Decisional Regeneration & Baptismal Regeneration

[ascund]

Hey Andy

Yes! By God's Word I have exposed your self-righteous condemnation of God's chosen method of evangelism.

I myself stand prepared to be judged according to this same method. Jesus alone!

Rather than say "oh well" as if you give up knowing you are right and I'm wrong - - examine your heart and repent.

Practice what you think you preach.
Lloyd

 

[Andy T.]

Lloyd,

A method of evangelism that does not talk about sin, sin's judgment, repentance is not God's "chosen method of evangelism". Those were the methods I was talking about. DR (again - read my earlier posts - DR is fluid and is not easily nailed down) tends to emphasize this type of "evangelism".

Also, evangelism that emphasizes that we are saved by our choice or decision is faulty, too. We are not saved by our choice. We are saved by the grace of the Father through Jesus Christ his Son. Faith is the instrument and we need to communicate that. A positive response must be made by the individual. Again, this comes down to emphases. Some evangelism techniques make the Gospel offer about as ho-hum as going to the store and picking out cereal; it makes the recipient into a mere consumer that must "choose Jesus". I'm not saying someone can't be saved under a flawed presentation like that - God can certainly use it to save someone.

Hope that clears things up a little.

By the way, you said this:

By God's Word I have exposed your self-righteous condemnation of God's chosen method of evangelism.

What was self-righteous about my supposed condemnation? I mean, maybe we disagree on evangelism techniques - you could say that my condemnation was mis-informed or ignorant, but how do you know it was self-righteous? Do you somehow know my heart?

 

[ascund]

Hey Andy

I just wrote a post and it got lost.

Your last post was really helpful. YOu did a good job articulating your concerns about DR.

Now, rather than talk about justification versus sanctification, we need to refine our discussions regarding justification.

John wrote his gospel for the express purpose that his readers might believe in Jesus and have eternal life (John 20:31). NOWHERE in his gospel or epistles does he use the word "repent."

You are dangerously close to MacArthur's Lordship Salvation here. Repentance comes in two flavors.

The unsaved need to "change their mind" about Jesus.

The saved need to "change their mind" about personal sins.

I think you have mistakenly taken a worthy concept applicable to saved sinners and wrongly forced it upon the unsaved sinners. This is just a subtle shift in terminology from the Catholic/CoC requirement for "obedience."

Who is able to clean up their act sufficiently enough for God to reward them with justification? If repentance were required, it is a sure bet that even the best of repentant hearts would yet be filthy rags (Isa 64:6).

Lloyd

 

[Andy T.]

Lloyd,

I don't want to get into the repentance debate at this time. No matter how you define or qualify repentance, it must be included in the Gospel message, even if you are just telling people to "repent about Jesus". That's my beef with many evangelism techniques. The definition of repentance is not my concern here.

 

[ascund]

Hey Andy T

Repent about Jesus is far different than repent about personal sins before you believe in Jesus.

The former is the gospel; the latter the blatant error of Lordship Salvation.

The definition of repentance is critical. One cannot grab the definition from one context and thrust it upon another context.

Justification if by faith alone (repentance about Jesus is a synonym). Justification is NOT by faith with repentance about personal sins.

Lloyd