability for his actions.

The truth is we remain accountable. We bear our sins bodily and "die in the body because of sin". We must die to sin. We must "die to the flesh". We must "put away our old self".

And we must "live in the spirit because of righteousness", be "conformed into the image of Christ", be "made new creations in Christ", have "a new heart" and a "new spirit".

God has predestined us in Christ to be justified, to be glorified.


@Martin Marprelate prays with all of his heart that the cross was Jesus experiencing His punishment from God to remove his accountability because the biblical atonement requires something he is unwilling to surrender.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I do not mind being considered a fool for pointing to God's Word. The gospel is to many, actually to most, foolishness. But to us it is the power of God to salvation.


Do you remember what you said when I pointed out that Scripture, in speaking of justice, says both clearing the guilty and comvicting the innocent are abominations to God?

You said that only applies to man's justice.

We have covered this so many times. For God to convict the innocent would indeed be an abomination, but Christ was never convicted of anything. You are thinking of Steve Chalke's "Cosmic child abuse" line. The Lord Jesus, the righteous one (Isaiah 53:11; 1 Peter 1:18-19) willingly took our sins upon Himself and paid the penalty for them in full

I pointed out what God states (over 50 times) as His basis for forgiveness. You dismissed that for your theory.

I pointed out that God told Adam what happened due to his sin in Genesis 3:19, defining the consequences of Genesis 2:17. You decided the Catholic Church came to a better option.

I pointed out that in Psalm 22 God never abandoned the Servant and never turned His face from the Servant although He was forsaken to suffer.

You dismissed the Psalm by saying Jesus was not quoting it.

What! When have I ever said that the Lord Jesus was not quoting it??? Of course He was. It is you who has been saying that "My God, My God why have You forsaken Me" really means, "My God, My God, You haven't forsaken Me." Now however, you are trying to say that being 'abandoned' is somehow different from being 'forsaken.' They mean effectively the same thing. According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the word 'abandon' does not appear in the KJV. It does appear in some of the modern versions, presumably because 'forsake' is considered an archaic word. The word Azab is used in the huge majority of the words translated 'forsake(n)' or abandon(ed) in the O.T. The NIV translates the word sometimes as 'forsake' and sometimes as 'abandon.' Compare Deut. 31:6 in both translations.
But let's come to the English text.
Psalm 22:1-2. "My God, My God why have You forsaken Me? Why are You so far from helping Me, and from the words of My groaning?
O My God, I cry in the daytime, and You do not hear ; and in the night season, and am not silent.'
I don't think it is possible to say that God has not forsaken the One speaking these words.
If you follow the Psalm down to verse 18, they relate to the sufferings of the Lord Jesus. In verse 15, He attributes His sufferings directly to God. "You have brought Me to the dust of death."
In vs. 19-21, the Lord Jesus cries out for relief, and from v.22, we see that God has heard His prayers, and we know that this happened at the cross.At the ninth hour, as I have said several times, the darkness passed and the sun came out again. Full atonement had been made. 'All things were now accomplished' (John 19:28).

You have avoided Scripture at every turn. You quote passages but then deny those passages in your explanation. Even Satan knows the Scripture he twists. The difference is he also believes it.

On the contrary, I quote passages and give my understanding of them. You, on the other hand, never respond directly to my posts, and are hopeless at quoting Scripture. I don't know how many people are reading this, but if they are not blind they can see who quotes Scripture and comments on it and who doesn't.

Your quest for an "easy believism" faith has paid off. You found it in its ultimate form. The problem is it is not "the faith once delivered".

It is not 'easy believism,' and it is indeed the faith once delivered, and you have not proved otherwise - that is just another example of you getting desperate and threshing about trying to finsd a stone to throw at me and the others who are making a stand for Biblical truth on the board.

ONLY thing you have criticized me for over the last decade and a half is for not accepting your understanding about what the Binle teaches. And that is a fair criticism because I absolutely do not accept your faith. BUT you have never been able to criticize me for not accepting God's words.

Balderdash! You absolutely refuse to accept God's words, but instead you twist them to fit your own shonky theology.

 

[JonC]

We have covered this so many times. For God to convict the innocent would indeed be an abomination, but Christ was never convicted of anything. You are thinking of Steve Chalke's "Cosmic child abuse" line. The Lord Jesus, the righteous one (Isaiah 53:11; 1 Peter 1:18-19) willingly took our sins upon Himself and paid the penalty for them in full

What! When have I ever said that the Lord Jesus was not quoting it??? Of course He was. It is you who has been saying that "My God, My God why have You forsaken Me" really means, "My God, My God, You haven't forsaken Me." Now however, you are trying to say that being 'abandoned' is somehow different from being 'forsaken.' They mean effectively the same thing. According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the word 'abandon' does not appear in the KJV. It does appear in some of the modern versions, presumably because 'forsake' is considered an archaic word. The word Azab is used in the huge majority of the words translated 'forsake(n)' or abandon(ed) in the O.T. The NIV translates the word sometimes as 'forsake' and sometimes as 'abandon.' Compare Deut. 31:6 in both translations.
But let's come to the English text.
Psalm 22:1-2. "My God, My God why have You forsaken Me? Why are You so far from helping Me, and from the words of My groaning?
O My God, I cry in the daytime, and You do not hear ; and in the night season, and am not silent.'
I don't think it is possible to say that God has not forsaken the One speaking these words.
If you follow the Psalm down to verse 18, they relate to the sufferings of the Lord Jesus. In verse 15, He attributes His sufferings directly to God. "You have brought Me to the dust of death."
In vs. 19-21, the Lord Jesus cries out for relief, and from v.22, we see that God has heard His prayers, and we know that this happened at the cross.At the ninth hour, as I have said several times, the darkness passed and the sun came out again. Full atonement had been made. 'All things were now accomplished' (John 19:28).


On the contrary, I quote passages and give my understanding of them. You, on the other hand, never respond directly to my posts, and are hopeless at quoting Scripture. I don't know how many people are reading this, but if they are not blind they can see who quotes Scripture and comments on it and who doesn't.

It is not 'easy believism,' and it is indeed the faith once delivered, and you have not proved otherwise - that is just another example of you getting desperate and threshing about trying to finsd a stone to throw at me and the others who are making a stand for Biblical truth on the board.

Balderdash! You absolutely refuse to accept God's words, but instead you twist them to fit your own shonky theology

You are lying (yes, you are dishonest).

1. I never used the "cosmic child abuse" argument and have often said it was flawed.

2. I said that Jesus WAS forsaken to suffer and die exactly as foretold in Psalm 22.

3. "Forsaken" is not an archaic word. It is often used today (and yes, not to mean "separation").

4. You said, 2 years ago, when I brought up Psalm 22 that it was silly for me to suggest Jesus was hanging on the cross and decided to quote Scripture. Your point was because another said He quoted the Psalm to identify Himself as the Messiah. To be fair, I never said Jesus was quoting Scripture (I believe Psalm 22 was foretelling the cross).

5. I did not just start calling Calvinism "easy believism". I have been saying for a decade on this forum that it is the ultimate form of easy believism.


Five lies in one post. Is that a record for you?


The "faith once delivered" refers to God's Word, not the words of Reformers and Puritans.

You hold a very shallow faith, one that is the ultimate form of easy believism, one that you think removes accountability from you but makes no demand of you. You hold a form of godliness but deny the power of the blood of Christ shed for us.

Condemnation is (in Scripture) equated with punishment. Scripture dies not divorce the sinner from the sins.


Christ's death reconciled man and God. It actually accomplished this. God reconciled to man. It was not an accounting loophole to remove accountability from the wicked.

 

[JonC]

Deny what passages? As usual you don't quote any. You are denying 1 Corinthians 2:2, or at least you are trying to pretend it's not there.
But of course we will be conformed into the image of Christ. We will be made new creations in Christ. We will have died to sin. We really will be made righteous in Christ and glorified. God has predestined us to those things. They will be our reality. And of course we cannot carry the "old man" into glory. Don't be so silly - and so desperate!
As I have said many times, you have your very own theory of penal substitution which bears next to no resemblance to the actual Doctrine.

You denied that God forgives sins based on repentance. You denied that justice requires the innocent not being condemned and the wicked not being punished.

Often your denials are via replacement.

You replace Christ's blood shed for us being a reconciliation of man and God in favor of an accounting process by which man escapes accountability for sins (forgiveness does not equate to reconciliation).

You make the cross and Christ's death unnecessary insofar as the redemption of man (you view it as an accounting process where Christ suffers our punishment by God so that we are not accountable).

You deny Psalm 22 by exchanging the Subject of the psalm being forsaken to suffer yet God "never hiding His face from Him" to God separating from Him.


You hold a very superficial faith. It is a mile wide and an inch deep. It is the ultimate form of easy believism.

 

[JonC]

What do these things actually mean to you? Why did Christ have to suffer and die if God can just ignore His own law and make us new creations without an atonement? Exactly what healing do we have by His stripes?

1. It means that Christ bore our sins bodily as we bear our sins bodily (we die in the body because of sin).

Christ bore our sins.
We bear His righteousness.

God lay our iniquities on Him.
God lays His righteousness on us.

By your logic Christ is, at this moment, unrighteous because God moved it from Him to us.

2. God did not ignore His law. By reconciling God and man in the person of Christ and conforming us to His image (at Judgment we will be justified in Him, we will be glorified) we fulfill the law.

The law dies not make anybody anything. It does not make one righteous or unrighteous. It SHOWS us who we are.

Sins are the fruits of the mind set on the flesh (Gal 5).

3. We are healed by Christ's suffering and death. Man is reconciled to God in the person of Christ.

God predestined us in Christ to be conformed to His image, to righteousness, to glorification.



There is more power in the blood shed for us than you are allowing.

 

[JonC]

Hello @Ascetic X
The text in question is Psalm 7:11. 'God is a just Judge; and God is angry with the wicked every day.'

THIS IS MY POINT!!!!!

Read the verse.

Does it say God is angry at the actions of the wicked and must punish those actions even if that person dies to wickedness?

NO. God id a just Judge. He is angry with the wicked.

The wicked store up wrath for themselves for the day of wrath.

IF you stand before God at judgment as a wicked man then you will perish.


You say Christ died to suffer the punishment of God against the actions of the wicked so the wicked will not be punished.

I say Christ died to reconcile man to God, to make the wicked new creations, not guilty.

We die in the body because of sin, we live in the spirit because of righteousness.


Your faith is too shallow. If Christ suffered God's punishment for the sins of the wicked then those wicked people would still perish because they still fall short of God's glory.

 

[JonC]

Or point out your error.

At this point we have seen your ideas, and we will not follow them at all,Thanks for offering your thoughts however.

We only offer scripture, rightly understood.

So, I am an Arminian who identified as a Calvinist???interesting!

If you know the conclusions it would seem like you know how you got there???

no, I held what I do, before I knew what these other ideas were.

I never have or ever will call God's word foolishness. Why do you insist on making this accusation??? This is dishonest on your part. Can someone else who reads JohnC's posts explain to JohnC that I have never posted this as he claims??/ I have tried to post it for him but he lisses it each time

You are wrong.

You think that Christ being punished by God instead of you allows you to enter the Kingdom. But it does not.

God's wrath is against the wicked.

Even if Jesus was punished instead of you for your sins you would still perish for being wicked.

Wickedness, not the things wicked people do, is the problem.


You bought out an easy believism faith and found one. Congratulations. See how far it gets you.