Kingdom Exclusion

[StraightAndNarrow]

If you would, clarify this question please. I'm not sure I understand.

The word "salvation" must be rightly divided (Acts 27:31)

A Christian has already been "obedient" to the call of salvation (in the eternal sense) when he obeyed the gospel and believed uopn Christ and his finished work.

Afterwards an eternally-secure Christian ought to obey the call to salvation in the second sense. (Which is salvation from chastening) Rom 11:21-22, Gal 6:7-9, Phil 2:12,)

The first salvation is blood alone. It is based solely upon Christs finished work. It is a legal transaction. Christ's blood alone for our sin.

The second (so great salvation Heb2:1-3) is based upon our works, suffering, and obedience sanctified by Christ's blood. (Blood and water -John 3)

Both can be seen in 1 Peter 1:18-23.

Lacy

(More to come)

There's only ONE type of salvation and there's only ONE Judgement.

 

[Hope of Glory]

That doesn’t mean that the standard fare is for someone that doesn’t agree with your kingdom teachings is anymore dishonest or honorable than the one who is trying to teach it

Then why are there those here who disagree who are able to discuss and/or debate the issue without slandering, misquoting, and/or lying about what was said? Why are there those who confront the Scriptures, and present a rebuttal, and can agree or disagree, but the majority claim that you said things you never said, and when asked to back it up, they never have time to do so?

 

[J. Jump]

I’m not going to circle with you on this issue

Benjamin I'm not trying to dance with you all I want you to do is back up your accusations with some facts. If you say that I directly called you spiritually blind then just provide proof positive of that. See that's what I don't like is people coming on these boards and saying you said this and that and then not providing evidence of it.

And instead of ponying up with your support to back up your claims you give me this nonsense about not whating to argue or circle with me on the issue. But I just want people to know that I have never said that to you and don't say those kind of things to people.

Now I'm not saying that I'm perfect and if I did slip up and say something like that then I want to see it.

but I made my position clear and will not go back into it.

Here I'm not sure what you are speaking about. Are you saying you made your position clear that I said that, because if that is the case your position is not clear and will not be clear until you post some facts instead of accusations.

If you are talking about your position on the kingdom then again I would say that you have not laid out your position very clearly, because all you have said about the kingdom is that it's Christ's and we are Christ's. That's not very clear at all. And it certainly doesn't explain the numerous contradictions between works and faith in passages that you say are eternal salvation passages. But if you don't want to discuss these things that is fine, but don't come on and say you have stated your position clearly.

 

[J. Jump]

There's only ONE type of salvation and there's only ONE Judgement.

Care to explain then why the Bible speaks of different salvations and different judgments?

 

[DeafPosttrib]

J.J.,

Please show us, where in the Bible teaching on different judgments and different salvations?

 

[J. Jump]

Well I'm sure you are already aware of the judgment of believers in which every believer will stand before Christ to give an account of his/her deeds done in the flesh whether good or bad.

And then I'm sure you are also aware of the Great White Throne judgment where every unsaved person will stand before the Judge before stepping into eternity.

Matthew 25 shows us there is a judgment that is post rapture, pre-Great White Throne, so there is at least three.

And there is the salvation of the spirit, which is by God's grace alone through the finished and substitutionary works of Christ alone (Acts 16:30-31 and Eph. 2:8-9)

And then there is the salvation of the soul which is based upon works eminating out of one's faith with the believer (saint, disciple) being transformed into the image of Christ from faith to faith and from glory to glory.

This is a salvation that will come at the end of faith. It is a salvation that will take place in the future.

The Bible discusses salvation in that I have been saved (past/spirit), I am being saved (present salvation which is the salvation of the soul if someone is being faithful, obedient and overcoming) and I will be saved in the future (which again has to do with the salvation of the soul and I think has to do with the salvation of the physical body).

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Lacy Evans,

Please show us where a single verse saying that a lazy servant/ disobedient Christian shall be finally released out of hell beyond the judgment day?

Also, the Bible clearly teaching us hell shall be cast into the lake of fire is the final futuer eternity punishment. Many believe hell is a temporary place. That is not true. Hell is a "reserved place" await for the great white throne, SO, the hell shall be cast into the lake of ifre. Hell is always an evelasting destiny for people who reject Jesus Christ, disobedience, and lazy servants. Nowhere in the Bible saying hell is a temporary.

Kingdom Exclusion sounds like as purgatory to me.

Nowhere in the Bible saying that the 'kingdom' is so called millennial or temporary. Kingdom is a good news for the world. And also, it is an everlasting. Kingdom is included with the gospel of Jesus Christ, birth, Calvary, death,buried, resurrection, reign, salvation, everlasting life, etc. Nowhere in the Bible saying that the 'kingdom' is so called, 'a thousand years' or 'millennial kingdom', or temporary either.

Joey Faust can easily see conditional with warnings in the Bible. So, am I also. But, Joey Faust believes in eternal security salvation. That doctrine of eternal security salvation teaches, nothing of any kind of conditional can effect elect's salvation, long as elect is reamin always saved.

Yet, Faust believes elect shall be cast into hell but for temporary. HUH??? That is much conflict with eternal security salvation doctrine as what almost every independent fundament baptist(IFB) churches in America, are teaching.

Over 95% of IFB in America, do not believe backslider or Christian shall be cast away into hell. Because a Christian is already automatically already saved at once, no matter how long a Christian remain always saed, even, while not obey God, still go to heaven.

I can easily see conditional salvation with warnings in the Bible. There is so overhwhelemed evidences with verses in the Bible talking lot of warnings are apply to us as Christians. No way, we can afford to neglect God's Word with warnings. I rather follow what the Bible saying, than what men saying according Colossians 2:8.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Hope of Glory]

I can easily see conditional salvation with warnings in the Bible. There is so overhwhelemed evidences with verses in the Bible talking lot of warnings are apply to us as Christians. No way, we can afford to neglect God's Word with warnings. I rather follow what the Bible saying, than what men saying according Colossians 2:8.

The "conditional salvation" as you call it, you will find in relation to the salvation of the soul or life for the age. It's all about works.

Spiritual salvation (which, I guess you could call "unconditional salvation") is based on the finished work of the Lord Jesus on the cross, and is free for anyone who accepts it. There are no works on our part that are involved. It's irrevocable, unless the Bible lies. If the Bible lies, then it needs to be tossed in the nearest trash can.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Much of the "you said this", "No I said that, but you said this" could be taken care of in PMs . The Thread has gotten a little off topic. I have been around this subject long enough to know ho emotional of a topic it can be.

We all have the same Holy Spirit, and he gives us each particular gifts. We are all important in the discussion. The temptation is to move from the issues and the scriptures to personalities.

I'm not sure now if there is a good place to jump back on.

lacy

 

[Lacy Evans]

Lacy Evans,

Please show us where a single verse saying that a lazy servant/ disobedient Christian shall be finally released out of hell beyond the judgment day?

Rev 20:14 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Only those NOT in the book are cast into the eternal lake of fire. What about those who are found written in the book of life? It is a very plain and simple scripture, unless you would argue that it is just a saying. (Unless you think that it really means, "Since no one was found written in the book of life,
EVERYBODY was cast into the Lake of fire.)

Matt 18:34 - till What does 'till mean?

 

[Benjamin]

[/font]

Benjamin I'm not trying to dance with you all I want you to do is back up your accusations with some facts. If you say that I directly called you spiritually blind then just provide proof positive of that. See that's what I don't like is people coming on these boards and saying you said this and that and then not providing evidence of it.

And instead of ponying up with your support to back up your claims you give me this nonsense about not whating to argue or circle with me on the issue. But I just want people to know that I have never said that to you and don't say those kind of things to people.

Now I'm not saying that I'm perfect and if I did slip up and say something like that then I want to see it.

I expect you could deny intent of the directness but the pattern in comparisons suggests otherwise and is revealing. The whole thing would not have even been brought up if you had not repeatedly told me I did not understand what you were saying after the first time I told you that I did but disagreed. Regardless the insinuations of lying by HoG were uncalled for especially after I had already apologized for bringing the matter up.

Originally posts by Benjamin:

I completely fail to see the logic in the salvation of one’s soul not being eternal.

Responses by J Jump;

But just because you fail to see something doesn't make it untrue. Israel failed to see the Messiah, but Jesus was every bit the Messiah He claimed to be. Spiritual blindness, does not equal spiritual untruth.

Look at where the servant put his talent; in the earth, the world, he received a gift but put his faith elsewhere. Oh, he believed and so does the devil, but if he had placed his faith above he would have been saved but he placed his faith in the earth. I do not think he was ever saved.

He was saved, becuase God doesn't give His goods to unsaved people. Unsaved people are dead in trespasses and sins and are incapable of producing a profit for the Lord. He was expected to work for the Lord, and the only people that can deliver on that are saved people.

People try to deny that the third one was saved, because they don't like what he was told, but to deny he was saved is to deny the plain reading of Scripture.

I differ with the this dispensationalist program of “rightly dividing” the Word to mean separating these type of things to prove doctrines and see “rightly dividing” to mean as a clean single clean cut to look into the Word to examine it as a whole, a complete picture, not to chopping it into pieces however it suits ones theology.

I'm not proving anything. The Bible needs no defense. You either see the Truth or you don't. Rightly dividing the Word is exactly as you say. You make separation where Scripture makes separation and by doing this you get the complete big picture.

That's EXACTLY what this does. It gives one the correct big picture of the Bible. It takes the overall picture of the Bible and allows the details to be plugged in correctly.

Which is exactly what he did not do (produce a profit) and now you flip and are describing his situation as unsaved after saying he was saved.

You continue to miss the whole point. He was expected to bring a profit and that is why he was given the talent. He could have brought a profit, but decided it would be in his best interest to hide what was given to him. He wasn't incapable, but unwilling. That's two different things that you are missing.

I have no problem with what he was told and you have not supported you’re view with one iota of proof thereby your claim to the plain reading of scripture is unfounded.

The first part of your statement may or may not be true. However the second part of the statement is absolutely false. If you can't see that the third man was just as saved as the other two then I can't help you any more.

All three were his servants. God doesn't have unsaved servants. He doesn't own unsaved slaves. That is just impossible to miss, unfortunately not impossible to deny, because there are so many that do.

 

[J. Jump]

But just because you fail to see something doesn't make it untrue. Israel failed to see the Messiah, but Jesus was every bit the Messiah He claimed to be. Spiritual blindness, does not equal spiritual untruth.

Now we are finally getting somewhere. Even though there is no direct calling you spiritually blind (which is what you said in a previous post that I directly called you spiritually blind, which you have failed to prove) I can see how you would see an insinuation there.

However I was equating spiritual blindness to Israel not to you. Israel was spiritually blind in that they didn't believe the message Jesus was delivering, but their blindness didn't make the message any less true. And the same can be said of ANYONE today that does not hold to God's Truth.

The problem is that most every Christian believes they are holding to God's Truth, which is not possible because there are too many varieties of beliefs out there for all of them to be true.

I will not address any of the other quotes, because they don't even come close to making your point. Spiritual blindess wasn't even mentioned in those posts.

Hopefully this settles the matter.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Lacy,

Hell is a place for Satan and fallen angels. It is reserved for them await for the coming judgement day, then they shall be cast away into the hell, as hell shall be cast into the lake of fire.

People, who reject Jesus Christ, disobey God's commandments, do not serve the Lord, their names are not found written in the book of life are already reserved in hell await for the great white thonr. SO, hell shall be cast into the lake of fire.

Many Christians understand that hell is an everlasting punishment, and separated form God.

Luke chapter 16 of a rich man being tornment in the fire. It tells us, both sides of Abraham's bosom and hell are already FIXED separated away like as gulf. No way, for rich man and sinners able to get across to other side. Same with hell is a prison await for the judgment day. Many people who rejected Christ already died are now in hell. They are already reserved await for future everlasting punishment into the lake of fire. There is no promise for a lazy servant shall be released out of hell, and bring back to God's place and dwell with Christ forever and ever.

Your belief of Kingdom Exclusion is unbiblical. It is similar like as Catholics teaching on puragtory.

Most baptists reject purgatory doctrine, because it is unbiblical. Same with Kingdom Exclusion.

You quoted of Rev. 20:11-15.

One problem for you. Matt. 25:30 say nothing that a lazy servant shall be finally being released out of the outer darkness beyond the judgment day. Use our common sense, easy for us to understand Matt. 25:30 speaks so very clear that a lazy servant shall be cast away into hell is an everlasting punishment.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Hope of Glory]

Matthew 25:30, which talks of being cast into outer darkness (not the lake of fire) also does not say that it's forever. So, you have to look at the person of whom this is speaking, the events surrounding the event in question, and the meaning of "outer darkness".

 

[Lacy Evans]

You quoted of Rev. 20:11-15.

My bad: Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was was cast into the lake of fire.

Same question. Why would you ever in a normal usage of the English language say something like "Everybody got sent away except the ones who were written down in a book!" if there were NO NAMES written in the book? It would be silly at an all girl's school for me as a teacher to say the everyone who is not a boy go to lunch. I would just say "go to lunch". The verse doesn't say "Everyone was cast into the lake of fire", as you contend.

One problem for you. Matt. 25:30 say nothing that a lazy servant shall be finally being released out of the outer darkness beyond the judgment day.

I quoted Matt 18:34. So in other words,

"Til he should pay all that was due unto him. 35. So likewise shall my heavenly father do unto you (Peter and other disciples -see v21) if ye from your hearts forgive not . . ."

Really means in the DPT version,

"Since you won't, can't or don't pay you'll be in jail 'till forever if you don't forgive. "

"Till he should pay means eternal?" No where in that verse does it say eternal.

I don't care who believes what. I only care what the verse says.

Lacy

 

[Benjamin]

I will not address any of the other quotes, because they don't even come close to making your point.

Wrong, my point was NEVER to create debate on the aspects of “direct” but changed into this strawman like scenario when your bud, Hope of Glory, stuck his nose in and made an issue out of my original point by calling me a liar in an unChristian like manner and continued in such, thereby throwing up a smoke screen while he gloried in his strife and you played the martyr and refused to let go after my apology for bringing it up.

The point to be originally made was you place a large dependence on proving your doctrine by repeatedly telling others they do not understand or do not see the truth. Maybe you think you’re some kind of prophet that the truth has been revealed to, or maybe believe you have been sent as a messenger to teach others, I don’t know, but your arrogance in this dependence and MO is consistent when challenged and is seen as motivated for belittling while insulting others intelligence along with questioning spirituality and integrity.

I can see how you would see an insinuation there.

Good, I would ask you to humbly think on it. Good enough?

Hopefully this settles the matter.

Yes, I apologized for bringing up to no avail realizing the circular ramifications.

 

[Lacy Evans]

You fellas ought to reign the emotions in a little. This could be a good debate. Is seems to me that a couple of mole hills have been made into mountains, then after everybody apologized, it kept on going.

-Lacy

 

[J. Jump]

Wrong, my point was NEVER to create debate on the aspects of “direct” but changed into this strawman like scenario when your bud, Hope of Glory, stuck his nose in and made an issue out of my original point by calling me a liar in an unChristian like manner and continued in such, thereby throwing up a smoke screen while he gloried in his strife and you played the martyr and refused to let go after my apology for bringing it up.

The problem is you never apologized for making a false accusation!

The point to be originally made was you place a large dependence on proving your doctrine by repeatedly telling others they do not understand or do not see the truth.

Again you are making stuff up. I don't have to prove my doctrine by telling other they do not understand. Talk about a strawman argument. Telling someone they don't understand is not proving anything.

Maybe you think you’re some kind of prophet that the truth has been revealed to, or maybe believe you have been sent as a messenger to teach others, I don’t know,

No you don't, so why would you say something like that?

but your arrogance in this dependence and MO is consistent when challenged and is seen as motivated for belittling while insulting others intelligence along with questioning spirituality and integrity.

Sometimes I can't believe the stuff that I read on here. I have NEVER attacked your intelligence. I have NEVER said you are incapable of understanding anything at all. I have NEVER said that you are incapable of understanding even what I'm saying. However I have said that you don't understand what I am saying. That is a HUGE difference in what you have accused me of.

And I have NEVER questioned your spirituality and your integrity. See these are the types of comments that have drawn comments. You accuse me falsly with absolutely no basis whatsoever and act as if you are the one being attacked. It just absolutely amazes me.

You don't have an understanding of what I'm talking about and your comments prove that out. That's not because you are incapable. My feeling on the matter is that you don't want to understand, so you just say things off the cuff. That's what normally happens.

Good, I would ask you to humbly think on it. Good enough?

There's nothing to think about. I explained that my statement was not intended the way you took it, but I was actually addressing Israel and not you.

Yes, I apologized for bringing up to no avail realizing the circular ramifications.

Again your apology didn't address the wrong. You wrongly accused me a something that you haven't been able to substantiate and that's what needed an apology.

 

[Hope of Glory]

"Eternal" (without beginning or ending or existing outside of time) is only found twice in the NT. "Everlasting" (Without ending) is only found in 16 places.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Care to explain then why the Bible speaks of different salvations and different judgments?

Where? I mean I know that there's a description of a Judgement in both MA 25 and in REV 20 but where does it say that these aren't different descriptions of the same event? As far as salvation is concerned I know you believe in one salvation for the Millenium and another eternal salvation. I just don't believe that there's any Biblical support for that.