BUY your way into Heaven! PLEASE!

[J. Jump]

I don't want to come across as mean spirited

With all due respect you might want to go back and re-read some of your posts, because there are several on here that think you are nothing but mean spirited . . . just something to consider.

when people deliberately try to lead people astray

I'm not sure that either of us are qualified to know whether someone is "deliberately" trying to lead people astray. I know that I am certainly not. There are many on here that I don't agree with, but I don't think they are trying to lead people astray.

Where do you guys get the idea that there are "Christians" in hell?

I'm not sure where you got that statement, because no one has said that Christians are currently in hell, at least as far as I can see through Scripture.

What are you guys?

Not sure what you mean by that question. I am a member of a Southern Baptist church and have always gone to a Southern Baptist church, except for a very brief time when we attended a Bible church. But first and foremost I am a child of God, that is awaiting the adoption (placement/acceptance) as a son (firstborn) of God.

What are you reading?

The Bible. It's an absolutely AMAZING Book when we remove ourselves from the interpretation process and just allow Scripture to speak and allow the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide us into ALL Truth that is contained within.

Where in God's Word do you get faintest idea that there will be "Christians" in hell?

The easiest place to see it is in the four Gospels.

 

[J. Jump]

J. Jump, with all respect, the scripture about the ten virgins is an illustration, or a simile, rather than a parable.

Ed what causes you to make a distinction between an illustration and a parable and what would be the difference between the two as you see it? Thanks in advance. By the way I have never heard the 10 virgins referred to as anything other than a parable, so that's why I'm asking for clarification on your post.

 

[EdSutton]

First lets take some of the wild off-the-wall imaginings of Shiloh and add facts to his fiction.

Not a bad idea, I'd say, even if I do usually post in smaller print.

They also reject Salvation by Grace through Faith not by "works."

Not exactly, as to the group you are castigating. They are, IMO, preaching a false doctrine in this, and one that is actually more likely to be misleading as to what is actually beng taught, than what you are portraying, but it is more accurate to say that this is an attempt to (1) incorporate works into faith for salvation, by "backloading" and 'requiring' them as an integral part OF faith; (2) 'claiming' that supposedly non-existent "works" (based on some etheral "undefined standard") shows either an absence of faith in the first place, a loss of this faith, or some "undefined" dead faith, that could not have 'saved one' to start with; or (3) a back-door attempt at 'keeping the Mosaic law', or at least some of it. The result is some continually shifting murky mixture of "Lordship Salvation", "Galatianism", and "legalism", regardless of how it is so loudly portrayed to not be what it actually is.

I know what the SDA's believe, I know what the JW's believeand (sic) other cults. The problem with them on here is that this is a "BAPTIST" message board.

This is the second time I am saying this. This particular forum is the "Other Christian Denominations" forum. They (whoever "they" may be) have every right to post in this forum, per BB rules. AND the BB is more than just a ""BAPTIST" message board", since that is how the Owner and Administrators have set it up. "them on here" have just as much right as you or me to post here, I will say again. You do not have to post here, nor do I. And should you or I not like it, there is not one earthly thing that says, should we so choose, we cannot start our own 'bored' - 'er I mean Board, and set it up anyway you or I would like it to be, rather than griping about another.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Ed what causes you to make a distinction between an illustration and a parable and what would be the difference between the two as you see it? Thanks in advance. By the way I have never heard the 10 virgins referred to as anything other than a parable, so that's why I'm asking for clarification on your post.

I believe that a "parable" is always named as such, and this is not so named. All parables could well to be said to be an illustration 'illuminating' some spiritual truth, in Scripture, but not all illustrations are necessarily parables, as I see it. Several so-called parables are not, IMO, including the account of the Father and his two sons, commonly referred to as "the parable of the Prodigal Son" (Scripture describes this unnamed individual as a "certain man", hence a specific individual, and something that is not usually associated with Jesus' parables); the account of the 'rich man' and Lazarus (Jesus never named any individual in any parable, and this is not stated to be a parable, either); the account of the "Good Samaritan", or the story of the widow and the two mites. None of these are stated to be 'parables", and I am reluctant to call them that, being as Jesus and the Gospel writers did not.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

In no sense of the word does 'buy' mean give something back to someone it already belongs too. Buy means to make a purchase, you pay a price and you have earned the right to own the item purchased.

I agree fully, here. Just as it is said that we "are bought with a price", and God now owns us, so to speak. It says not one thing about Him giving back to us what is (really) ours, then.

Ed

 

[J. Jump]

Ed so it is really just semantics then as far as I can tell . . . yes?

 

[EdSutton]

Ed so it is really just semantics then as far as I can tell . . . yes?

Not really. A parable is a fictitious account, that is generally applicable to human life and conditions and is instructive of a heavenly truth. , a 'saying' illustrating the same, etc. A similie is a comparison of two unlike things, and an illustration is something that makes something clear. While there are some similarities in all, there are also some differences. And the four examples I gave of things often called parables that are not identified as such, are I believe, all examples of actual fact, as opposed to fictitious accounts.

Ed

 

[J. Jump]

I guess what I was getting at the most is you don't see a difference in the Truth that is to be gleaned from each set correct? The Scriptural Truth is the Scriptural Truth whether its a parable or illustration correct?

 

[Claudia_T]

I agree fully, here. Just as it is said that we "are bought with a price", and God now owns us, so to speak. It says not one thing about Him giving back to us what is (really) ours, then.

Ed

Us giving back to Him what is really His.

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

It's got nothing to do with buying. God didn't buy us. Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins. We are not slaves.

How can you give something to someone who already owns it?

We are adopted into God's family. God is my Father.

I paid the price for my children by going through labor. They are my children. They do not have to give themselves back to me.

AND, they will always be my children. Nothing can change that fact. Nothing can change the fact that I will always be God's child.

Our children rebel sometimes, but they are still our children.

We rebel by sinning sometimes, but we are still God's children.

 

[J. Jump]

God didn't buy us.

Scripture does say we were purchased.

Acts 20:28, Revelation 5:9, I Corinthians 6:20

Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins. We are not slaves.

That is exactly what we are. At least that is what we should see ourselves as. Paul on numerous ocassions pointed out that he was a bond servant as did others.

We are adopted into God's family.

We are born into the family, while adoption has yet to occur.

 

[Allan]

Well actually Alan you didn't quite portray my beliefs 100% accurately, but that's not surprising not many do.

The salvation of the spirit is based on the finished works of Christ, not the soul as you typed in.

The salvation of the soul is based on a mixture of faith and works as virtually the entire NT tells us.

As far as the 1,000 years go there are definitely Christians that are going to miss the kingdom. They will not rule and reign with Christ, but they will receive the discipline that they should have received now. Unfortunately many a Christian according to Scripture does not receive discipline and therefore are considered illigetimate, according to Hebrews.

Hopefully that clarifies at least for Allan

Scripture only allows for one interpretation, and anything outside of seeing the difference between the salvation of the spirit and the salvation of the soul will only lead to contradictions, which can not exist, because God's Word is perfect and without error.

No it was not intentional to mislead about your views. I get the two confused as to which one will be in Hell for the 1000 years while Christ reigns.

I only stated it because that was some of what you were trying to get across to Claudia as them ALL being saved (which they are not) but they are locked out due to disobedience.

Sorry for misrepresenting your veiws.

 

[Allan]

Actually I forgot to make comment on this comment of Allan's. Allan that is not what I believe. I'm not sure why you typed that, but the Christian in hell does not save the spirit of the man. The spirit of the man is already saved or not before the end of this life whether it be by death or by rapture.

What you have typed is probably closer to what the Catholics teach and that is not what I believe.

So instead of posting my beliefs on my behalf, you could have and should have just said that you were referring to my post and directed Claudia to ask for clarification if she needed any. You have only muddied the water. Hopefully it wasn't intentional. :wavey:

Then where do you believe the Christians who are excluded from the thousand year reign will be and what will they be doing??

I know that you believe a persons spirit can be saved and at the same time that their soul can be lost. So they can be children of God but not Sons of God.

I might be mistaken here but I thought you held to the the Kingdom Exclusivism and the theology it espouses?? That might be my misunderstanding. However you have affirmed what I stated but corrected my misinformation.

 

[EdSutton]

Us giving back to Him what is really His.

No, Claudia, that is not what you have said, previously. Please think about what you say, and less confusion should result. You have said when we 'buy' we are just 'giving back to God what is already and rightfully His', to begin with.

If that is the case (which is not the meaning of "buy" in any sense), does it not follow that 'when God 'buys' us i.e. "redeems" us "out of the slave-market of sin," He then really just 'gives back to us what is rightfully ours'? We are now set free from the 'slave-market' for as God has purchased us with something far more precious than earthly 'riches', namely His own blood -

18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. (I Pet. 1:18-19 - NKJV)

Scripture then says that we are to designed be a "love-slave", one that is not 'bound' anymore, but stays with the One who redeemed us, because of love. There is a tremendous difference between the two, the 'freed' 'love-slave' and the one who is bound, and not free. The book of Philemon describes just such a one in Onesimus, and speaks to both conditions in one individual, BTW. It has some geat insights, and the book of Ruth shows the great type of the 'Goel' Redeemer of Christ, by the picture of Boaz 'redeeming' Ruth.

Ed

 

[Claudia_T]

No, Claudia, that is not what you have said, previously. Please think about what you say, and less confusion should result. You have said when we 'buy' we are just 'giving back to God what is already and rightfully His', to begin with.

If that is the case (which is not the meaning of "buy" in any sense), does it not follow that 'when God 'buys' us i.e. "redeems" us "out of the slave-market of sin," He then really just 'gives back to us what is rightfully ours'? We are now set free from the 'slave-market' for as God has purchased us with something far more precious than earthly 'riches', namely His own blood - Scripture then says that we are to designed be a "love-slave", one that is not 'bound' anymore, but stays with the One who redeemed us, because of love. There is a tremendous difference between the two, the 'freed' 'love-slave' and the one who is bound, and not free. The book of Philemon describes just such a one in Onesimus, and speaks to both conditions in one individual, BTW. It has some geat insights, and the book of Ruth shows the great type of the 'Goel' Redeemer of Christ, by the picture of Boaz 'redeeming' Ruth.

Ed

well all Ive said was that....

1Cor:6:20: For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

If I said anything different than it would be just us giving back what was rightfully God's then you'll have to show me because I dont remember...

Jesus bought us and paid the price...

and so when we give Him our sinful hearts to purify and cleanse we are merely giving back to God what is rightfully His.


I dont know where I said anything any different than that.

but it seems like on here no matter WHAT I say, by the time people get all done commenting upon it, its unrecognizable from anything I originally said anyway


its like BobR always says, they will just "make stuff up"

its as simple as can be Jesus is the Pearl of great Price and that parable has double meaning. To Jesus, we are the Pearl of Great Price. He paid the highest price for us.... and in return we are to just give God back what is then rightfully His. He "bought us with a price" and we are to give God our sinful hearts to purify and cleanse.

(I figure if I say this once every few posts maybe someone will get it)


1Cor:6:20: For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.


It is a very simple, biblical concept... see it? RIGHT HERE:


1Cor:6:20: "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."

that means you are now HIS

and thus you are not to just go around doing whatever you please/(that would be the part in green)

Claudia

 

[J. Jump]

No it was not intentional to mislead about your views. Sorry for misrepresenting your veiws.

Thanks for clearing that up!!!

I only stated it because that was some of what you were trying to get across to Claudia as them ALL being saved (which they are not) but they are locked out due to disobedience.

Unfortunately there is nothing in that passage that indicates there are five saved and five unsaved. All the evidence is that they are all saved. There were 10 of them which means completeness. They were all the same. They were split up because of disobedience as you say.

Whether we are obedient or disobedient doesn't have anything to do with our salvation. That's what I've been trying to get Claudia to see. The whole context is not a context of eternal (spiritual) salvation, but of the kingdom of the heavens.

The only ones that can even be in view in that context are saved individuals.

Then where do you believe the Christians who are excluded from the thousand year reign will be and what will they be doing??

The Bible explains it as hell or outer darkness. They will be receiving the disicipline they should have received during this lifetime.

For some reason Christendom believes that God is just going to let all flavors of Christians rule and reign with the Son. But the Bible tells us otherwise in a number of different ways.

I know that you believe a persons spirit can be saved and at the same time that their soul can be lost. So they can be children of God but not Sons of God.

Absolutely. That's what the Bible teaches, so I believe it.

I might be mistaken here but I thought you held to the the Kingdom Exclusivism and the theology it espouses??

I do believe in the word of the kingdom, or the gospel of the kingdom as it is called in Scripture.

 

[Claudia_T]

Giving Glory to God

Actually, I have told about this Bible verse that says because you were bought with a price (the death of Jesus on the cross) you now belong to GOD and are not free to do whatever you please; you are to give your wicked heart to God to cleanse and purify through the washing and regeneration of the Holy Spirit. How do you GLORIFY God?

1Cor:6:20: For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.


Revelation 14:6-12 tells you how to GLORIFY God... read it:


Revelation 14:

6: And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
7: Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
12: Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.



You keep God's commandments, thats how you give glory to Him, You reveal His character of love to the world so that through you, they see God.

Then they know what God is like..


Mt:5:16: Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

1Cor:6:20: For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.


Understand? WE ARE NOT OUR OWN ANYMORE!!! Jesus BOUGHT US... we now belong to Him.

READ IT PEOPLE!!! Read:


2Cor:5:15: And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.



THAT IS WHY JESUS DIED FOR YOU! He bought you.

 

[Allan]

Bump, bump, bump.

 

[EdSutton]

Bump, bump, bump.

Is that the sound of one doing this three times?? :BangHead:

Just curious! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[Amy.G]

Claudia was banned?