Jon, you and agedman need to stop claiming something neither of you have dine. Neither of you have actually sought out scripture on this matter. You have tried to pick out sentences as proof texts, but honestly, the pagans and godless do that same thing, so you have no prideful high ground. Moreso, when you have been presented with scripture that connects both old and new testament atonement, you redefine terms and deny what God actually says. So, stop imagining you are doing something that is higher and more noble than others who disagree with your philosophy.
-
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!
Magic Blood Theory
- Thread starter AustinC
- Start date
- Status
Did any of your friends sweat, as it were, great drops of blood praying to be spared? No? Braver than Jesus, they were!
No, it is not a waste of time. This is a point of contention that we must never grow weary in pressing. This isn't about some minor point of doctrine, this is the Work of Christ we're talking about.
He was God robed in flesh. His flesh(including His blood) was exactly the same as ours. If His blood was holy and pure, then He was not flesh and blood just like we are.
This is a false accusation
@agedman and I have provided Scripture, we have sought out Scripture, and there is nothing in our posts that you can point to as unbiblical.
What you argue against is Scripture (is what is written in the text of Scripture).
You hold a Reformed Roman Catholic faith. You believe a theory that your "pope" (the Reformers) came up with about 700 years ago.
You are unable to provide any Scripture that states what you believe yet you believe Sctipture "teaches it".
@Iconoclast said Scrioture does not mean what it says, but progressively reveals what it means. I e. "progressive revelation". God revealed this previously hidden truth to the Reformers. We have to connect the dots of Scripture....fill in the blanks. God gave us Reformed teachers to lead us on the path to "properly understand" Scripture. That is the mark of cults. I'm not saying you lack salvation, but you are closer to a cultists than a Christian on this topic.
What we (@agedman ) have rejected is the things you carry into Scripture....your additions and small changes to God's Word.
The reason is he and I believe what is written and believe Scripture teaches what is written in Scripture rather than what is absent from the text if God's Word.
Let's hope he does. I hope you are fearful of ever asserting the perversion of Christ's work that have done lately. I hope you dismay of the Baptist Board.
I agree. This is why I have continued urging we stick to Scripture
I was thinking the same of you. We are held at a greater level of accountability when we seek to teach others.
All I (and @agedman ) have been asking for is your belief actually stated in Scripture. By your own admission it is not there (in what is written).
The difference is the standard by which we accept doctrine.
@agedman and I have restricted this to Scripture. Our appeal has been to God's Word. Yours has been to what you believe Scripture "teaches". @Iconoclast 's has been to the Reformed teachers he follows.
We hold a different criteria for doctrine. So we will never agree. You and @Revmitchell can never prove your faith via Scripture because it depends on human reasoning and philosophy. @Iconoclast 's faith depends on elevating Reformed teachers to a level approaching little popes.
But @agedman and I have stuck exactly with what is written in God's Word and we will be persuaded to change our views only by what is written in Scripture.
@Revmitchell is right. It is a waste of time. I proclaim God's Word and you proclaim what you believe God's Word teaches.
Nope. Austin said it best.
The issue is you and @AustinC cannot show a place where @agedman and I have strayed from the text of Scripture. We can show where you and @AustinC have departed from the text of Scripture.
Your defense is "that is what it teaches". But what if Scripture actually teaches what it says (what is written). Then you and @AustinC are under a "greater condemnation".
I am more comfortable answering for teaching the actual Word of God than I would be teaching your ideas about what it really means.
Jon, your comment here is coming from your own delusion.
I leave to such delusion.
We have over and over.
Here's the latest. That Christ suffered the wrath of God for our sins is confirmed by two scriptures.
lol..So now Austin follows the Pope and is cult like?
.Where exactly did Iconoclast say scripture does not mean what it says?
Where did Iconoclast say it was previously hidden truth?
You deny God has given teachers to the Church now.
Only an ascended master can offer such claims!
Is someone becoming unglued?
Hey Austin, take down those pictures of those Popes you follow
Duckie
Member
I believe Jesus was tempted, it's in Luke 4, but what I mean by Holy and pure - without sin.
No, it isn't.
I have told you what I believe. I have provided Scripture that states exactly what I believe.
You have told me what you believe. You cannot provide Scripture stating what you believe but instead say what you believe is what Scrioture "teaches".
This is a fundamental difference between our understanding.
I understand what you believe. I believed as you for decades.
I chose to abandon what you see (and I saw) as "taught by Scripture" for what is actually written in God's Word.
You call belief in the text of Scripture "unbiblical" and what you feel is taught by Scripture as "biblical".
We disagree. Before a discussion can be had basic presuppositions must be agreed upon.
I will not accept the idea that men's understanding of what Scripture "teaches" is the standard by which we evaluate doctrine.
You will not accept the idea that what is written in God's Word (the text of Scripture) is the standard by which we evaluate doctrine.
Therefore there is no legitimate conversation or debate to be had.
I was not intending to debate you, but to give you an opportunity to change my mind by providing passages that actually prove your view...passages that I (as a finite human being) may have missed.
Obviously no such passages exist (passages that state your position).
Had I wanted your opinion about what Scripture teaches then it would be different. But I do not care about your opinions as for most of my life I held the same opinions.
What observers need to take note of, my whole point, is that @agedman and my view is actually in God's Word (it is "what is written" and what us written again).
Your ( and @Iconoclast , @Revmitchell , and @Aaron ) faith is based not on "what is written" but what ypu feel is taught in the Bible.
The problem is you cannot test your faith against "what is written" because it is not there. The best you can do is try to make sure that Scripture can be used to prop up your belief.
The problem with this type of thinking was made obvious when @Iconoclast called my belief that "Christ bore our sins in His body on the cross" proof of error as he claimed Scripture does not make that claim. He dismissed "what is written" in favor of what he believes Scripture "teaches". It was made obvious when @JesusFan objected to quoted passages about our Justification not being "Pauline Justification".
Your view on the Cross and the Atonement though still lives us due to be paying and judged for our own sins!
Jon, this is simply a false statement by you. Yet, you keep saying it, which means, in your mind you are believing what is not true.
I have shared both OT and NT passages, then explained the connection. You have stated your opinion and then provided proof text tbat doesn't even prove your point. Agedman just says "Colossians 2" as though his point is made.
So think what you will, but know what you think is not reality.
So, I go back and look at the link.
Nope - no two Scriptures, only opinions concerning the Scriptures.
Has anyone taken Colossians 2 and refuted what I presented?
Either the Scriptures stand as they are stated in the Bible(s), or opinion is greater then Scriptures.
I try when I post opinion to make it known that it is my opinion. Sometimes I don't, but I do try to remember.
Why don't we all take time to go back over what we posted and see when we spouted opinion and when we quoted Scriptures.
See what Colossians 1 has to present concerning the Wrath poured out upon the Son by the Father:
15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18And He is the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning and firstborn from among the dead, so that in all things He may have preeminence. 19For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross. 21Once you were alienated from God and were hostile in your minds, engaging in evil deeds. 22But now He has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy, unblemished, and blameless in His presence— 23if indeed you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope of the gospel you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.
Do you see the wrath?
Do you see it poured out upon the very one who created all, both the invisible and visible, thrones, dominions, rulers, authorities, the one whom God was pleased to have all HIS fullness indwell Him, and .....
NOPE - no wrath even slightly insinuated!
Surely, if it was true concerning the wrath, then it would have made headline copy in the Scriptures.
Agedman what is your point regarding atonement in quoting from Colossians?
Shall I quote the entire Pentatuech, John, Romans and Hebrews, then say "there ya go!"?
But that doesn’t mean His blood was holy and pure. Yes He was tempted, yet never sinned. But that doesn’t mean He had holy and pure blood. Words matter in these conversations and we always need to clearly define our words.
- Status