Featured 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved'

Dr. Rice was KJV preferred, too. So was I until, the rancor and slaying over the "only" became a point to where I just moved away from the KJ to prefer the NASB. That way I stand apart from that whole controversy.

If I recall correctly, Icon is also KJ preferred.

I am not certain that I agree with those who consider God is apathetic to all things emotional as some of the extreme teach of the "doctrine of divine impassibility." For one cannot express love, anger, ... in the divine sense nor does the Scripture present God as "impassible" when it comes to how God interacts with the creation. Mark and Matthew both state that Christ was "moved to compassion." Some would view Christ as experiencing that which God does not, but John's account of the relationship of the Son and Father would not allow such an expression to be factual. Christ certainly did experience pain and sorrow so does the Father. Hunger and thirst are human aspects of which God gives as an attribute of sustenance, and not pointing to His attribute. So, when Christ hungered and thirsted, in the physical sense, that was not something that God would experience, but rather a human need for sustaining bodily functions, (same with the heart beating, the inhaling and exhaling, ...)

Then there is the connection in "the doctrine of impassibility" that concerns whether God's emotions and expressions of passion are voluntary or involuntary.

On that point, I would consider it rational that God does nothing "involuntarily." For then He would become subject to the impulses of what drove the "involuntary" and not as sovereign ruler over all creation and Himself. However, there are certain key driving forces that Scriptures conclude are not separable from God. Such passions as Love, Joy, Peace, Justice, and other attributes that are to be part of the believer, also.

 

....or wandering in the wilderness for the rest of their lives....

 

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
15 For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God:
17 and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. Ro 8

'Sons' denotes maturity, as in:

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Jn 1

The elect are already 'children'. Each of them upon receiving Christ now have the power to mature and become 'sons'.

 

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
--The minute we are born again, that is redeemed, we also receive the adoption, or are adopted as sons into His family as mature sons.

 

I don't disagree, DHK, but I want to make certain that readers don't misunderstand.

Readers,

Be a bit careful when reading "we might receive" as if it such is held as some reward or even can become a missed opportunity.

Rather, the phrase in English is a single word in the Greek and should be taken as the assured gaining of all rights due to the adopted son as a "joint heir." We (believers) get what is "due" as adopted sons as any "born son" and the right to call from our hearts, "Father, Papa."

 

It doesn't say:

"as many as received him, He made sons of God".

It says:

"as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God"

And it's clear:

"Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

Those 'receiving' Him were already 'born of God', thus His children.

 

The verse is speaking of the new birth or regeneration, not adoption.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name: (ASV)
--The word "tekna" is more accurately translated "children" meaning sons and daughters.
It is speaking about those who become part of the family of God through means of the new birth, not by adoption.

 

It doesn't say anything about a 'new' birth. It's a heavenly birth, born from above, born of God. Those receiving Him are already born of God. 'His sheep' are the ONLY ones that are able to 'receive Him'. It's expounded on again in the third chapter, before one can enter or even see the kingdom of God he MUST first be born from above.

When you use this term 'born again' it gives you free willers wiggle room to insert man's cooperation with the birth from above. The 13th verse is a threefold denial of any involvement on the part of man concerning the birth from above.

 

The Scriptures present no difference between the adopted and the other children (natural born). The presentation is that the adopted are endowed with all rights and privileges of the family.

The only difference is the significance shown of the birth of Christ the "only BEGOTTEN son."

But, more to the point of the opening words of John's account, is that exclusivity of the group that are given that right. It is ONLY to those who do not turn from the light. They don't take the light, they don't grab the light, and they do not "accept" in any manner than passively basking in the light; rather, these do not turn from the light in contrast to the many of the world who do. And as a result of their lack of turning away from the light they are given the right (power) to be the children (adopted heirs) and believe on his name.

This authority is not universal, and is not subject to the whims of the mind, will, birth right, but were born of God (meaning that they were chosen and endowed in birthright as His children).

 

Brother Icon,

The commentary writer WR Downing you quoted said, "
Evangelical or saving repentance unto life is the gift of God,
the immediate consequence of regenerating grace". In other words he is saying repentance is an immediate effect of being regenerated (born again), not the cause of becoming regenerated. I concur with this, do you?

I also agree when the author continues his statement regarding repentance stating, "
...and is evidenced in turning from sin to God." Here I take him to be saying repentance is not the actual turning from sin, but rather a change of mind toward the view of sin by the regenerated soul that surely results/produces a change in a believer's walk toward obeying God and not sinning in the future. Are you in agreement?

 

I think the Apostle John would be in agreement, too.

 

I was about to answer the same, nor does he provide Scripture or pay attention to sound doctrine or apology.

 

You guys want me to provide scripture for something that doesn't exist.

Since Icon has failed to do so, why don't you list where the Bible says one must "repent of your sins" in order to be saved?

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

You nailed it when you quoted dhk. Please time permitting post more of his quotes against the necessity of repentance. I see one gave a thumb up to his 'who teaches this?' pretense of ignorance yet has done so prematurely.

Here is some of dhk saying this:

I've taken screenshots as well. Can provide these as well.

https://www.baptistboard.com/thread...in-classic-arminianism-ourselves.66655/page-5

More:

https://www.baptistboard.com/thread...in-classic-arminianism-ourselves.66655/page-6

There is more...like here:

More:

Jesusfan says

to which dhk replies:

https://www.baptistboard.com/thread...in-classic-arminianism-ourselves.66655/page-8

And here, clarifying his position even moreso:

(same link as above)

I also took a screenshot of this page as well.

More:

 

Englishman's Concordance
ἀπολάβωμεν (apolabōmen) — 1 Occurrence
Galatians 4:5 V-ASA-1P
GRK: τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν
NAS: the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.
KJV: that we might receive the adoption of sons.
INT: the adoption we might receive

I believe it should be translated as that in bold: the adoption, with the tense showing, to receive that which has already been received by Christ. Meaning?

What are we joint heirs of in Rom 8, is it not to be glorified? Therefore Rom 8:23 the adoption, the redemption of the body? Gal 4:5 means the same as : John 17:5 O Father, glorify thou me.

For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. Phil 3:20,21

That is when, the adoption, takes place, the redemption of the body, to be glorified with Christ, to become an inheritor and is carried out by the Spirit, see Romans 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you., > at the return of Jesus from heaven.

We have been begotten of the Spirit that gives us confidence of that taking place. See also 2 Cor 5:1-5

 

Please quote where he did. He can't. He would be bearing false witness, as you are now.

 

That is the worst butchering of interpreting how the Bereans treated scripture that I've ever heard of. Breathtaking!

Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith.
2 Timothy 3:8 ESV

So, you're saying I'm unsaved because I don't buy into your Calvinist theology.



Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

We have already received it, just like we have already received salvation. And yet at the same time salvation won't be complete until glorification is completed. This analogy holds true for adoption as well.

We were adopted as mature sons the day that we were regenerated. But the scripture also says "we have received the "spirit of adoption." Perhaps it is because we haven't been glorified yet. Nevertheless we have been adopted. In Romans 8, it is not just us, but the whole creation that awaits the coming of Christ.

The word "conversation" here means citizenship. We are citizens of heaven with all the rights and privileges thereof. Only one who has been adopted into that nation could avail himself of those rights and privileges.

The adoption has taken place but has not yet been fully completed.

 

My appologies, I didn't know the post had already been responded, too.

1 John 3:

Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.​

Romans 8:

"For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God...."
"The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him." ​

Ok, there is enough to show that it is not some future estate of adoption, but the present condition that all believers abide. We are God's own, His children.

We await for the final new in which we yet do not (as Paul states) know the form other than we shall be "like Him."