Destiny of the un-evangelized

[steaver]

Brother Steaver,

Did all or even most of the religious people of Jesus's day agree with the truth he preached? No they tried to kill Him. I don't take census polls to determine if a doctrine is true, if I did, I bet we would end up concluding mankind is saved by doing good works.

God bless,

Brother Joe

We are discussing the born again here reading scripture, not people in general.

We probably interpret even the verse you gave me of "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved" differently. I do not interpret the "believe" in this verse to be causative (i.e. the reason the person is saved), but merely an evidence that they are saved, but you on the other hand probably believe it means you need to believe to get saved (if you don't please let me know). Big difference!

As far as if we all just read the scriptures with each other there would be no divisions this is not true as God has not given grace to every man to see that the scriptures merely testify of Jesus and that he alone saves. This is why Jesus said to those most well versed in scripture in His day, "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." (John 5:39).

God bless,

Brother

Again, we are not talking about ALL people reading the scripture. But ALL who are in Christ have the same Holy Spirit teaching them application as they read.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

We are discussing the born again here reading scripture, not people in general.



Again, we are not talking about ALL people reading the scripture. But ALL who are in Christ have the same Holy Spirit teaching them application as they read.

Brother Steaver,

Those who believe in the 5 points and those who don't come to very different conclusions from reading the same Bible. I don't believe people from either group who truly believe Jesus is the Christ, rose again, and died for their sins are lost, do you? If not, why do you think they come to different conclusions even though they have the same Holy Spirit? One group is having the flesh get in the way. Which group has "the flesh" performing that which is pleasing to God (i.e. believing the gospel) while not yet having the Holy Spirit? Did not Paul say "So then they that are in the flesh cannot (total inability) please God." (Romans 8:8), but if one can repent and believe the gospel without the spirit, while yet only in the flesh, how then can Romans 8:8 be true? We can both agree that both groups cannot be right. Do you believe these issues on how one becomes born again and the purpose of the gospel are not big enough to divide over?

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[Rebel]

Brother Steaver,

Those who believe in the 5 points and those who don't come to very different conclusions from reading the same Bible. I don't believe people from either group who truly believe Jesus is the Christ, rose again, and died for their sins are lost, do you? If not, why do you think they come to different conclusions even though they have the same Holy Spirit? One group is having the flesh get in the way. Which group has "the flesh" performing that which is pleasing to God (i.e. believing the gospel) while not yet having the Holy Spirit? Did not Paul say "So then they that are in the flesh cannot (total inability) please God." (Romans 8:8), but if one can repent and believe the gospel without the spirit, while yet only in the flesh, how then can Romans 8:8 be true? We can both agree that both groups cannot be right. Do you believe these issues on how one becomes born again and the purpose of the gospel are not big enough to divide over?

God bless,

Brother Joe

Although not addressed to me, let me respond to the highlighted part of your post: This is an unfair characterization.

Further, let me suggest this: Instead of saying that both groups cannot be right, could it not be that both groups are partially right? Or do you believe it is possible to be 100% correct 100% of the time? I do not, and I think Paul agrees, seeing that he said we all see through a glass darkly.

Considering all that, let me ask you then: Do you think this is something to divide over? If so, how many divisions are acceptable? Are they acceptable to the point that one reaches a place where he can have fellowship only with himself?

I have strong views on these issues, but I don't believe I would exclude those who disagree with me from fellowship, either within a church or outside it.

 

[Rebel]

Hi Brother Rebel,

Primitive Baptists differ from reformed theology on justification in that we maintain legal justification is based solely on the blood of Christ, not faith. We understand justification by faith in a different way than reformed theology.

Justification by Blood (Rom 5:9). This is legal justification in the sight of God. This happened ONCE in the history of all the Earth, when Christ made Himself an offering on the Cross. When Christ was made an offering for sins, God the Father was pleased with the Son's sacrifice and we were legally justified (declared just). This verdict occurs in God's courtroom! "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." (Romans 5:9)

Justification by Faith (Rom 4). This is experiential. In short, when a born again person trusts solely in Christ's power to raise the dead, that faith is "counted unto him" for righteousness. The reality of being redeemed (justified by blood) is understood by the believer. That person, upon believing, experiences peace with God (5:1).

Paul's two examples of justification by faith are Abraham and David.

Abraham - According to Paul in Romans 4, Abraham was justified by faith in Genesis 15:6 when he believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Notice though, that Abraham left Ur in Genesis 12:1. According to Hebrews 11, Abraham left Ur by faith. According to Galatians 5:22, faith is a fruit of the Spirit. According to Hebrews 12:2, Christ authors Faith in a person. In short, no one has faith without first being born again (1 John 5:1). Faith is a product of the New Birth, when God writes His laws upon our hearts, and teaches us to “know Him” (Heb 8).

According to Reformed Theology however, justification by faith comes at the identical time as the new birth. Yet, we find Abraham walking by faith 15 years prior to the event in which he was “justified by faith,” all the way back in Genesis 12:1. Hmm...how can one walk by faith for over a decade prior to being justified by faith, if justification by faith and the new birth are synonyms? Simple, that idea is erroneous.

Abraham walked by faith, worship God, etc., prior to believing in Christ's power to raise his dead body in a reproductive sense. He was already born again. But, when he believed God's promise, his redeemed state with God was felt and he was justified on the level of his conscience. The legal fact was now a felt reality.

So what is Justification by faith? It is when a Child of God by God's power believes in Christ's atonement , he is now aware on the level of his conscience to be just, and experiences peace with God. This is experiential.

Justification by works (James 2). This occurs in the “courtroom of others' opinions.” By good works, we show ourselves to be righteous to other people. To quote James 2, we “show our faith by our works.”


To sum up, 3 justifications-

•By blood: God's courtroom.


•By faith: The courtroom of a believer's conscience.


•By works: The courtroom of onlookers' opinions.


God bless,

Brother Joe

Thank you for your answer. I won't comment further except to say that I cannot relate to the way you see justification and salvation. I hold to early church views, not those which came 1000 - 1500 years later. The early churches knew nothing of this legal, courtroom view.

 

[SovereignGrace]

..................

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Thank you for your answer. I won't comment further except to say that I cannot relate to the way you see justification and salvation. I hold to early church views, not those which came 1000 - 1500 years later. The early churches knew nothing of this legal, courtroom view.

Why am I not surprised :laugh:

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Further, let me suggest this: Instead of saying that both groups cannot be right, could it not be that both groups are partially right? Or do you believe it is possible to be 100% correct 100% of the time?

.

Hi Brother Rebel,

No, I do not feel those who hold to the five points are in error. No it is not possible in the flesh to be right 100% of the time, but in regards to salvation through the Holy Spirit scripture makes it clear one can come to a understanding of the gospel,"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things" (1 John 2:27) and "13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth...:" (John 16:13a)

Considering all that, let me ask you then: Do you think this is something to divide over? If so, how many divisions are acceptable? Are they acceptable to the point that one reaches a place where he can have fellowship only with himself?

I have strong views on these issues, but I don't believe I would exclude those who disagree with me from fellowship, either within a church or outside it.

I do not believe one who doesn't believe in the 5 points of doctrines of grace should join a church that has that in their confession of faith , otherwise how is the church to maintain the "the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:13)? As far as divisions go, I believe God has preserved throughout all ages His true church, " Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages" (Ephesians 3:21), thus the Baptist church did not go through Rome, but has existed since the time of the apostles. The true church doesn't divide, but has those who do divide and leave it when they end up adhering to heresies.

I would be friends with someone who disagrees with the doctrines of grace, but would not have church fellowship with such who are not of the same faith and order.

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[steaver]

Brother Steaver,

Those who believe in the 5 points and those who don't come to very different conclusions from reading the same Bible. I don't believe people from either group who truly believe Jesus is the Christ, rose again, and died for their sins are lost, do you? If not, why do you think they come to different conclusions even though they have the same Holy Spirit? One group is having the flesh get in the way. Which group has "the flesh" performing that which is pleasing to God (i.e. believing the gospel) while not yet having the Holy Spirit? Did not Paul say "So then they that are in the flesh cannot (total inability) please God." (Romans 8:8), but if one can repent and believe the gospel without the spirit, while yet only in the flesh, how then can Romans 8:8 be true? We can both agree that both groups cannot be right. Do you believe these issues on how one becomes born again and the purpose of the gospel are not big enough to divide over?

God bless,

Brother Joe

Those in the flesh ( having not the Spirit of Christ) cannot please God. The only way they can please God is to surrender oneself to Jesus Christ and receive Him as LORD.

"If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water."

"In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink".

If one has the living water already, they have no thirst and no need to ask again for it.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Thank you for your answer. I won't comment further except to say that I cannot relate to the way you see justification and salvation. I hold to early church views, not those which came 1000 - 1500 years later. The early churches knew nothing of this legal, courtroom view.

Brother Rebel,

How do you then reconcile the scriptures that talk of one being # 1 "justified by faith" #2 justified by works, and #3 justified by blood? Do you believe these are all the same thing?

The example of Abraham being saved prior to being "justified by faith" proves that one is born again prior to being justified by faith. They are not simultaneous occurrences as Abraham's example makes clear. Was not Abraham Paul's primary example of one being "justified by faith" in Romans when he, " believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Romans 4:3)

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[steaver]

As far as divisions go, I believe God has preserved throughout all ages His true church, " Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages" (Ephesians 3:21), thus the Baptist church did not go through Rome, but has existed since the time of the apostles. The true church doesn't divide, but has those who do divide and leave it who end up adhering to certain heresies as John tells us, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John 2:19).

God bless,

Brother Joe

So only those holding to your own beliefs concerning the gospel are God's "true church"?

The true church doesn't divide, but has those who do divide and leave it who end up adhering to certain heresies as John tells us, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John 2:19).

Only those holding to the same statements of faith as your church does are God's true church?

These John tells us about are not saved. John is not talking about Christians with different views.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Those in the flesh ( having not the Spirit of Christ) cannot please God. The only way they can please God is to surrender oneself to Jesus Christ and receive Him as LORD.

.

Brother Steaver,

I agree with the first sentence of yours, but you contradicted yourself by making an exception to the rule you laid out in the first sentence in your second sentence above. Scripture does not make an exception, but merely says, "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:8), therefore those believing the gospel must first have the Spirit to believe.

Brother Joe

 

[steaver]

Brother Rebel,

How do you then reconcile the scriptures that talk of one being # 1 "justified by faith" #2 justified by works, and #3 justified by blood? Do you believe these are all the same thing?

The example of Abraham being saved prior to being "justified by faith" proves that one is born again prior to being justified by faith. They are not simultaneous occurrences as Abraham's example makes clear. Was not Abraham Paul's primary example of one being "justified by faith" in Romans when he, " believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Romans 4:3)

God bless,

Brother Joe

There was no such thing as "born again" prior to the glorification of Jesus Christ (John 7). Calvinist are obligated to believe there was, even without any scripture support of it at all, in order to propagate the doctrine of rebirth precedes belief.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

So only those holding to your own beliefs concerning the gospel are God's "true church"?.

Brother Steaver,

They are not my beliefs, but the Bible's.

These John tells us about are not saved. John is not talking about Christians with different views.

Yes, I agree with you here regarding those that John says "went out from us" were not saved, I shouldn't have used that example. I wasn't thinking about those he speaks of were actually unsaved when I posted it.

Brother Joe

 

[steaver]

Brother Steaver,

I agree with the first sentence of yours, but you contradicted yourself by making an exception to the rule you laid out in the first sentence in your second sentence above. Scripture does not make an exception, but merely says, "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:8), therefore those believing the gospel must first have the Spirit to believe.

Brother Joe

The "therefore" you are concluding is totally of your own making. All of Calvinism's errors spin off of this one fallacy, which is the Holy Spirit rebirth precedes faith and that it also is nothing "new", even though God said He was going to do a new thing and have a new covenant. The Calvinist says "no, nothing new going on". So if one reads the Scripture having this fallacy embedded upon the mind, all of these Scriptures will be misinterpreted and misapplied.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

There was no such thing as "born again" prior to the glorification of Jesus Christ (John 7). Calvinist are obligated to believe there was, even without any scripture support of it at all, in order to propagate the doctrine of rebirth precedes belief.

Brother Steaver,

If there was no being "born again" prior to Jesus's glorification why did Jesus tell Nicodemus prior to His glorification "... Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3)?

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I do not believe one who doesn't believe in the 5 points of doctrines of grace should join a church that has that in their confession of faith , otherwise how is the church to maintain the "the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:13)? As far as divisions go, I believe God has preserved throughout all ages His true church, " Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages" (Ephesians 3:21), thus the Baptist church did not go through Rome, but has existed since the time of the apostles. The true church doesn't divide, but has those who do divide and leave it when they end up adhering to heresies.

I would be friends with someone who disagrees with the doctrines of grace, but would not have church fellowship with such who are not of the same faith and order.

Brother Joe

Here I am in agreement with you....conversely, I personally will not join a church that doesn't agree with it. I have learned the best thing to do is tell the prospective pastor up front that I believe in DoG. You'd be surprised how many inquiry calls never get followed up after you disclose it. Being Amil is the other issue. Honestly, no big deal for me. :thumbs:

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Here I am in agreement with you....conversely, I personally will not join a church that doesn't agree with it. I have learned the best thing to do is tell the prospective pastor up front that I believe in DoG. You'd be surprised how many inquiry calls never get followed up after you disclose it. Being Amil is the other issue. Honestly, no big deal for me. :thumbs:

I agree. Amil is not a big deal to me either.

 

[Scott J]

Hogwash. You're adhering to one of the lamest 'explain aways' of immediate regeneration there is. So many there are that just cannot accept the simple truth of Jn 3:8.

13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:
14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Ro 2

These are DOERS of the law, and they're declared justified.

If you're hung up on 'their conscience bearing witness', compare it with this:

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit,

...or this:

16 The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: Ro 8

Nothing in that rant answered my simple point.

If you want to relate John 3:8 then you need to do so WITHOUT assuming your premise or your conclusion.

Shortly after writing what you quoted, Paul stated very clearly that there are NONE that do good. ALL have gone out of the way.

I am at somewhat of a disadvantage since I do not know what you believe outside of the few posts you've made in this thread. I assume by your somewhat indignant response that you believe in some form of "progressive" or works based regeneration? Talk about having to explain away scripture... you have to if you believe that.

 

[Scott J]

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

I personally have not found any who believe or teach any such doctrine. It seems you have come across some who do. Could you please provide sources of those who teach this?

Did you misunderstand or are you intentionally being obtuse?

 

[kyredneck]

....Shortly after writing what you quoted, Paul stated very clearly that there are NONE that do good. ALL have gone out of the way....

….the doers of the law shall be justified Ro 2:13

…by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified… Ro 3:20


...when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law... Ro 2:14

...There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one: Ro 3:12

Yea, what's up with that, was Paul getting senile?