Lordship Salvation? - Part Two

What cannot be ponied up is your scripture to back up your statement.

 

These questions just too hard for you?

 

And it's done in the age to come, as well. The two are not exclusive.

Unless you have a passage that says, "God only chastizes his children in this age, and not the age to come." (In which case there are some serious contradictions, but we've already ascertained that some people are willing to accept contradictions and ignore Acts 16:31, among other passages.)

So, the chastening punishment (chastening is punishment, but it's familial; punitive punishment is not familial) precedes the judgement? You chastize your children; you punitively punish a criminal.

So, are you saying that you will be punished before you're judged?

Umm... last I checked, sins are works.

And if you don't access the blood on the mercy seat?

I could send you a gift card for a pedicure and a massage, but if you don't access it, you don't get it, even though it's already paid for.

Jesus shed his blood, but we're commanded to access it continually. If we confess our sins, he's faithful and just to forgive us our sins, right?

If we don't continue to confess them, then what? Does he cease to be faithful and just? No! He's faithful and just to hold us accountable. Otherwise, we have a license to sin! Do you think we have a license to sin?

 

After a true believer dies...they keep the sin nature in order to be chastened for 1000 years? What is the point of chastening...and what good does chastening do when the possibility of sinning is gone? Makes no sense...

 

Well, according to one young lady I know (who does not believe in the coming Kingdom of God), it does make sense in that you do come out the other side; what happens then?

Some already behave themselves; some do not.

Besides, you have to ask yourself, "Boy, I wonder why God chastizes his children after the Judgment Seat?" Since he says he does, and if you accept God at his word, then it becomes a theological issue to find out why.

Of course, as this young lady's brother said, and he does believe in the coming Kingdom, since God gave this to us as a warning, shouldn't we just want to avoid it? No matter what hell is (the lake of fire is literal; gehenna is figurative), it's going to be unpleasant. It's going to be something that you want to avoid.

Of course, promising people that they will avoid it no matter what they do removes that disincentive. But, those pages are still in my KJV Bible, NASB, CLV... Those pages are still in every Bible that I own. But, few people read the Bible, and simply rely on the teachings of popular preachers.

 

Says "works".

I do not find that it mentions, "sins", in this, which I believe is here at the Bema, although this Scripture does not specifically say when this "testing" occurs, only that it does at "the Day".

For free!

The 'great white throne' judgment also says they were judged "according to their works", again, not mentioning sins.

Ed

 

So Ed when I deliberately disobey God by "doing" something that He told me not to do that is just a work and not a sin? How about when I omit "doing" something that He said I should do? That's just a work and not a sin?

Sin and works can not be separated. When you disobey God that is a sinful work.

I fail to see what the other option is.

Please explain how something can just be a bad work but at the same time is not sin.

 

JJump -- I think mmetz has it right.

The OT gospel that Jesus could give to the rich young ruler was not "believe on Me and you will be saved." People who don't realize that there were 2 gospels -- one pre-cross, on post-cross -- will consistently misinterpret Jesus counsel here.

But what Jesus appeared to be saying is for the rich man to give up this physical kingdom for the spiritual kingdom that is coming soon (post-cross). When you got a lot of "stuff," it is hard to accept that there is a spiritual kingdom worth having, isn't it?

skypair

 

HoG --- God chastises the physical body, not the spiritual one. So it would be scripiturally impossible for God to chastise or punish believers after death. Think about it --- we will either die and appear as spirits in heaven or we will be raptured in glorified bodies, right? So you're saying that God will punish or chastise something that couldn't even be in heaven unless it was perfect (Heb 12:23)?

And here's the point of 1Cor 3:12-15 --- wood, hay, and stubble" are (look at the following verses) the wisdom (19), thoughts (20), and the glory (21) of man. Basically, we are going to be "purged" of our worldliness -- some more than others.

This is a "manufactured" distinctive -- "wood" or "hay" that you no doubt will have to be "tried by fire" for -- your "garment spotted by the flesh." We are trying to "pull you out of that fire" don't you see?

Of course we access the mercy seat! But it is not to preclude punishment in the hereafter -- it is to avoid chastisement in this life inasmuch as we can. "Judge yourselves that ye be not judged."

Yes. And there IS a "sin unto [PHYSICAL] death" that we need to avoid through confession and repentance! But it is not unto spiritual death and the spiritual conwequences are limited to this earth.

skypair

 

There was NO Provision for a gospel of grace to the OT, DPT. The Provision that was to come to them was a King, not a Lamb, DPT. Therefore, the gospel was of the kingdom, NOT of grace.

Absolutely true! But faith in 2 different things -- a King vs. a Lamb. Faith, in both testaments, is unto JUSTIFICATION of the soul. But faith in the NT is also to SANCTIFICATION of the spirit. Don't worry, DPT. In the MK, all the OT saints will accept the Lamb like we have. :thumbs:

When the rich man came to Christ, he told Him, he wanted to know what shall he do and shall have eternal life. Christ told him, to obey the Ten Commandments. ... Because The rich man have NO faith. He was worry over his things, do not want to lose his things and life, want to keept all his things. That why he have NO faith in Christ.[/quote] Actually, the rich man (if he, indeed, obeyed the 10 commandments since his youth) obeyed the 1st commandment and (Deut 6:5) "loved the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." And that was the faith of the OT.

And Jesus did NOT question the rich young ruler's profession of faith, did He -- point being that, so far, he had done what the OT required.

Also, in the book of James talk lot about faith and work. People claim, they did work for the Lord, but have no faith, then their works are dead. Or other wise, if do not do work, then their faith is dead also.

I just read that passage and didn't find that. Please show me.

Five more months and I'll retire from that kind of schedule myself. Can't wait!!

 

EXACTLY! It is a kingdom message. The kingdom message and the eternal salvation message are NOT the same thing. That has been my whole point.

And in order to even comprehend the kingdom message, which this ruler was able to do he must be spiritually alive because it is a spiritual message. And if he is spiritually alive then he is eternally saved.

So yes in the Biblical sense he did hear the Truth and didn't accept it. But the Truth that was delivered unto him was not the message of eternal salvation, but a message of the kingdom. Unfortunately Christendom tries to combine those two distinct and different messages and just makes a train wreck of Scripture on both sides of the track.

 

Actually we are ALL saved by God's grace through faith whether OT or NT. There was provision made for these people in the many lambs that pointed to the coming Lamb.

But you are correct in that the gospel that was being presented was the gospel of the kingdom and not the gospel of grace through faith, because these folks were already saved.

The gospel of grace through faith and the gospel of the kingdom are NOT the same thing as much of Christendom would have us believe.

And the prior can not even be entertained or understood until the later has been taken care of for the person. Meaning the gospel of the kingdom can not be delievered to the eternally (forever and ever and ever and ever) damned (spiritually dead).

 

I think I understand where you are coming from ---- you are applying an "Israel pattern" of salvation to the church.

Here's what I think you are saying --- that we are saved by grace but look forward to a kingdom future (MK). In it, we will experience physical chastisement for our sin in some way and "rule" if we are "good Christians" in this life. That kingdom comes before the final kingdom of God. Is that correct?

Because that is ISRAEL'S destiny, jump. They (the OT saints) DO expect to be raised into the kingdom of Messiah and to rule if they were "giants" of the faith and to mostly serve if they were not. It WILL be a world of sin and death for 1000 years. In their bodies, they may still be chastised (I'm not sure on that) just as we are today in our resurrected bodies!

So here is what will "disappoint" you --- we're NOT that "Israel." We're already being sanctified. We don't need another resurrection body wherein we need to be sanctified more. We have the spiritual and physical inheritance on earth right now! OT Isreal has their spiritual inheritance, heaven, but receives their physical inheritance on earth in the coming MK. Are you understanding what I am saying?

skypair

 

Not exactly. The gospel of the kingdom was not the everlasting salvation plan for Israel. See this why I have asked so many times how were people in the OT saved. It is CRITICAL to our understanding, but only one person has attempted an answer.

Way to go Amy! And she was actually correct. But she never went any further when I asked okay what were they supposed to believe in order to be saved.

This is a big key to understanding Scripture.

The gospel of the kingdom was delivered to an eternally (forever and ever and ever, spiritually alive) people. If they were still spiritually dead (eternally damned) they could not have even had the opportunity to understand this message that was being delivered.

But back to your point here. The gospel of the kingdom was taken away from Israel and the offer was to be given to a "new" nation, one that would produce the fruits of the kingdom.

This offer is now being given to Gentiles who have been made alive spiritually (grace through faith apart from works). But most of Christendom believes the gospel of the kingdom and grace through faith apart from works is the same message.

And that's a HUGE mistake because the gosepl of the kingdom required faith and works, not faith alone.

Therefore when the two messages are combined both messages are for all intents and purposes destroyed, because you have the church adding things to faith in order for people to be saved whether on the front side or back end.

Yes we are all going to spend the 1000 years in once place or another. We are either going to spend it with Christ, because we were obedient, faithful and overcame the flesh, the world and Satan in this present lifetime or we will spend it in outer darkness because we were disobedient, unfaithful and overcome by either the flesh, the world or Satan or a combo of two or all three.

That does not disappoint me and I never said we were. However the church has been given the opportunity that Israel rejected. That doesn't make us Israel.

No we SHOULD be in the process of being sanctified. All saved people are not automatically being sanctified. Sanctification is not a guarantee.

Not according to Paul and I'll trust him over you if you don't mind.

I understand what you are saying, and I understand that it is not Biblical.

 

Again I will ask. What scripture says that Christs blood is limited to only past sins? I see still no answer.

 

Where has anyone said that it's only limited to past sins?

 

It would have to be limited to past sins, if we pay for future ones.

 

Full of questions and short on answers I see. Not even going to take a stab at telling me why I have to confess something that's already forgiven? Why am I reminding God of something that He has removed as far as the east is from the west?

As far as your question goes I will reiterate what HoG has already said. No one has said that Christ's blood is "limited" to "only" past sins. What we have said is that your past sins are forgiven and washed by the blood at the moment you are saved, but any sins after that point still have to be dealt with according to I John 1:9.

Again I'm just curious why does God tell me He's only going to forgive what He's already forgiven if I confess. Does that really make sense to you?

Well if you don't confess your sins then you are the one that is limiting the blood not Christ or the Father. We are fully capable of having the blood applied to future sins, but only if we confess according to I John 1:9.

 

JJump:

What happens if you die with unconfessed sins?