So, as usual Jon. we disagree.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is Spiritual death a Biblical Concept then?
- Thread starter JesusFan
- Start date
So, as usual Jon. we disagree.
That is where our views differ.
I view that those elementary things, that foundation, was the OT and the audience being encouraged to move on to a mature Hebrew faith in the New Covenant.
I believe this is the benefit we can gain from discussing God's Word and different interpretations. We certainly do not have to agree, but we can walk away knowing why the other holds the understanding they hold. Each of us accept Scripture and each of us hold a legitimate and logical understanding of Scripture but both of us do so based on our understanding of the context of Hebrews.
I am not one who opposes different views. In fact, I believe we benefit as a whole by discussing these differences. As long as the basis remains a faithfulness to God's Word we have the common ground to have a discussion.
In the end our difference here does not matter. What we differ about is not salvation or who is saved from the wrath to come at Judgment, but whether those who are not saved once was.
It does not matter for two important reasons:
1. We hold the sane ultimate conclusion - those who reject Christ are not saved.
2. The issue of those who reject Christ is not the focus of Hebrews.
Our benefit, although we will never come to the same conclusion, is that we gather around God's Word.
All you need to do to be correct is agree with me, but wrong people are interesting in their own way too.
That is where our views differ.
I view that those elementary things, that foundation, was the OT and the audience being encouraged to move on to a mature Hebrew faith in the New Covenant.
I believe this is the benefit we can gain from discussing God's Word and different interpretations. We certainly do not have to agree, but we can walk away knowing why the other holds the understanding they hold. Each of us accept Scripture and each of us hold a legitimate and logical understanding of Scripture but both of us do so based on our understanding of the context of Hebrews.
I am not one who opposes different views. In fact, I believe we benefit as a whole by discussing these differences. As long as the basis remains a faithfulness to God's Word we have the common ground to have a discussion.
In the end our difference here does not matter. What we differ about is not salvation or who is saved from the wrath to come at Judgment, but whether those who are not saved once was.
It does not matter for two important reasons:
1. We hold the sane ultimate conclusion - those who reject Christ are not saved.
2. The issue of those who reject Christ is not the focus of Hebrews.
Our benefit, although we will never come to the same conclusion, is that we gather around God's Word.
All you need to do to be correct is agree with me, but wrong people are interesting in their own way too.
Yes, I can see that if I don't agree with you, I'm wrong, lol.
That is the first step to wisdom, Grasshopper.
I see I am late to this parade, as we are now on page 6.
Being physically alive yet somehow "dead in sin, flesh, wrongdoing, etc" is a biblical concept.
See Ephesians 2:1, 2:5 and, Colossians 2:13.
Next we have the idea that at some time we "died" our spiritual death in sin. This I think is misleading, as I believe we are conceived in sin, so when God forms our human spirit within our physical body, it is in some manner "dead."
I believe this "dead" condition is to be spiritually separated from God, He is Holy and our sinful condition as "made sinners" means we are separated from our holy God. Now, being dead means to be disabled in various ways. Physically we cannot move, communicate, or be aware because our body returns to dust. Spiritually we cannot move, meaning change our location from being "in Adam" or "in the realm of darkness" to being "in Christ" or "in the kingdom of His marvelous light." We cannot do anything, as all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags to God, to earn, merit, cause our salvation, as only God can transfer us into Christ where we are made alive together with Christ.
Some add other consequences to being spiritually dead, such as total spiritual inability, but his is an argument from silence to be kind.
Being physically alive yet somehow "dead in sin, flesh, wrongdoing, etc" is a biblical concept.
See Ephesians 2:1, 2:5 and, Colossians 2:13.
Next we have the idea that at some time we "died" our spiritual death in sin. This I think is misleading, as I believe we are conceived in sin, so when God forms our human spirit within our physical body, it is in some manner "dead."
I believe this "dead" condition is to be spiritually separated from God, He is Holy and our sinful condition as "made sinners" means we are separated from our holy God. Now, being dead means to be disabled in various ways. Physically we cannot move, communicate, or be aware because our body returns to dust. Spiritually we cannot move, meaning change our location from being "in Adam" or "in the realm of darkness" to being "in Christ" or "in the kingdom of His marvelous light." We cannot do anything, as all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags to God, to earn, merit, cause our salvation, as only God can transfer us into Christ where we are made alive together with Christ.
Some add other consequences to being spiritually dead, such as total spiritual inability, but his is an argument from silence to be kind.
That is the first step to wisdom, Grasshopper.
LOL, Grasshopper's master was a blind man.
Oh, you're one of those young whipper snappers!
Yes....Kung Fu, Beretta, Barnaby Jones, Columbo, Barney Miller, Sanford & Sons.......
I missed those silent movie days, too young
Yes....Kung Fu, Beretta, Barnaby Jones, Columbo, Barney Miller, Sanford & Sons.......
I missed those silent movie days, too young
LOL, I remember them well! Back when tv shows were decent to watch.
I will just keep on rambling then with likes of Calvin, Spurgeon, Packer, Carson etc, as their theology in many ways mirrors my own, and all gotten from the bible
You would do much better to turn to God rather than men.
The problem you have is you seem completely unable to justify your theories with Scripture.
The reason you gave for for your belief is the men you follow are "smarter" than you. Well, Stephen Hawking was probably smarter than you as well. Are you going to become an atheist?
Until you can provide Scripture you really have no Christian ground to hold your theory.
It appears you simply chose a camp and drank the kool-aid.
Until you can defend your theory using God's Word the belief you hold is not yours - it is a borrowed belief to which you have no legitimate right.
Take my conversation with @Charlie24 for an example. He believes one can lose their salvation. I do not.
BUT each of us defended our view with Scripture. We both know where we disagree and why (and how we interpret the passages of concern differently). We know this because we went to the common ground of God's Word.
Had I said I believe eternal security because Tim Keller, John Calvin, and Spurgeon believed it and they are smarter than us.....well....that would be saying that I'm appropriating another's beliefs. And it would be a foolish argument because @Charlie24 is not obligated as a Christian to believe something because John Calvin taught it.
You really should prioritize God over men and look to His Word to determine doctrine. When you do that you will have a biblical position, even if we disagree on the interpretation of Scripture.
By following men rather than God you are standing on very weak ground.
Are you saying you look at what these men write , to make them an idol, or you read their writing to see what they taught about scripture?
When we read any post on a board, we are after all reading another persons take on scripture. Is that what you are saying?
If you go by what Paul said, "Let us move on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works" there can be no doubt "the laying again" is referring to the Law that demanded works.
So, the principles of the Doctrine of Christ are the first principles found in the OT.
And "moving on" would be to the New Testament/New Covenant in Christ.
But I can see that there are doubts on this, and everything else if you think about it.
I agree with your view of the "milk". I view the OT as foreshadowing the New Covenant, in a sence the "milk" preparing for the "meat".
But I also understand those who believe the "milk" refers to the gospel while the "meat" refers to Christian growth.
My argument would be that up to this passage the previous chapters appear to support the former view as what had been discussed was angles, Moses, Joshua, the levitical priesthood, etc.
Some also view Hebrews not to have been written to a Hebrew audience.
The audience greatly affects the context (like where we depart is I view the passage addressing potential Jewish converts while you view them as converts).
The cool thing is this really does not matter in the end because we view the lost as lost, whether or not they were at one time saved. This also does not affect discipleship because where you may warn of losing one's faith I would warn of being deceived into thinking that faith is present.
I have one question (that you probably answered but me, being blind like Master Po, probably missed).
Do you believe a person who was saved and then turned from the faith can be saved again?
NO, they can't, Paul makes it clear there can be no repentance after departing from Christ.
This is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, forcing Him to depart, and it will not be forgiven.
But let's not confuse this with backsliding! the backslider still has faith and remains saved.
Several scholars I have read say that the person who willingly departs from Christ, which Paul is warning against in Hebrews, will never want to come back to Christ.
But the problem of departing from Christ is much deeper than what's illustrated in Hebrews.
We can depart from Christ by shifting our faith from Christs' finished work to something else and the result is the same as what we see in Hebrews.
Such as seeing our salvation coming from a pool of water, or if we begin to believe that merely being elected by God counts as our salvation, or maybe believing your denominational beliefs are the way to God, etc.
Our faith must be grounded in the finished work of Christ or there is no salvation.
Thanks.
We agree on backsliding...I think.
While we do disagree on losing salvation, we don't have as wide as disagreement as most here.
The reason is I tend (whether right or wrong) to view salvation as being saved from the wrath to come (saved from a future judgment). We use "saved" in the present tense to refer to a present reality only God can know. It is for this reason I believe we are told to test our faith lest we have an unbelieving heart.
The only thing, and I mean the only thing, that saves us from the wrath sure to come, is our faith in what Christ did for us in His death, burial, and resurrection. That's it, nothing else can save us, and if you don't have this type of faith when they plant you in the ground, you're not going to make it.
Exactly. This is what I mean by being "saved" today means being saved at Judgment. Either one is saved (at Judgment will be saved) or they are not saved (they will perish).