#2 Two Salvations? #3 Kingdom Exclusion

[Lacy Evans]

Peter did mess up, and yes, He did deny Christ. but we must remember that he repented.

And Repentence is not works.

He repented out of righteous sorrow and the Godly fear. He chose to repent. It is the same choice we face when we deny Christ by not obeying him as Lord. Peter's sin was not a sign of anything except that he sinned. Likewise, his willful repentance was not a sign of anything either, except that he repented.

This "All Christians automatically repent" thing is starting to sound a little mystical, Diggin.

Lacy

 

[Diggin in da Word]

This 'some saved people are going to be cast into outer darkness and miss out on the Millenial Kingdom' sounds mystical.

 

[Hope of Glory]

I have seen several posts showing the ME or KE doctrine to be false by scripture, yet every time scripture is brought up, those giving them are accused of 'cherry picking', or 'pulling verses out of context' just to fit their doctrine. I cannot see where they did either.

In every single case, we have shown why we thing they're taking their verses incorrectly. Not one single time have we resorted to the tactics that Diggin and SFiC use of shouting them down, telling them they're going to hell for being cultish heretics, and it's all because we said so. (OK, I did it once toungue-in-cheek because of the asininity of Diggin and SFiC, but even Jesus was sarcastic on occasion.)

Why will they not answer direct questions about verses if they are so holy and correct?

For example, the questions that I have posted repeatedly about John 3:16 have been answered by exactly one person: Tiny Tim.

An example: Linda claims that all Christians are saints. I gave massive amounts of Scripture to show that there is nothing in the Bible that agrees with her. Then, she gets a verse from an epistle that is written to "saints" that callse them "saints" and says, "There! That proves it!"

That's cherry picking if I've ever seen it! All it does is support the preconceived man-made traditions.

Another example that is often repeated is the "works aren't really works" argument. We post a passage that has works in view that states explicitly that it's concerning the Kingdom, and the response is, "Well, a true Christian [a phrase that exists nowhere but in men's imaginations] will perform good works." [A concept that I agree with technically, but many people use the word "Christian" for everyone who is saved, so I disagree with the sentiment behind the statement.]

They will claim that the Kingdom and salvation are the same thing, state that they believe that salvation is apart from any works, then espouse a works-based salvation to make it fit the Kingdom passages.

Then, instead of confronting the Scriptures that they are shown, they try to shout people down with the "You're going to hell because you're not truly saved!" argument.

 

[Hope of Glory]

This 'some saved people are going to be cast into outer darkness and miss out on the Millenial Kingdom' sounds mystical.

Apparently, it's one of the mysteries of the Kingdom...

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

What is "his" gospel? Is spiritual salvation a mystery?

 

[J. Jump]

yet the KE or ME proponents change that to the Lord may send some to outer darkness.

We don't make this stuff up. It's right there in Scripture. The only way one can get around the Scripture is to claim that someone called a servent, his "own" servant and the like are lost people, which makes no sense.

There is nothing that is made up.

Again you have two posts and yet there is no OT Scriptural proof that what you believe is correct. Where is the OT pictures, types, illustrations, whatever you want to call them that every NT saved person is going to make up the bride.

There aren't any. And that's why it is said that your group cherry picks verses, because you only use the NT and you only use one or two verses. The kingdom doctrine is seen throughout Scripture both in the OT and NT and it is not just a verse here and there.

We cannot stand in our own righteousness and please God. We must be clothed in Christ's Righteousness and His alone.

Then how do you explain Revelation 19:8 which says the wedding garment is not Christ's righteousness, but the righteous acts of the saints?

See at every turn the Bible speaks against what you all are proposing. There's not twisting Scripture to get there, it's just let Scripture speak the way Scripture is laid out.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Seems to me when reading God's Word, the faithful mentioned separate from the saints, although saints certainly can be faithful.

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Paul did not say to the faithful saints. NO, he said to the saints... and the faithful.

Colossians 1:2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Why did not Paul just state 'To the faithful saints'?

It is clear there are two groups of people here. Saints are not always considered to be faithful.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Not all who are disobedient are going to be chastized; some are just going to fall short. Many are called; only a saved person can be called; but few are called out or elect.

I think that Scripture also only points to a select few who are going to be actively chastized.

Houston, we have a problem.

Not all dosobedient are going to be chastised? Only a select few will be actively chastised? That makes God a respector of persons.

Heretical doctrine alert!!

 

[J. Jump]

You say you are not worried about being excluded from the Millennial Kingdom. But the way I am reading your statements, your confidence does not lie in the fact that Jesus Christ made a full and sufficient sacrifice once and for all for your sins. That gets you into Heaven, you say.

You are counting on being in the "Millennial Kingdom" because you are good enough. Especially compared to some other "Christians" who are in unrepentant sin. What that sin is or how frequently it occurs you do not wish to define, yet I suspect you are not claiming sinless perfection. So you are sinning, yet you don't think you are sinning enough to be excluded.

So ultimately you seem to be basing your confidence on a subjective view of how well you are living the Christian life.

Karen thanks for your post. With all due respect you do not have a clear understanding of what we have been saying or you haven't followed any of the other threads dealing with this subject.

So with that in mind let me address some areas where you have mis-spoke albeit unintentionally I believe.

your confidence does not lie in the fact that Jesus Christ made a full and sufficient sacrifice once and for all for your sins.

That's the ONLY confidence I have. If Christ's blood does not cover my sins there is NO hope for me or anyone else for that matter. Christ's blood is the ONLY thing that can take care of sin.

What I don't believe is that ALL sin was taken care of when I was saved. If that is the case there would no reason for me to continue to confess my sins as per I John 1:9, becuase if my sins were already forgiven then I would just be recalling to God's memory sins which He said He was going to remember no more and remove as far as the east is from the west.

Christ told us that we have to be washed from time to time because we get dirty. We don't need a full cleansing, but a periodic washing of the dirty parts. There is TONS more detail in that, but we'll just leave it at that.

So if I am told to confess my sin and to be washed from time to time as needed because I am dirty there is no way that ALL my sins were forgiven at the the moment of salvation.

But the ONLY way that my sins can be dealt with is by Christ's blood and that comes through confession and repentance.

That gets you into Heaven, you say.

I think we have to stop thinking and teaching eternal salvation as "getting into heaven." That is not exactly what the Bible teaches, but that's probably for another thread.

You are counting on being in the "Millennial Kingdom" because you are good enough.

Only if and because God considers me good enough, not because I consider myself good enough. What I think of me has NO bearing on the coming kingdom.

Obviously there were some that thought pretty highly of themselves as Christ told them He never knew them. So as long as God thinks I'm okay then I'm okay.

What that sin is or how frequently it occurs you do not wish to define, yet I suspect you are not claiming sinless perfection.

Of course I'm not sinless. John tells us you are lying and the Truth is not in you if you say you do not sin. I think the Bible does define the sin...murder, envy, strife, drunkenness, etc. And no it is not based on a number of times, but a lifestyle. If you are one of those things because that is your lifestyle then you will not inherit the kingdom.

But if you mess up in one of those areas and are repentant then you are not one of those things, but you just made a mistake. We can see many examples of that in Scripture.

It's not based on quantity, but quality and endurance. This has been said many many times, but people are still wanting to know how many times can I do something before I'm toast.

And I'm saying you shouldn't be worried about that. The Bible tells us not to focus on what will put us in outer darkness, but rather shows us how to keep from getting kicked out. And if we focus on what the Bible tells us we should be doing then the "number" of offenses doesn't matter.

It's a matter of being obedient, faithful and overcoming until Christ comes to get us or God takes us out. That doesn't mean perfection, that means dealing with sin as it comes up the way the Bible says to do so.

If one does that they will be blameless as they stand before the Judge. If they don't do that then there will be blame to be held to their account.

So you are sinning, yet you don't think you are sinning enough to be excluded.

Again the amount is meaningless. The issue is am I confessing my sin and allowing Christ to cleanse me of that sin. If I am doing the same sin over and over and over and over again then I think it's safe to say that I'm not repenting and confessing and I'm actually living a life of rebellion.

So ultimately you seem to be basing your confidence on a subjective view of how well you are living the Christian life

Couldn't be further from the truth. What I believe about how I am living my life makes NO difference at all. It's only what God thinks of my life that counts for ANYTHING. But God has given me enough instructions to know whether or not I'm okay.

John writes in his gospel and in his first epistle that we can know that we have life for the coming age, and he wants us to know that and believe that.

Hope that helps clarify.

 

[J. Jump]

Paul did not say to the faithful saints. NO, he said to the saints... and the faithful.

Actually if you will go back to the original text the "and to the" is not there. The CLV has the best rendering of that verse as it is a further explanation of who the people in Ephesus are not two separate groups.

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God, to all the saints *who |are also believers in Christ Jesus:

These were holy ones that were believing in the Messiah. This were kingdom believers, who were called out of the called.

Same thing for Colossians. It's not two groups of people, but added information about this group. They were holy ones that had been separated and they were believers in the Messiah.

 

[Hope of Glory]

See at every turn the Bible speaks against what you all are proposing. There's not twisting Scripture to get there, it's just let Scripture speak the way Scripture is laid out.

That's one way that I test any belief that I have. If I can disprove it with Scripture, then it's wrong.

So, when I first realized that nowhere does the Bible call all saved people "saints", I searched the Scriptures trying to find one place. If one single verse contradicts something, then it's not true.

The same with goats. I grew up believing that goats were unsaved people. Then, one day, I saw that goats are called "holy". "Now why would God call a person headed for the lake of fire 'holy'?" I asked myself. There's not one single place in Scripture that he does.

I also do this for any long-held beliefs that I have. I spend a lot of time trying to prove they're wrong, because if I can, then I'm holding to a man-made tradition.

And this belief that every saved person is part of the bride or is going to rule and reign is exactly that: A man-made tradition.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Of course I'm not sinless. John tells us you are lying and the Truth is not in you if you say you do not sin. I think the Bible does define the sin...murder, envy, strife, drunkenness, etc. And no it is not based on a number of times, but a lifestyle. If you are one of those things because that is your lifestyle then you will not inherit the kingdom.

Hate to break the news to you, but if one lives a lifestyle of sins mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6 and Galatians 5, that one is not saved. That is why that one will be denied entrance into the kingdom, not because that one was saved and lived in sin.

A saved person will not live the lifestyle of the old sin nature. If any man be in Christ...

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Original text? From my understanding no one has the original text.

Funny, you saythe CLV has the best rendering of that verse, yet I do not see it saying the saints were 'faithful,' only that they were 'believers.'

 

[Hope of Glory]

Seems to me when reading God's Word, the faithful mentioned separate from the saints, although saints certainly can be faithful.

Paul did not say to the faithful saints. NO, he said to the saints... and the faithful.

You might want to re-read Ephesians 1:1. Here, I'll post if for you:

Παῦλος ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ καὶ πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ·

It's to all the ones who are saints and faithful. It's two adjectives describing one participle. (Remember, a participle can be used as a noun.)

It is clear there are two groups of people here. Saints are not always considered to be faithful.

Even the KJV doesn't seem to make that distinction. Here's the pertinent part: ἁγίοις καὶ πιστοῖς ἀδελφοῖς

You have two adjectives describing one noun, not two separate nouns. "Saint" and "faithful" both describe the brethren. Don't forget that the Bible also defines "brethren" for us as those who do the will of the Father; it's repetitive, but it emphasizes the importance of obedience, and unless you believe in a works-based salvation, obedience is not necessary for spiritual salvation.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Hate to break the news to you, but if one lives a lifestyle of sins mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6 and Galatians 5, that one is not saved. That is why that one will be denied entrance into the kingdom, not because that one was saved and lived in sin.

A saved person will not live the lifestyle of the old sin nature. If any man be in Christ...

So, you preach a works-based salvation. I think you're wrong. We're saved by grace through faith, not by our works.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Show me NT scripture that says the goats that are cast into outer darkness represent saved people.

I cannot find it.

Or are you mistakenly naming these goats as the same that are mentioned as being holy in the OT book of Numbers? If so, you are dead wrong. Those goats in the OT were sacrifices, their blood was what was needed to atone for sin. Once Christ died on Mount Calvary and shed His blood, those goats were no longer needed to pay for sin.

No, the goats in the NT are not saved.

 

[J. Jump]

Hate to break the news to you, but if one lives a lifestyle of sins mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6 and Galatians 5, that one is not saved. That is why that one will be denied entrance into the kingdom, not because that one was saved and lived in sin.

A saved person will not live the lifestyle of the old sin nature.

Hate to tell you this, but that's not what the Bible says. Every time you all post something like this it is noticeable that you never post Scripture to go along with these statements. Wonder why that is?

Please show me Scripture where it says that a Christian will not do those things. Or even a Scripture that says ALL Christians are repentant when they mess up.

It just doesn't exist. Those are nice sayings, and everyone likes to believe everyone is going to be okay in the end, but that just pie in the sky thinking that is not backed with Scripture.

 

[J. Jump]

Original text? From my understanding no one has the original text.

Funny, you saythe CLV has the best rendering of that verse, yet I do not see it saying the saints were 'faithful,' only that they were 'believers.'

We have an alert of the strawman emerengcy debate system. This is not a test this is a real emergency. This is a strawman alert.

 

[J. Jump]

Show me NT scripture that says the goats that are cast into outer darkness represent saved people.

I cannot find it.

Show me NT Scripture that says the goats that are cast into outer darkness represent unsaved people.

I can't find it.

Boy I like this game. Let's play some more. That doesn't prove your point any more than my post did.

There is not a verse of Scripture that says the goats are saved or unsaved. You have to compare Scripture with Scripture and when one does that the Bible clearly shows us that the goats are saved individuals.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Original text? From my understanding no one has the original text.

Funny, you saythe CLV has the best rendering of that verse, yet I do not see it saying the saints were 'faithful,' only that they were 'believers.'

That's one of the shortcomings of English. It's an adjective in both cases. If you read the sublinear to the CLV, you will see "faithful" as a note. As I've written elsewhere on the board, "believe" as a present, active, participle can be used as a noun or an adjective, and when used as such, it is synonymous with the noun "faith". After a fashion, you can look at "believe" as the verb form of the noun "faith". We're saved by "believe" in the aorist; we're to live by "faith" or continuing to believe.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

So, you preach a works-based salvation. I think you're wrong. We're saved by grace through faith, not by our works.

Where did I say I believe in a works based salvation? I cannot find it anywhere. I do believe I was saved by grace through faith. And it is that faith that keeps me.

The Word of God tells me that if I sin, I have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous.

Jesus is my lawyer. If I sin, I have retained the best defense ever. He has never lost a case. He will remind His Father that His blood was shed and sprinkled on the mercy seat on my behalf. God will not hold me accountable for those sins.

And because I have put on the Lord Jesus, I am clothed in His Righteousness. I am guaranteed entrance into the kingdom because of only one thing that I have done, nothing more. That one thing is trustig Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior.