Andy Stanley

[Don]

So Evangelist - are you a calvinist?

 

[evangelist6589]

So Evangelist - are you a calvinist?

Moderate yes..

 

[Don]

Moderate yes..

5 point? Or does moderate mean 4 point, or less?

 

[evangelist6589]

5 point? Or does moderate mean 4 point, or less?

I do not believe in Limited Atonement.

 

[webdog]

Webdog, do you think that many people "turn from sin" without turning to Christ? Guess I have never thought of that or framed it that way. BTW, I know nothing about Comfort.

I do. Catholicism teaches that, as well as Judaism.

 

[Winman]

To stop sinning is to keep the law. The law says, "thou shalt not bear false witness". So if you believe you have to stop lying to be saved, you believe you have to keep the law to be saved.

The same with stealing, the law says, "thou shalt not steal", so if you believe you must stop stealing to go to heaven, then you are teaching that a person must keep the law to be saved.

The error arises from the word "repent". People believe the word repent means to stop sinning. This is not what repent means, as the scriptures say God repented many times.

Psa 106:45 And he remembered for them his covenant, and repented according to the multitude of his mercies.

Repent cannot mean to stop sinning, because God often repented in scriptures. No, it means to change your mind, or to change your attitude or belief.

Repent most often means to change one's attitude about one's self and realize we are sinners in need of salvation. This is what John the Baptist taught the Pharisees and Sadducees that came to be baptized.

Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Here John the Baptist tells the Pharisees and Sadducees to repent, but then he explains exactly what they must turn from, the false belief that they are saved simply because they are the physical descendants of Abraham. He is not telling them they must stop sinning and keep the law to be saved.

You cannot be saved unless you first acknowledge you are lost, and this is what biblical repentance means. We see this again in Luke 13;

Luk 13:1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?
5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

These persons mistakenly believed because misfortune had happened to certain persons was proof that they were terrible sinners being punished by God.

Jesus corrects them and asks them if they believe these persons were worse sinners than others, and tells them they must turn or repent of this false belief. Unless they realize they too are lost sinners they will perish.

So, to repent means to turn from an attitude of self-righteousness and acknowledge you are lost. A person must realize they are lost before they will come to Jesus for salvation.

But to teach that you must quit sinning to be saved is nothing different than teaching a person must keep the law to be saved.

 

[SaggyWoman]

Andy Stanley: As I understand things he is bad news. He is much different than his father and seems to associate with the Willow Creeks, the Rob Bells, and so forth. Charles is a good Bible teacher and has written some good books. I do not know why his son has turned out so different, but what do you say? Is there any good in Andy Stanley?

Maybe before you get all the hear say, you should go and meet him and spend time with him. Ask him questions. Then make a decision for yourself.

 

[Revmitchell]

Maybe before you get all the hear say, you should go and meet him and spend time with him. Ask him questions. Then make a decision for yourself.

Oh no, he couldn't do that. Then he might discover that there is nothing to gossip about. What would ha have to post about then?

 

[Yeshua1]

To stop sinning is to keep the law. The law says, "thou shalt not bear false witness". So if you believe you have to stop lying to be saved, you believe you have to keep the law to be saved.

The same with stealing, the law says, "thou shalt not steal", so if you believe you must stop stealing to go to heaven, then you are teaching that a person must keep the law to be saved.

The error arises from the word "repent". People believe the word repent means to stop sinning. This is not what repent means, as the scriptures say God repented many times.

Psa 106:45 And he remembered for them his covenant, and repented according to the multitude of his mercies.

Repent cannot mean to stop sinning, because God often repented in scriptures. No, it means to change your mind, or to change your attitude or belief.

Repent most often means to change one's attitude about one's self and realize we are sinners in need of salvation. This is what John the Baptist taught the Pharisees and Sadducees that came to be baptized.

Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Here John the Baptist tells the Pharisees and Sadducees to repent, but then he explains exactly what they must turn from, the false belief that they are saved simply because they are the physical descendants of Abraham. He is not telling them they must stop sinning and keep the law to be saved.

You cannot be saved unless you first acknowledge you are lost, and this is what biblical repentance means. We see this again in Luke 13;

Luk 13:1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?
5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

These persons mistakenly believed because misfortune had happened to certain persons was proof that they were terrible sinners being punished by God.

Jesus corrects them and asks them if they believe these persons were worse sinners than others, and tells them they must turn or repent of this false belief. Unless they realize they too are lost sinners they will perish.

So, to repent means to turn from an attitude of self-righteousness and acknowledge you are lost. A person must realize they are lost before they will come to Jesus for salvation.

But to teach that you must quit sinning to be saved is nothing different than teaching a person must keep the law to be saved.

realiise that ALL of us are in a worse shape than that, as we ar all guilty by associated with Adam before Holy God before we even willfully commit acts of sin!

That is why NONE can be saved by keeping the law, for even if one could, and no one can other than jesus, still ahve sin guilt before God from being found in adam!

 

[Winman]

realiise that ALL of us are in a worse shape than that, as we ar all guilty by associated with Adam before Holy God before we even willfully commit acts of sin!

That is why NONE can be saved by keeping the law, for even if one could, and no one can other than jesus, still ahve sin guilt before God from being found in adam!

Baloney, Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Jesus took on himself the same NATURE as the seed of Abraham, NOT ADAM.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Do I need to tell you that Abraham was a sinner born after the so-called fall?

The scriptures teach that Jesus was made like unto his brethren the Jews in ALL THINGS.

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Maybe you ought to quit parroting your Reformed/Calvinist creeds and actually read your Bible. Jesus came in the flesh, took on our nature, and was made like us in all things.

If we are born with a sin nature inherited from Adam, then so was Jesus, because Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and David was descended from Adam.

You do not have a clue.

 

[Yeshua1]

Baloney, Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Jesus took on himself the same NATURE as the seed of Abraham, NOT ADAM.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Do I need to tell you that Abraham was a sinner born after the so-called fall?

The scriptures teach that Jesus was made like unto his brethren the Jews in ALL THINGS.

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Maybe you ought to quit parroting your Reformed/Calvinist creeds and actually read your Bible. Jesus came in the flesh, took on our nature, and was made like us in all things.

If we are born with a sin nature inherited from Adam, then so was Jesus, because Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and David was descended from Adam.

You do not have a clue.

Jesus is God in His nature ANF sinless Humanity, so he was NOT born with SAME nature as you and i were!

Jesus was born humna, but with NO sin nature as we all have!

 

[Winman]

Jesus is God in His nature ANF sinless Humanity, so he was NOT born with SAME nature as you and i were!

Jesus was born humna, but with NO sin nature as we all have!

You are flat out denying what scripture plainly says.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

This verse says Jesus did not take on himself the nature of angels, but the nature of the seed of Abraham. And Abraham was born after the "fall".

Even John Gill, a Calvinist if there ever was one agrees with my interpretation;

Our LibraryCommentariesJohn Gill's Exposition of the BibleHebrewsHebrews 2Hebrews 2:16
Hebrews 2:16

Hebrews 2:16
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels
Good angels; for they are all along spoken of in this book; and it would have been impertinent to have said this of evil angels: and this is to be understood not of a denying help and assistance to the angels; for though they have not redemption from Christ, which they needed not, yet have they help from him; they are chosen in him, and are gathered together under him; and he is the head of them, and they are upheld and sustained by him in their being, and well being: but of a non-assumption of their nature; there was no need of it with respect to good angels, and there was no salvation designed for evil ones; and to have assumed the nature of angels, would have been of no service to fallen man; an angelic nature is not capable of death, which was necessary to atone for sin, save men, and destroy Satan: this negative proposition is very strongly put, "he never took", as the Vulgate Latin version more rightly renders it; at no time, in no place; nor is it said in any place of Scripture that he did; this is a certain truth, and not to be disputed. The Syriac and Arabic versions render it, "he took not of, or from angels"; he took not any individual from among them:

but he took on him the seed of Abraham;
not all his posterity, but some individual, as the word seed is sometimes used, ( Genesis 4:25 ) ( 15:3 ) . Christ assumed human nature as derived from Abraham; for the Messiah was to spring from Abraham, and is promised, as that seed of his, in whom all nations should be blessed; and he was particularly promised to the Jews, the seed of Abraham, to whom the apostle was writing; and it was with a view to Abraham's spiritual seed, the children of the promise, that Christ partook of flesh and blood: the word here used signifies to catch hold of anyone ready to perish, or to lay hold on a person running away, and with great vehemence and affection to hold anything fast, that it be not lost, and to help persons, and do good unto them; all which may be observed in this act of Christ's, in assuming an individual of human nature, in Abraham's line, into union with his divine person; whereby he has saved those that were gone out of the way, and were ready to perish, and done them the greatest good, and shown the strongest affection to them: and from hence may be learned the deity and eternity of Christ, who was before Abraham, as God, though a son of his as man; and his real humanity, and that it was not a person, but a seed, a nature he assumed; and also the union and distinction of natures in him: and Christ's taking human, and not angelic nature, shows the sovereignty of God, and his distinguishing grace and mercy to men.

The scriptures are clear that those who deny Jesus came in the flesh are not of God but the spirit of antichrist.

1 Jhn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

You see, I don't have a problem believing Jesus came in the flesh and had the same nature as the seed of Abraham, because I believe the scriptures say God has made man upright (Ecc 7:29).

Because you believe the false doctrine of Augustine you are forced to deny that Jesus truly came in the flesh and was tempted in all points as we are, and took on himself the nature of the seed of Abraham, and was made like unto his brethren the Jews in "all things".

One error leads to another.

 

[PeterM]

The virgin birth (not being conceived in sin) is the means by which Jesus was not born with a sin nature. If Christ has a sin nature, then He could not be the promised messiah. He would be blemished. Christ, was born free from sin. Yes, He was tempted, but without sin. He is the second Adam, first born of the dead.

 

[Winman]

The virgin birth (not being conceived in sin) is the means by which Jesus was not born with a sin nature. If Christ has a sin nature, then He could not be the promised messiah. He would be blemished. Christ, was born free from sin. Yes, He was tempted, but without sin. He is the second Adam, first born of the dead.

Nonsense, pure superstition. Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

You receive one half of your DNA from your mother, and your mother received half of her DNA from both her mother and father. You received one fourth of your DNA from your maternal grandfather. This is scientific FACT.

Jesus received his flesh from his mother Mary, who was descended from Adam, so if the sin nature is passed through the flesh, then Jesus would have been born with a sin nature.

Even the angel that spoke to Mary called David Jesus's father.

Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Sin is not something you can inherit, like the color of your hair or eyes, sin is something you do.

This teaching that Jesus was born of a virgin to escape a sin nature is pure superstition, the scriptures clearly teach that Jesus was born of a virgin as a sign.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

 

[preacher4truth]

Oh boy. More of the 'theology' of winman.

Jesus born free from sin, the One for whom it was impossible to sin, and winman calls it nonsense.

The lamb of God, spotless, One who could not sin, in all His Being perfect is reduced in winmans theology. All this from the one who says it was possible that Jesus could lie.

No Baptist believes the nonsense he utters on BB.

 

[preacher4truth]

The virgin birth (not being conceived in sin) is the means by which Jesus was not born with a sin nature. If Christ has a sin nature, then He could not be the promised messiah. He would be blemished. Christ, was born free from sin. Yes, He was tempted, but without sin. He is the second Adam, first born of the dead.

Amen!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[Winman]

The virgin birth (not being conceived in sin) is the means by which Jesus was not born with a sin nature. If Christ has a sin nature, then He could not be the promised messiah. He would be blemished. Christ, was born free from sin. Yes, He was tempted, but without sin. He is the second Adam, first born of the dead.

Nonsense, pure superstition. Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

You receive one half of your DNA from your mother, and your mother received half of her DNA from both her mother and father. You received one fourth of you DNA from your maternal grandfather. This is scientific FACT.

Jesus received his flesh from his mother Mary, so if the sin nature is passed through the flesh, then Jesus would have been born with a sin nature.

Even the angel that spoke to Mary called David Jesus's father.

Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Sin is not something you can inherit, like the color of your hair of eyes, sin is something you do.

This teaching that Jesus was born of a virgin to escape a sin nature is pure superstition, the scriptures clearly teach that Jesus was born of a virgin as a sign.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

 

[PeterM]

Nonsense, pure superstition. Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

You receive one half of your DNA from your mother, and your mother received half of her DNA from both her mother and father. You received one fourth of your DNA from your maternal grandfather. This is scientific FACT.

Jesus received his flesh from his mother Mary, who was descended from Adam, so if the sin nature is passed through the flesh, then Jesus would have been born with a sin nature.

Even the angel that spoke to Mary called David Jesus's father.

Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Sin is not something you can inherit, like the color of your hair or eyes, sin is something you do.

This teaching that Jesus was born of a virgin to escape a sin nature is pure superstition, the scriptures clearly teach that Jesus was born of a virgin as a sign.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

I have never... in all my life encountered a baptist who embraces Christadelphian theology. That said, The problem with your position is that the Scripture clearly articulate that any sacrifice made to God must be without blemish (Deuteronomy 17.1).

If Jesus was born with a sin nature, He would have been blemished. Contrary to what you are espousing (again Christadelphian heresy) the Bible teaches us that Jesus has/had no defect, no blemish (Hebrews 9.14). This verse states that Jesus is without blemish. How can He be without blemish if He has a fallen and sinful nature?

The only way I see anyone being able to assume that Christ was born with a sin nature, would be to deny the Trinity and the virgin birth.

Your conjecture that sin is limited to being just an action is also erroneous. I am not a sinner because I sin, I sin because I am a sinner. But because of the grace of God, I am no longer declared a sinner, I am the righteousness of God though I am still afflicted with a nature to act contrary to my new nature.

 

[preacher4truth]

I have never... in all my life encountered a baptist who embraces Christadelphian theology. That said, The problem with your position is that the Scripture clearly articulate that any sacrifice made to God must be without blemish (Deuteronomy 17.1).

If Jesus was born with a sin nature, He would have been blemished. Contrary to what you are espousing (again Christadelphian heresy) the Bible teaches us that Jesus has/had no defect, no blemish (Hebrews 9.14). This verse states that Jesus is without blemish. How can He be without blemish if He has a fallen and sinful nature?

The only way I see anyone being able to assume that Christ was born with a sin nature, would be to deny the Trinity and the virgin birth.

Your conjecture that sin is limited to being just an action is also erroneous. I am not a sinner because I sin, I sin because I am a sinner. But because of the grace of God, I am no longer declared a sinner, I am the righteousness of God though I am still afflicted with a nature to act contrary to my new nature.

I've never seen a Baptist that believes the nonsense winman utters as well.

Blessed are the eyes that see.

 

[Mexdeaf]

The evolution of this thread is amazing.