Are there even biblical arminians posting On The baptist Board?

[Winman]

jesus NOT exactly same as us, as that would make Him a sinner!

God had foreordained Him to die upon the Cross, NOT was "might" die on the Cross, was foreordained that he WOULD die!

OK, I'm going to try to explain this to you, but I have serious doubts YOU will ever understand.

Sin is something you DO. Sin is not something you ARE. The word "sinner" is a word that describes someone who has committed sin. If you have never committed sin, then you are not a sinner. Jesus was never a sinner, because Jesus never sinned.

Were Adam and Eve made sinners? No. They were not sinners until they committed sin. Their nature did not change, but their guilt/innocence before God changed when they sinned.

It is like being a bank robber. Can you be a bank robber if you have never robbed a bank? Answer that question please.

Can you be a murderer if you have never murdered someone? Answer that question please.

You were not born a sinner, just as you were not born a liar. You became a sinner when you sinned, you became a liar when you lied, just as you could not possibly be a bank robber unless you rob a bank.

Now, I understand your mind has been corrupted by false teaching and that you think a person lies because they are a liar. And you think a person sins because they are a sinner. You have been taught the exact opposite of reality. I can't do anything about that, only help you see your error.

Answer this question, can you be a bank robber unless you rob a bank?

Answer that question honestly if you have the courage to do so.

 

[convicted1]

Agreed. Now, if it comes from God good, then what makes it bad at conception? Sin is breaking God's command(s). What sin did the soul commit at conception to turn it from bad to good?

I meant to say turn it from good to bad.....oopsy!! :smilewinkgrin:

 

[convicted1]

jesus NOT exactly same as us, as that would make Him a sinner!

God had foreordained Him to die upon the Cross, NOT was "might" die on the Cross, was foreordained that he WOULD die!

And you point is?? Neither side of the debate refutes this. Why post something like this? It's like you expect us to disagree with this!?!?!?


I do not mean this in a snide way, but do you ever bring anything meaningful to a discussion?

 

[convicted1]

Willis,
you did not respond to this:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post

Okay, I'll try to give you scriptural proof, but I am sure you won't have any of it, but here goes:

Willis,

I cannot agree to your idea ,as I believe it is unbiblical in several ways

I'm shocked!! :laugh: j/k Brother.

In your idea...men are born spiritually alive.

To quote Dave Hester from Storage Wars, "Yuuuuuup!"

That would mean they are born indwelt with the Holy Spirit.

Well, lemme see here. Were David, Moses, Elijah, Joshua, Aaron, Samuel, Saul(David's F-I-L), Samson, et al ever indwelt the the Holy Spirit? Nope, and yet we will be with them in heaven when God calls us home. The only one that I can think of that was indwelt with the Spirit prior to Jesus' death and ascension is the John the Baptist. And these that I named are God's elect.

That would mean they lose salvation when they commit and act of sin.

Nope. God doesn't hold children accountable for what they do/did until after they know the ramifications of sinning.

that would mean they were not sealed with the Spirit like Eph 1 says.

The ones I previously mentioned weren't sealed either. Yet they are reating from their labors.

that would mean romans 3:23 does not say this as i posted to Winman:

That which is born of flesh, is flesh(outer, physical man), and that which is born of Spirit, is spirit(inner man, soul or spirit). Man creates a baby's "clay frame" when a sperm fertilizes an egg. God then forms that baby in the way it pleases Him. God is the one Who places the soul/inner man in that clay frame, and it comes alive. Humans give birth to the fleshly man, and God dives birth to the inner man, IOW.

The outer man is what is in Adam in that we come from the ground that God cursed(we come from the same ground, it was just that Adam was formed pre-curse) . Even while we were being formed in the womb, our clock was clicking backwards. It is because of Adam's sin that we will die, regardless of being a saint or sinner. The "physical death decree" was passed upon ALL flesh due to Adam's sinning in the Garden. We can't escape it. Now, spiritual death is passed unto us when we willingly and knowingly sin against God. To know to doeth good, and doeth it not, to him, is sin.

8 The use of the aor. in both Romans passages, in their given context, point to an event, i.e., mankind did not simply inherit a sinful nature or tendency from Adam—“all have sinned,” thus referring to personal experience and activity,


but “all sinned” in an event, a point in time (Rom. 3:23, pa,ntej ga.r h[marton kai. u`sterou/ntai th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/. “For all sinned and are subsequently constantly coming short…”


Rom. 5:12, …diV e`no.j avnqrw,pou h` a`marti,a eivj to.n ko,smon…evfV w-| pa,ntej h[marton. “by one man sin entered into the world…for all sinned.”). Every human being is a sinner by imputation, nature and personal activity.

"In Adam" is in regards to the flesh. We die physically due to Adam, but we die spiritually due to ourselves, and us sinning before a Just God, and did so, knowingly and willingly.

 

[saturneptune]

I do not mean this in a snide way,

 

[convicted1]

I honestly didn't mean it in a snide manner, but he does ask these questions repeatedly, and he always gets the same answers from us, and yet, he asks them yet again.


BTW, what do you think of my new quotes in my sig?

 

[Iconoclast]

Okay, I'll try to give you scriptural proof, but I am sure you won't have any of it, but here goes:




I'm shocked!! :laugh: j/k Brother.



To quote Dave Hester from Storage Wars, "Yuuuuuup!"




Well, lemme see here. Were David, Moses, Elijah, Joshua, Aaron, Samuel, Saul(David's F-I-L), Samson, et al ever indwelt the the Holy Spirit? Nope, and yet we will be with them in heaven when God calls us home. The only one that I can think of that was indwelt with the Spirit prior to Jesus' death and ascension is the John the Baptist. And these that I named are God's elect.



Nope. God doesn't hold children accountable for what they do/did until after they know the ramifications of sinning.



The ones I previously mentioned weren't sealed either. Yet they are reating from their labors.




That which is born of flesh, is flesh(outer, physical man), and that which is born of Spirit, is spirit(inner man, soul or spirit). Man creates a baby's "clay frame" when a sperm fertilizes an egg. God then forms that baby in the way it pleases Him. God is the one Who places the soul/inner man in that clay frame, and it comes alive. Humans give birth to the fleshly man, and God dives birth to the inner man, IOW.

The outer man is what is in Adam in that we come from the ground that God cursed(we come from the same ground, it was just that Adam was formed pre-curse) . Even while we were being formed in the womb, our clock was clicking backwards. It is because of Adam's sin that we will die, regardless of being a saint or sinner. The "physical death decree" was passed upon ALL flesh due to Adam's sinning in the Garden. We can't escape it. Now, spiritual death is passed unto us when we willingly and knowingly sin against God. To know to doeth good, and doeth it not, to him, is sin.





"In Adam" is in regards to the flesh. We die physically due to Adam, but we die spiritually due to ourselves, and us sinning before a Just God, and did so, knowingly and willingly.

Willis.
Thanks for responding Willis.:wavey: I see why we disagree in part. I am glad we agree on the Blood of Jesus, and some other things.

One main difference is that you have man being born innocent, scripture declares Him born in sin and seperated from God.

God holds every person accountable.

Death was both spiritual, and physical at the fall....not just physical death.Adam lived many years after the fall.

You went to 1 Cor 15:22 in the other post...if only physical death is in view...the verse does not make sense....

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Even the unsaved are raised to second death.....they never enter spiritual life....the unsaved are never "IN " Christ.....something to ponder Willis...my friend:thumbsup:


Another thing....the scripture does speak of an inner man,and an outward man....but God saves the whole man....as an intact person....sometimes when you are trying to dispute ....it almost sounds like you are drifting on this and not quite making it back Willis......stay in the ballpark:laugh:

 

[Yeshua1]

OK, I'm going to try to explain this to you, but I have serious doubts YOU will ever understand.

Sin is something you DO. Sin is not something you ARE. The word "sinner" is a word that describes someone who has committed sin. If you have never committed sin, then you are not a sinner. Jesus was never a sinner, because Jesus never sinned.

Were Adam and Eve made sinners? No. They were not sinners until they committed sin. Their nature did not change, but their guilt/innocence before God changed when they sinned.

It is like being a bank robber. Can you be a bank robber if you have never robbed a bank? Answer that question please.

Can you be a murderer if you have never murdered someone? Answer that question please.

You were not born a sinner, just as you were not born a liar. You became a sinner when you sinned, you became a liar when you lied, just as you could not possibly be a bank robber unless you rob a bank.

Now, I understand your mind has been corrupted by false teaching and that you think a person lies because they are a liar. And you think a person sins because they are a sinner. You have been taught the exact opposite of reality. I can't do anything about that, only help you see your error.

Answer this question, can you be a bank robber unless you rob a bank?

Answer that question honestly if you have the courage to do so.

Why do we sin? BECAUSE we are born with the nature of sinners!

From the womb we go stray, NONE are rightous!

Jesus was NOTba sinner because of having NO sin nature residing in Him, NOT because he never sinned!

He couldn't even sin, he was fully God!

 

[Yeshua1]

Willis.
Thanks for responding Willis.:wavey: I see why we disagree in part. I am glad we agree on the Blood of Jesus, and some other things.

One main difference is that you have man being born innocent, scripture declares Him born in sin and seperated from God.

God holds every person accountable.

Death was both spiritual, and physical at the fall....not just physical death.Adam lived many years after the fall.

You went to 1 Cor 15:22 in the other post...if only physical death is in view...the verse does not make sense....



Even the unsaved are raised to second death.....they never enter spiritual life....the unsaved are never "IN " Christ.....something to ponder Willis...my friend:thumbsup:


Another thing....the scripture does speak of an inner man,and an outward man....but God saves the whole man....as an intact person....sometimes when you are trying to dispute ....it almost sounds like you are drifting on this and not quite making it back Willis......stay in the ballpark:laugh:

Some here seem to be coming cklose to a full blown pel view on salvation, that we basically have full free way and God did what he could by the Cross, but we can fully determine our own destiny by ourselves!

 

[psalms109:31]

New International Version*(©1984)Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For we know - We who are engaged in the work of the gospel ministry. Paul is giving a reason why he and his fellow-laborers did not become weary and faint in their work. The reason was, that they knew that even if their body should die, they had an inheritance reserved for them in heaven. The expression "we know" is the language of strong and unwavering assurance. They had no doubt on the subject. And it proves that there may be the assurance of eternal life; or such evidence of acceptance with God as to leave no doubt of a final admission into heaven. This language was often used by the Saviour in reference to the truths which he taught*John 3:11;*John 4:22; and it is used by the sacred writers in regard to the truths which they recorded, and in regard to their own personal piety;*John 21:24;*1 John 2:3,*1 John 2:5,1 John 2:18;*1 John 3:2,*1 John 3:14,*1 John 3:19,*1 John 3:24;*1 John 4:6,*1 John 4:13;*1 John 5:2,*1 John 5:15,*1 John 5:19-20.That if our earthly house - The word "earthly" here (ἐπιγειος epigeios) stands opposed to "heavenly," or to the house eternal (ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς en tois ouranois) in the heavens." The word properly means "upon earth, terrestrial, belonging to the earth, or on the earth," and is applied to bodies*1 Corinthians 15:40; to earthly things*John 3:12; to earthly, or worldly wisdom,*James 3:15. The word "house" here refers doubtless to the body, as the habitation, or the dwelling-place of the mind or soul. The soul dwells in it as we dwell in a house, or tent.Of this tabernacle - This word means a booth, or tent - a movable dwelling. The use of the word here is not a mere redundancy, but the idea which Paul designs to convey is, doubtless, that the body - the house of the soul - was not a permanent dwelling-place, but was of the same nature as a booth or tent, that was set up for a temporary purpose, or that was easily taken down in migrating from one place to another. It refers here to the body as the frail and temporary abode of the soul. It is not a permanent dwelling; a fixed habitation, but is liable to be taken down at any moment, and was suited up with that view. Tyndale renders it, "if our earthly mansion wherein we now dwell." The Syriac renders it, "for we know that if our house on earth, which is our body, were dissolved." The idea is a beautiful one, that the body is a mere unfixed, movable dwelling. place; liable to be taken down at any moment, and not designed, anymore than a tent is, to be a permanent habitation.Were dissolved - (καταλυθῇ kataluthē). This word means properly to disunite the parts of anything; and is applied to the act of throwing down, or destroying a building. It is applied here to the body, regarded as a temporary dwelling that might be taken down, and it refers, doubtless, to the dissolution of the body in the grave. The idea is, that if this body should moulder back to dust, and be resolved into its original elements; or if by great zeal and, labor it should be exhausted and worn out. Language like this is used by Eliphaz, the Temanite, in describing the body of man. "How much less in those that dwell in houses of clay," etc.;*Job 4:19; compare*2 Peter 1:13-14.We have a building of God - Robinson (Lexicon) supposes that it refers to "the future spiritual body as the abode of the soul." Some have supposed that it refers to some "celestial vehicle" with which God invests the soul during the intermediate state. But the Scripture is silent about any such celestial vehicle. It is not easy to tell what was the precise idea which Paul here designed to convey. Perhaps a few remarks may enable us to arrive at the meaning1) It was not to be temporary; not a tent or tabernacle that could be taken down.(2) it was to be eternal in the heavens.(3) it was to be such as to constitute a dwelling; a clothing, or such a protection as should keep the soul from being "naked."(4) it was to be such as should constitute "life" in contradistinction from "mortality." These things will better agree with the supposition of its referring to the future body of the saints than any thing else; and probably the idea of Paul is, that the body there will be incorruptible and immortal. When he says it is a "building of God" (ἐκ Θεοῦ ek Theou), he evidently means that it is made by God; that he is the architect of that future and eternal dwelling. Macknight and some others, however, understood this of the mansions which God has prepared for His people in heaven, and which the Lord Jesus has gone to prepare for them; compare*John 14:2. But see the note on*2 Corinthians 5:3.An house - A dwelling; an abode; that is, according to the interpretation above, a celestial, pure, immortal body; a body that shall have God for its immediate author, and that shall be suited to dwell in heaven forever.Not made with hands - Not constructed by man; a habitation not like those which are made by human skill, and which are therefore easily taken down or removed, but one that is made by God himself. This does not imply that the "earthly house" which is to be superseded by that in heaven is made with hands, but the idea is, that the earthly dwelling has things about it which resemble that which is made by man, or as if it were made with hands; that is it is temporary, frail, easily taken down or removed. But that which is in heaven is permanent, fixed, eternal, as if made by God.Eternal in the heavens - Immortal; to live forever. The future body shall never be taken down or dissolved by death. It is eternal, of course, only in respect to the future, and not in respect to the past. And it is not only eternal, but it is to abide forever in the heavens - in the world of glory. It is never to be subjected to a dwelling on the earth; never to be in a world of sin, suffering, and death.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Wouldn't it be good if there was a church where these differing views would be allowed?

There are, actually, but honestly, I don't think it would be a good thing. People should be able to attend a Church wherein these things are (in a sense) "officially" or "confessionally" taught. If I were a Calvinist....I would fear that Arminianism makes too little of God's Sovereignty....If I were an Arminian... (I more or less am) than I would think that Calvinism teaches too many compromises on God's Just and Loving Character. Thus, I don't think it would work....There is an established Calvinist S.B.C. Church in my County which is rather highly regarded by all others around them. We would not attend it though...Neither would we "tithe" or give directly to it's ministry. Neither would I have my children raised in their Sunday School Department. No one begrudges their cooperation in the S.B.C. And they are, as a local body well-regarded by all their surrounding Churches....I suppose, as a Baptist, that I would welcome the opportunity to preach to them, and would welcome them as a guest preacher at MY Church....but there would already be an understanding that the Soteriological differences were not to be expounded. I would not suggest Arminianism to that flock, nor would they be permitted to suggest Calvinism to ours.

There is a lay-preaching Calvinist in My Church....and he is permitted to preach. He is welcomed as a member...but he is, on NO LEVEL...permitted to either "teach" or "preach" his particular views from the pulpit.

I have come to regard Icon as a friend, and I would not want to see him rejected from a church i was in, even though our views are opposite on some things.

I would imagine that Icon would not wish.....to attend or become a member of the Church you were in. I wouldn't...and not because I doubt for a second your sincerity, love of Christ, or anything else...But merely because my views and yours are signifigantly different such that, given any option, it would be imprudent to support ministries which teach the Scriptures sufficiently differently than I believe they ought to be taught.

The "Great Commission" teaches that we are to
1.) make Disciples
2.) Baptize
3.) Teach them to observe "ALL THINGS"...whatsoever I have commanded you...

Given number three....I would not, for instance, vote (in favour) of the ordination of any woman that the church which you attended were posing as a candidate for either liscensure to preach, ordination, or anything else. Why should I want to be in such Theological dis-unity????? I do not, I guess, wish to support "unity" above and beyond...or even in lieu of what I would defend as Biblical "Truth"...Amos 3:3

 

[psalms109:31]

double post

 

[psalms109:31]

New International Version*(©1984)Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For we know - We who are engaged in the work of the gospel ministry. Paul is giving a reason why he and his fellow-laborers did not become weary and faint in their work. The reason was, that they knew that even if their body should die, they had an inheritance reserved for them in heaven. The expression "we know" is the language of strong and unwavering assurance. They had no doubt on the subject. And it proves that there may be the assurance of eternal life; or such evidence of acceptance with God as to leave no doubt of a final admission into heaven. This language was often used by the Saviour in reference to the truths which he taught*John 3:11;*John 4:22; and it is used by the sacred writers in regard to the truths which they recorded, and in regard to their own personal piety;*John 21:24;*1 John 2:3,*1 John 2:5,1 John 2:18;*1 John 3:2,*1 John 3:14,*1 John 3:19,*1 John 3:24;*1 John 4:6,*1 John 4:13;*1 John 5:2,*1 John 5:15,*1 John 5:19-20.That if our earthly house - The word "earthly" here (ἐπιγειος epigeios) stands opposed to "heavenly," or to the house eternal (ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς en tois ouranois) in the heavens." The word properly means "upon earth, terrestrial, belonging to the earth, or on the earth," and is applied to bodies*1 Corinthians 15:40; to earthly things*John 3:12; to earthly, or worldly wisdom,*James 3:15. The word "house" here refers doubtless to the body, as the habitation, or the dwelling-place of the mind or soul. The soul dwells in it as we dwell in a house, or tent.Of this tabernacle - This word means a booth, or tent - a movable dwelling. The use of the word here is not a mere redundancy, but the idea which Paul designs to convey is, doubtless, that the body - the house of the soul - was not a permanent dwelling-place, but was of the same nature as a booth or tent, that was set up for a temporary purpose, or that was easily taken down in migrating from one place to another. It refers here to the body as the frail and temporary abode of the soul. It is not a permanent dwelling; a fixed habitation, but is liable to be taken down at any moment, and was suited up with that view. Tyndale renders it, "if our earthly mansion wherein we now dwell." The Syriac renders it, "for we know that if our house on earth, which is our body, were dissolved." The idea is a beautiful one, that the body is a mere unfixed, movable dwelling. place; liable to be taken down at any moment, and not designed, anymore than a tent is, to be a permanent habitation.Were dissolved - (καταλυθῇ kataluthē). This word means properly to disunite the parts of anything; and is applied to the act of throwing down, or destroying a building. It is applied here to the body, regarded as a temporary dwelling that might be taken down, and it refers, doubtless, to the dissolution of the body in the grave. The idea is, that if this body should moulder back to dust, and be resolved into its original elements; or if by great zeal and, labor it should be exhausted and worn out. Language like this is used by Eliphaz, the Temanite, in describing the body of man. "How much less in those that dwell in houses of clay," etc.;*Job 4:19; compare*2 Peter 1:13-14.We have a building of God - Robinson (Lexicon) supposes that it refers to "the future spiritual body as the abode of the soul." Some have supposed that it refers to some "celestial vehicle" with which God invests the soul during the intermediate state. But the Scripture is silent about any such celestial vehicle. It is not easy to tell what was the precise idea which Paul here designed to convey. Perhaps a few remarks may enable us to arrive at the meaning1) It was not to be temporary; not a tent or tabernacle that could be taken down.(2) it was to be eternal in the heavens.(3) it was to be such as to constitute a dwelling; a clothing, or such a protection as should keep the soul from being "naked."(4) it was to be such as should constitute "life" in contradistinction from "mortality." These things will better agree with the supposition of its referring to the future body of the saints than any thing else; and probably the idea of Paul is, that the body there will be incorruptible and immortal. When he says it is a "building of God" (ἐκ Θεοῦ ek Theou), he evidently means that it is made by God; that he is the architect of that future and eternal dwelling. Macknight and some others, however, understood this of the mansions which God has prepared for His people in heaven, and which the Lord Jesus has gone to prepare for them; compare*John 14:2. But see the note on*2 Corinthians 5:3.An house - A dwelling; an abode; that is, according to the interpretation above, a celestial, pure, immortal body; a body that shall have God for its immediate author, and that shall be suited to dwell in heaven forever.Not made with hands - Not constructed by man; a habitation not like those which are made by human skill, and which are therefore easily taken down or removed, but one that is made by God himself. This does not imply that the "earthly house" which is to be superseded by that in heaven is made with hands, but the idea is, that the earthly dwelling has things about it which resemble that which is made by man, or as if it were made with hands; that is it is temporary, frail, easily taken down or removed. But that which is in heaven is permanent, fixed, eternal, as if made by God.Eternal in the heavens - Immortal; to live forever. The future body shall never be taken down or dissolved by death. It is eternal, of course, only in respect to the future, and not in respect to the past. And it is not only eternal, but it is to abide forever in the heavens - in the world of glory. It is never to be subjected to a dwelling on the earth; never to be in a world of sin, suffering, and death.


What matters in the end is what is on the inside that is what God is saving the outside is nothing if the inside is not change by His word.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

No need to. Brother HoS said it better than I ever could.

WOW!!! Willis (may I call you that)??? Wonderful votes of confidence you have shown in my rejoinders...I thank you for your kind words about my posts...

Now, if only I learn to interract with our fellow Christians with the more Christ-like Spirit of yours (Which I envy).....I might be of value on this board!
Tell you what....I'll trade you the Theologically erudite posts I sometimes have posed for the Christ-honoring Spirit with which you always post... :thumbs: Is it a deal? :wavey:

 

[Winman]

Why do we sin? BECAUSE we are born with the nature of sinners!

That is your assumption. Adam and Eve had no sin nature, yet they sinned. Satan was not created with a sin nature, yet he sinned. So, this idea of yours that a person MUST have a sin nature to sin is totally refuted by scripture.

From the womb we go stray, NONE are rightous!

I actually agree with this, "from the womb", that is, after we are born we go astray in sin. But we are not born sinners.

Jesus was NOTba sinner because of having NO sin nature residing in Him, NOT because he never sinned!

Jesus himself refutes you, Jesus said if he were to deny his father, he would be a liar. His sinfulness was determined by what he DID.

Jhn 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

Jesus said that if he said he did not know his Father, he would be a liar, he would be a sinner. Jesus being a sinner or not was determined by what he did.

He couldn't even sin, he was fully God!

Jesus implied he could sin, he said "if" he denied that he knew his Father he would be a liar. The word "if" implies that it was possible for Jesus to deny that he knew his Father and be a liar.

Why would Jesus imply he could lie if he was unable?

Jesus was not a sinner because he always obeyed God's commandments and never sinned.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

There are, actually, but honestly, I don't think it would be a good thing. People should be able to attend a Church wherein these things are (in a sense) "officially" or "confessionally" taught. If I were a Calvinist....I would fear that Arminianism makes too little of God's Sovereignty....If I were an Arminian... (I more or less am) than I would think that Calvinism teaches too many compromises on God's Just and Loving Character. Thus, I don't think it would work....There is an established Calvinist S.B.C. Church in my County which is rather highly regarded by all others around them. We would not attend it though...Neither would we "tithe" or give directly to it's ministry. Neither would I have my children raised in their Sunday School Department. No one begrudges their cooperation in the S.B.C. And they are, as a local body well-regarded by all their surrounding Churches....I suppose, as a Baptist, that I would welcome the opportunity to preach to them, and would welcome them as a guest preacher at MY Church....but there would already be an understanding that the Soteriological differences were not to be expounded. I would not suggest Arminianism to that flock, nor would they be permitted to suggest Calvinism to ours.

There is a lay-preaching Calvinist in My Church....and he is permitted to preach. He is welcomed as a member...but he is, on NO LEVEL...permitted to either "teach" or "preach" his particular views from the pulpit.



I would imagine that Icon would not wish.....to attend or become a member of the Church you were in. I wouldn't...and not because I doubt for a second your sincerity, love of Christ, or anything else...But merely because my views and yours are signifigantly different such that, given any option, it would be imprudent to support ministries which teach the Scriptures sufficiently differently than I believe they ought to be taught.

The "Great Commission" teaches that we are to
1.) make Disciples
2.) Baptize
3.) Teach them to observe "ALL THINGS"...whatsoever I have commanded you...

Given number three....I would not, for instance, vote (in favour) of the ordination of any woman that the church which you attended were posing as a candidate for either liscensure to preach, ordination, or anything else. Why should I want to be in such Theological dis-unity????? I do not, I guess, wish to support "unity" above and beyond...or even in lieu of what I would defend as Biblical "Truth"...Amos 3:3

Well, that is a good, open, and honest post. I enjoyed reading it.

 

[Iconoclast]

I have come to regard Icon as a friend, and I would not want to see him rejected from a church i was in, even though our views are opposite on some things.
I would imagine that Icon would not wish.....to attend or become a member of the Church you were in. I wouldn't...and not because I doubt for a second your sincerity, love of Christ, or anything else...But merely because my views and yours are signifigantly different such that, given any option, it would be imprudent to support ministries which teach the Scriptures sufficiently differently than I believe they ought to be taught.

Short term anyone can visit any church and be of some help.Long term members of a church need to be like minded to have a chance to serve together.

I have been in several kinds of Churches over the years as I have the chance to travel. When forced to attend a church that is doctrinally weak...I learn from the error, try to agree with some of the verses offered, and look to help those I fellowship with.
To attend under those circumstances takes much prayer...as I would not want to undermine what takes place in that assembly. Coming from the outside I might not be aware of several of the backrounds of the people...who is a new member, who has a degree of mental defect,etc.
Michael has expressed his view that he would be supportive of a wide diversity of beliefs, even those I hold that differ from him.
I have come to understand that God will perhaps use Michael to reach some "bruised reeds" who come from backrounds that i struggle with...believing that most highly liturgical churches seem like dead assemblies to me.....so I avoid them.
Michael might be better equipped to ministers long term to those kind of persons than I ever would be .Each group has strengths and weaknesses.

 

[convicted1]

Willis.
Thanks for responding Willis.:wavey:

You're welcome------>:wavey: back @ you.

I see why we disagree in part.

I agree with you. I see why we disagree, but let's not do this in hatred. There's too much from Genesis 1:1------->Revelation 22:20 for us to agree upon to have a "falling out" with each other.

I am glad we agree on the Blood of Jesus, and some other things.

Right here is a prime example of what we agree upon.

One main difference is that you have man being born innocent, scripture declares Him born in sin and seperated from God.

Not true. I do not have man being born innocent, but rather, not guilty. Here's the difference. I am sure you read my analogy of the child who accidently shot and killed their sibling. Now, they were guilty of killing, and no one could disprove this otherwise. But this wasn't murder. Murder is killing WITH intent......IOW, a motive behind it. This child, if ever placed before a jury trial, would be found not guilty, and not innocent. To be found innocent, would mean the child didn't fire the weapon that killed their sibling. They would be found not guilty, because, eventhough they did kill, they do so without knowing the ramifications of using a firearm. Children, when they lie, steal, cuss, "back-sass", or whatever else sin they commit, did so without knowing the ramifications of these sins. When I was in second grade, we would get out on the play ground and cuss like sailors. We thought it was something to talk like our daddies. I didn't know that I was sinning before a Righteous God. I knew that if I was caught by the principal, my "bum-bum" would be warmed-up, and when word got to my parents, I would get another "reheating" at home. I knew it was wrong in their sight, but not God's. I didn't know the ramifications of my sins before God. Now, when God showed me I needed to serve Him, then I felt the ramifications of these sins being placed upon me, and that if I died then, hell is where I'd be.

God holds every person accountable.

Agreed....but not from birth, let alone conception.

Death was both spiritual, and physical at the fall....not just physical death.Adam lived many years after the fall.

God told Adam that when he ate of it, he'd die. When his eyes were opened, he died spiritually right then and there, and the "sentence of physical death" was placed upon him, Eve, and all mankind. This is what got passed down from Adam's sin, the physical death sentence, and not his sins.

You went to 1 Cor 15:22 in the other post...if only physical death is in view...the verse does not make sense....

It does when you leave it to say what it does, and leave Calvinism out of it. Regardless of how "saved" any of us are, we are going to die, period. We can not escape this, no matter how godly we live. We die spiritually when we knowingly and willfully commit sins.

Even the unsaved are raised to second death.....

Agreed. Never stated otherwise.

they never enter spiritual life....

Agreed. Never stated otherwise.

the unsaved are never "IN " Christ.....

Agreed. Never stated otherwise. Now, I am giving you something to "gnaw" on. The OT Prophets, High Priests, and Judges, they did many wonderful works while being moved upon by the Spirit, correct? Show me where the likes of Samuel, Joshua, Moses, Aaron, Samson, et al, had the permanent indwelling of the Spirit. To be "indwelt" with the Spirit, is to be in Christ, no? So, they were "saved", yet not indwelt with the Spirit. Even the donkey that spoke, the Spirit spoke through said donkey....so I guess the donkey was "in Christ", too?

something to ponder Willis...my friend

Yes, it is something to ponder. I just hope and pray you ponder on what I showed you.

Another thing....the scripture does speak of an inner man,and an outward man....

An accord.....hallelujah.

but God saves the whole man....as an intact person...

I dunno about that....got scripture to back this claim up. If the whole man is saved, then there would be no warfare betwixt the outer and inner man.

sometimes when you are trying to dispute ....it almost like you are drifting on this and not quite making it back Willis......stay in the ballpark:laugh:

I am always in the ballpark, just not your side of it:laugh:. I hope and pray that we can both learn from each other, even if we disagree, and boy, do we ever. May He richly bless you, your wife and kids this weekend. May He ever keep His hands upon you as you travel throughout this grand country of ours.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Short term anyone can visit any church and be of some help.Long term members of a church need to be like minded to have a chance to serve together.

I have been in several kinds of Churches over the years as I have the chance to travel. When forced to attend a church that is doctrinally weak...I learn from the error, try to agree with some of the verses offered, and look to help those I fellowship with.
To attend under those circumstances takes much prayer...as I would not want to undermine what takes place in that assembly. Coming from the outside I might not be aware of several of the backrounds of the people...who is a new member, who has a degree of mental defect,etc.
Michael has expressed his view that he would be supportive of a wide diversity of beliefs, even those I hold that differ from him.
I have come to understand that God will perhaps use Michael to reach some "bruised reeds" who come from backrounds that i struggle with...believing that most highly liturgical churches seem like dead assemblies to me.....so I avoid them.
Michael might be better equipped to ministers long term to those kind of persons than I ever would be .Each group has strengths and weaknesses.

Thanks for your kind words. I'm glad I found out that you're a good guy, and I'm glad to count you as a friend. I pray for your safety on the roads.

 

[convicted1]

WOW!!! Willis (may I call you that)???

Sure, why not? Let this be your blessing for today......nah, just kidding.....Willis is fine....:laugh:

Wonderful votes of confidence you have shown in my rejoinders...I thank you for your kind words about my posts...

I am like an umpire, I call'em as I see'em.

Now, if only I learn to interract with our fellow Christians with the more Christ-like Spirit of yours (Which I envy).....I might be of value on this board!

I dunno about that. I have my MANY faults and failures......I take solace in knowing that when I stumble, Jesus takes up the slack, and steadies me.....He pleads my case before the Father, and everything is A.O.K.

Tell you what....I'll trade you the Theologically erudite posts I sometimes have posed for the Christ-honoring Spirit with which you always post... :thumbs: Is it a deal? :wavey:

Nope. I am keeping my Christ-honoring Spirit, and taking your erudite posting ability, too. I am hoggish like that.....hey, that's how I roll.....LOL


But to be serious for a moment......***holding breath***........I really enjoy your posts. You just blow me away sometimes.....in a good way, that is.....sometimes, I feel like I need a "Funk and Wagonall", or a "Webster's" close by..........