Enjoying your posts full of grace and truth...I notice not one of those who oppose themselves can stay on point, they drift off when you turn up the heat
:laugh::wavey::thumbsup:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A False Teaching on Christ’s Satisfaction Exposed
- Thread starter Protestant
- Start date
- Status
Enjoying your posts full of grace and truth...I notice not one of those who oppose themselves can stay on point, they drift off when you turn up the heat
:laugh::wavey::thumbsup:
Some of them are just doing nothing but spouting of Calvinism, and some of them do it in a very crass way. Sometimes you get excited at that, quote those comments and them give them applause. It is not edifying.
Quoting well thought out arguments would be a different situation.
I deleted what I just described--the repetition of a string of crass comments and personal attacks. There was nothing positive.
It is better to either quote a well thought out answer, or to give one yourself, not an emotional attack.
I still don't know where it is. We are on page 24. I just went back 10 pages to page 14. I didn't find it. Are you sure it is in a thread where I was actively posting?
You are smart enough to post your own arguments. The statement you just made is very lame. I don't refute links; I refute people which I debate.
I have given links on specific topics before. Instead of refuting them people just got indignant and upset. But the material was never refuted. (The topic was "neo-Calvinism," in which Albert Moehler is involved). That is just an example.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Heh Icon, well said.
I wanted to jump in about half way through but did not want to read all the posts and certainly did not want to be accused of jumping around like a dog. Of course correctly written DoG stands for Doctrines of Grace so don't take DHK seriously. He likely was paying you a compliment!
That being said the OP is excellent and Protestant presents some of the best arguments/rebuttals of anyone on this BB.
Ha Ha. LOL. I really am laughing out loud on those comments above. You are living in looney-land.
In a number of your ludicrous links they did not have even a single mention of your flaky charges.
It was especially evident in your crazy accusation that the majority of Presbyterians are swallowed up in hyper-Calvinism. That took the proverbial take.
I fully agree!
Like I said, "I have given "LINKS" on certain topics, and then gave an example of one. So what are you laughing about? It was a reply to Icon who often wants me to reply to his "links" which I normally do not do.
As I recall I believe you were one of the ones that got upset at the neoCalvinist link but could do nothing to disprove it. Your emotions don't really do you much good in a debate.
Your "link" about Al Moehler was shaky and looked like second hand speculation.
You have offered links of a premill nature that were orthodox.....
I believe when I post solid links you cannot answer them ,,,plain and simple.
You have never proven otherwise....if you could.....I would listen.
Most times you announce to the world that you are not going to look at the link, or listen to the sermon.....I look at your links so whats the problem?
DHK....do you want truth?.....or do you just want to be right?
I have not seen AL Moehler write or preach anything that was questionable.....I have learned from Him.
Yes....Protestant, Sovereign Grace, You, Reformed, AA. Martin M. Rippon, Con 1, Bosley, Aaron, and so many others offer good solid food...before the negative comments come in like a flood.
There is more than one link--many sources. In fact I have some of my own books on the subject.
I have complete theology books on the subject. Why would I need to go to a link? Like I said already, I don't normally go to the links you you offer.
Normally I provide a link to back up what I am saying; or to verify what I am saying. Normally, the link ought not to be the argument in and of itself.
If I want a discussion I will go to the Fellowship Forums.
This is a debate Forum. I have been in the ministry for 40+ years. I know the truth. If you differ with me then that is fine. What you say or read isn't going to change what I have been teaching for most of my life.
Never said one could not learn from. But the movement he is in, in order to attract young people to Christ is "of the world," and not of God. But until you are willing to look at the facts openly and objectively and see them for yourself, you will reject that information.
DHK
DHK.....I recently said the same thing to rmac......this is a statement of unbelief. How can you make this statement? What I say , or provide for you to read ......is not going to change what you believe????
You are saying you will not be open to learn truth if someone offers you anything different from what you have already been taught???? what if you are wrong???? The men I offer to you read from the greek text....they know more than both of us combined.....You need to humble yourself perhaps:wavey:
The article linked him to one example of some contempory junk.....it did not say he was promoting it...he probably just did not oppose it....it was very vague...do you have a full length sermon or a full article that he himself wrote that would demonstrate your claim....I have heard him about 20 times and he is an able minister of the new covenant. I would trust him way before 20 fundamentalist KJO types.
DHK.....I recently said the same thing to rmac......this is a statement of unbelief. How can you make this statement? What I say , or provide for you to read ......is not going to change what you believe????
You are saying you will not be open to learn truth if someone offers you anything different from what you have already been taught???? what if you are wrong???? The men I offer to you read from the greek text....they know more than both of us combined.....You need to humble yourself perhaps:wavey:
.[/QUOTE]
The article linked him to one example of some contempory junk.....it did not say he was promoting it...he probably just did not oppose it....it was very vague...do you have a full length sermon or a full article that he himself wrote that would demonstrate your claim....I have heard him about 20 times and he is an able minister of the new covenant. I would trust him way before 20 fundamentalist KJO types.
The NIV, ESV, KJV, NKJV, YLT, WYC, WEB, RSV, NLT, NET, NCV, NASB, MEV, LEB, ISV, HCSB all state the word 'faith' as being the word used. In fact, the Greek word used is 'pisitis' and that rendering you are stating it to be can not be further from being correct. The faith, that true belief in God, comes from Him, and is not 'pent up' inside of man.
See above quote.
Non, mon ami, non. That is not a play on words our blest Savior was saying. It was/is a biblical fact that Jesus replied, “This is the work of God—that you believe in the One He has sent.” [Jn 6:29] Faith is not a work of man, oui. If faith was a work, then salvation, which comes with faith being exercised, is not grace but merit. But it is a fruit of the Spirit.
You make a very compelling case here, mon ami. However, if you were to just use this one passage, you would have an 'ironclad' case. But let us also look into other passages, monsieur.
As I already showed you, in Heb. 12:2, it states that God is the Pioneer and Perfecter of our faith. The KJV states is as the Author and Finisher of our faith. That would 'Author'/'Pioneer' means the chief leader, prince, of Christ, one that takes the lead in any thing and thus affords an example, a predecessor in a matter, pioneer, the author. None of these renderings show it dwelling inside man mon ami. And 'finisher'/'Perfecter' means a perfector', one who has in his own person raised faith to its perfection and so set before us the highest example of faith. Again, this in no way shows faith residing within man, monsieur.
Reread Galatians 5, mon ami. You will see Paul warning them to not Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.[vs 2] Some of the Jews were telling men the necessity of being circumcised, and Paul was telling them not to. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.[vss 3,4] Those who would go ahead and be circumcised were going to do so against the clear biblical teachings of Paul. I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty. Then at the end of the chapter Paul states The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.[vss 19-21] Paul is telling them what the works of the flesh are. None of these characteristics are edifying to another Christian and also God. No one will exhibit all of these traits, but they do possess some of them monsieur. Not every sinner is sexually immoral, not every sinner is a liar, not every sinner is selfish, not every sinner is into drunkenness, not every sinner partakes in orgies, not every sinner has fits of rage, not every sinner is jealous, but sinners are those types of peoples, just not all of those characteristics rolled up into one. Then Paul finishes up this chapter(I know he never wrote in 'book, chapter, verse style') by writing 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. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.[vss 22-26] He is comparing the vileness of sinners, who live in the flesh, who live carnally,
D) with the walk of the Christian. Faith is a fruit of the Spirit, yes. Now, you say that faith is a fruit of the Spirit, that sinners must exercise faith. So, if faith is a fruit of the Spirit and sinners must exercise faith, then is there another faith that sinners have that God does not? Think about it. You say that sinners must exercise faith, of which I completely agree with. Now, if faith is a fruit of the Spirit, and God does not give faith to sinners, then what faith do they, being sinners, exercise?
Continued on another post. Afraid this will be too lengthy.
Last edited by a moderator:
Once He bestows them to the sinner, they are saved, monsieur. Once He regenerates them via the Spirit of God, they are given faith and repentance at the very same time. They are not given faith, and then God waits for them to exercise it. Once given to them, faith elicits a response that very moment.
People love their mom and dad differently than their spouse. They love their spouse differently than they do their children. They love their spouse, children, mom and dad, differently than they do their friends. Sinners DO NOT love God whatsoever. Sure, they may not 'hate' Him, but what does the bible say? Here is what it says about loving God “If you love me, keep my commands."[Jn 14:15] Then there is If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love.[Jn 15:10] The only way we love God is by obeying Him. The only way we can obey Him is via the Spirit. That is why we love Him We love because he first loved us.[1 Jn 4:19] We show Him that reciprocated love by keeping His commands.
I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh.[Ez 11:19] And then there is I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.[Ez 36:26] Why did Jesus repeatedly state Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”?[Mk 4:9] People can hear the gospel preached with the ears that hold their glasses from falling off their faces their whole life mon ami, and die eternally lost. Those are not the ears Jesus is talking about. Sinners have a 'tone deaf' ear to Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says. Their ears have to be unstopped, unplugged to truly hear what the Spirit says. And again, mon ami, God gave the Israelites the Law, knowing all the time they could not keep it, and He killed them when they broke one of those commands. We are even to for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.”[1 Pet. 1:16] Are we commanded to be holy even as Christ is holy? Yes. Can we be as holy as Christ? No. So there are two places I have showed you that God commands us to do that which we can not. It shows us our weaknesses and we turn to Christ to do for us that which we can not do. And yet you think it is vile for God to command us to do what we can not. Look at Israel.
Once given, it is our faith monsieur. I was reading in Romans this evening when I came across this Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past.[Rom. 16:25] Now, is that really Paul's gospel, meaning it came from him, or is it Paul's gospel, because God inspired him to write it? It is the latter and not the former. The same thing can be said of saving faith. It is OUR faith, yes, AFTER being bestowed to us by God. It is Paul's 'my gospel', but only because the Spirit moved Paul to write it. It is OUR faith only because God gave it to us to exercise. Paul also stated This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.[Rom. 2:16] Again, it is Paul's 'my gospel' only because Paul wrote through the inspiration of the Spirit.
See above comment.
Last edited by a moderator:
Look to your own self. We could say the same thing and perhaps often wonder about your beliefs. Perhaps you are the one that remains in a state of unbelief, blind to the truth, and we wonder if there is any possibility of God ever opening your eyes. You are unteachable, as I have mentioned to you many times. Not only will you listen to my explanation, you will not listen to another's explanation or two or three other's from which I will quote to you on almost any given subject. Then you often have the audacity to think that I stand alone in my beliefs even though I quote other authorities. Unbelief? Hardly. I am a non-Cal and you don't accept that. Consider that Calvinism may be a false system started by a man who was deceived by one of the fathers of Roman Catholicism.
You are certainly not in the position to lecture any one about humility. Please take a good hard look into the mirror before you speak on that subject.
What I have been taught?? What did I just tell you? I have been in the ministry for 40+ years. Do you think I am relying on what I "have been taught" or perhaps "what the Holy Spirit has taught me." I don't rely on what man (like Calvin) teaches. I am not wrong. I have studied Greek. I am not as proficient in it as some others, but I do have plenty of resources at my disposal. One thing I learned many years ago. A person is able to make the Greek say anything he wants to say. The Greek is not the guideline by which we test scripture. It only adds one small dimension to our interpretation of scripture. There are other factors to take into consideration. These other factors are often what Calvinists miss because of their own pre-disposed bias.
If we start another link on the subject, yes I have material. But this thread is not the time nor the place. It is already 26 pages and will soon be closed.
The verse I remember talking about was Jude 3:
Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
(This is what you referred back to in #214).
The KJV has the definite article in front of it as referring to a definite body of truth, as most commentaries I have read also refer to it.
For example, A.T. Robertson:
Jamieson, Faucett, Brown:
In fact I don't know of a commentary that says otherwise. As Robertson says, it is not the sense of "trust."
¶ αγαπητοι πασαν σπουδην ποιουμενος γραφειν υμιν περι της κοινης σωτηριας αναγκην εσχον γραψαι υμιν παρακαλων επαγωνιζεσθαι τη απαξ παραδοθειση τοις αγιοις πιστει
pistis
Thayer Definition:
1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it
1a) relating to God
1a1) the conviction that God exists and is the creator and ruler of all things, the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ
1b) relating to Christ
1b1) a strong and welcome conviction or belief that Jesus is the Messiah, through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God
1c) the religious beliefs of Christians
1d) belief with the predominate idea of trust (or confidence) whether in God or in Christ, springing from faith in the same
2) fidelity, faithfulness
2a) the character of one who can be relied on
Part of Speech: noun feminine
There are many definitions of pistis. The second definition fits quite well in this context.
The ESV which you quoted above says:
contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
--And so do most of the other translations.
I don't understand your objection here.
As mentioned, I fail to see your objection, and I don't know where you got your information from. It doesn't seem to be correct.
But it was a play on words. Jesus cast "works" deliberately as a work when we (as well as He) know that it is not as work. Thus the response, to "What must we "DO"? The can't DO anything. No one can merit anything to obtain eternal life. That is what Jesus was telling them. He deliberately uses "works" to teach them that faith is not a "work." If faith was a work, the salvation would by by merit, by works. It was a pun on words.
It is the one of the two ways God uses faith in the Bible--a spiritual gift or the fruit of the Spirit: neither of which He would give to the unregenerate. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.
There is a good answer to that also. It is in the context.
First, chapter 11: We are shown a great stadium of witness--heroes of "the faith."
Second, We are told: "Therefore, ...run this race that is set before us."
Third, "looking unto Jesus" (our example) who pioneered the way for us, and ran it for us and completed it for us. He is our Great Example. He sets before them an example to follow while running this race lest they be discouraged. It is the perfect example, the perfect One, who ran perfectly--from beginning to end. "Look to him." Run the race. Walk the walk (of faith). Don't give up.
The unsaved sinner exercises faith in himself, in his fleshly desires, in many things. Sometimes the object of his faith may be good--his wife, his family, his work.Think about it. You say that sinners must exercise faith, of which I completely agree with. Now, if faith is a fruit of the Spirit, and God does not give faith to sinners, then what faith do they, being sinners, exercise?
It is the object of one's faith that is important. The unsaved will put their faith in some thing or person other than Christ.
A saved person will put their faith in Christ, as Hebrews 12 teaches us.
"Looking unto Jesus."
"Consider Him, who endured such contradiction of sinners..."
The object of their faith was not to be their own discouragement, but rather Jesus. They were to focus on Christ.
The question is: Can an unsaved person put their faith in Christ?
The Calvinist says he must be "forced" to do so (i.e., Irresistible Grace).
The non-Cal says, no this doctrine is wrong. Jesus invites all to freely come to Him. He doesn't need to be forced by God. He is not reprobated to Hell. He is invited freely to come. "Whosoever will may come."
Protestant
Well-Known Member
Yes. Please note the subject referred to in verse 3 is salvation. Therefore the faith for which we contend references saving faith.
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jude 3-4)
The Online Etymology Dictionary discovers its origin from Middle French or Later Latin and is interpreted as “lewd, playful, frolicsome, wanton.”
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lascivious
The false prophets were perverting the Gospel of God’s grace by turning it into the heresy of carnal Christianity.
The heresy of carnal Christianity ultimately denies the very Savior they claim as Lord.
Carnal Christianity takes many forms including sensual lewdness.
It can also take form of carnal Entertainment posing as Christian worship.
And it can take the form of carnal decisional regeneration.
Jude recognizes the eternal reprobation of these carnal false prophets when he states they were of old ordained for condemnation.
Paul speaks of such as vessels of wrath fitted to destruction.
Such false prophets are at work today.
But we are not unaware of who they are and what they teach.
We have RIGHT NOW already passed over from death to eternal life, and the ONLY "judgement" left for the saved will be when God judges us as to if we will keep/lose etrnal rewards for our 'good works" done in nwme of Christ!
NEVER as to if we keep or l;ose our eternal life, so the "inverstigative judgement" of the SDA as to if we stay saved ot not is heresy!
And she did NOT get this from God!
Nothing you say denies what I have said.
Salvation is "the faith" which we believe.
The false teachers denied "the faith" which we believe.
Every commentator I have read agrees with me. I have already quoted A.T. Robertson, and his position using the Greek.
Here is Barnes:
Do you think John Gill would make it clear enough for you?
The full quote is to lengthy for me to quote, but I hope you get the idea. No one takes the position that you are advocating.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The Bible says God the Father was in Christ "reconciling the World to Himself" -- that is not something I made up.
I can freely admit that Christ did not "feel that" reality on the cross since the Father was veiled from Christ just then - but He was never-the-less suffering - never-the-less God, never-the-less omnipresent never-the-less in Christ,
That is how Calvinism would prefer to state it - but it not how the Bible states the facts.
God was in Christ reconciling "the WORLD" not "THE FEW of Matt 7" - according to the Bible.
Thus God "sent His Son to be the Savior of the WORLD"
We Arminians say this -
"14 We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world." -- yes "really".
"God so Loved the World" -- yes really
"He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -
Because in the free will system that God sovereignly chose we we have this
Rev 3
20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me. 21 He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
If I say yes then I place myself in the Bible camp where God does LOVE the World and Does say that He was in Christ reconciling the WORLD to Himself - and yet the WORLD has free will and so "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11
it all fits together.
It all works.
Rev 3 is not "an addition to scripture" it IS scripture.
Rev 3
20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me. 21 He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
Romans 10 is not an "addition to scripture" it IS scripture.
Rom 10
10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.”
John 1 is not an "addition to scripture" - it IS scripture.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
Is 5:4 is not an "addition to scripture" Is 5:4 IS scripture
Is 5
“What more was there to do for My vineyard that I have not done in it?
Why, when I expected it to produce good grapes did it produce worthless ones?
Where did John say that "His OWN always receive Him" -- other than Rippon saying it??
In 1 John 2:2 "He is the Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"
1 John 4:14 "The Savior of the World"
John 1 "The World was MADE by Him"
John 3:16 "God so loved the World".
John is pretty clear on this point - not so sure that is also true of Rippon.
Is that what Paul is doing in 2Cor 5??
"we BEG you on behalf of Christ - BE reconciled to God" --
"He came to HIS OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11
Correction - you side step the text quoted then go on to frame your argument so as to sail right back into the teeth of the text of scripture - a practice that literally begs for that scripture to be quoted - yet again.
I already gave it -- you made it up.
The Bible does not say "God did not suffer", labor, and even cry out in frustration as in
Is 5
“What more was there to do for My vineyard that I have not done in it?
Why, when I expected it to produce good grapes did it produce worthless ones?
The cross is not where God "gets paid" it is where "God is tortured" - it is God that provides the blood sacrifice for mankind's sin - not an underling - "God so Loved that HE GAVE"
Adding 'oh no He did not" is not a compelling answer to the problem this poses for that particular flavor of Calvinism.
I am not sure you appreciate just how much I am enjoying this discussion. I do not object to Calvinism promoting a different opinion - I just think the Bible gives a better one.
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited by a moderator:
Protestant
Well-Known Member
Hi Bob:
Until I receive substantive responses to my substantive questions, I must concentrate on other concerns which require my attention.
Have a great day!
- Status