Millenial Exclusion, the gospel of fear

And I will have to go with HoG on this one . . . how hard is it to believe (Acts 16:30-31)? Paul never says anything about it being difficult. The idea is simple. Jesus died and shed His blood on your behalf, because of your sin. Do you believe that? Yes. Well then you are saved.

How is that difficult and why would you want to make the simple message of salvation by grace through faith apart from works difficult and hard?

 

And yet not a single verse of Scripture I quoted nor anyone that I have found has said anything about healthy/unhealthy. That would be just another man-made addition to Scripture such as really, really, really and truly saved. :laugh:

 

I don't know. Why do you do that?

 

1. I mean this as no disrespect, but I have been in discussions with you before, and I continue to notice the same problem: you have a problem with the Greek. You totally ignore the Greek because it oftentimes destroy your position.

2. You have used a typo on my part and seems to continue with the idea that I have used Scripture that support your views. Perhaps, you need to reread those posts again.

3. Do you know how the Greek language works? I encouraged you from a previous thread to consult a good Greek Grammar. I will go along way.

4. Let me give you the Greek behind the word "faith" and the relevant words around it:επαγωνιζεσθαι τη απαξ παραδοθειση τοις αγιοις πιστει

a. Notice that τη, "the", is feminine date of the Greek article and it is separated from its substantive , πιστει, by απαξ παραδοθειση τοις αγιοις.

b. So it will look sometime like this: "the"...... "faith."

c. This is not subjective faith as you will like, rather it is objective faith, "the faith."

5. The same construction is seen else where: μονον δε ακουοντες ησαν οτι ο διωκων ημας ποτε νυν ευαγγελιζεται την πιστιν ην ποτε επορθει (Gal 1:23). Clearly, objective idea.

6. Also here:και ο λογος του θεου ηυξανεν και επληθυνετο ο αριθμος των μαθητων εν ιερουσαλημ σφοδρα πολυς τε οχλος των ιερεων υπηκουον τη πιστει (Acts 6:7). Clearly the idea is objective.

7. "The Faith" is a reference to the gospel and that is what Jude has called us to contend for.

8. And I see you have made a great deal about the expression "Common Salvation," thinking that Jude defines it the same way you and others have.

 

1. In another thread on "How many gospels are there?", I have treated this verse from the Greek and J.Jump dismissed it as purely my interpretation because he couldn't respond from the Greek.

2. Ask him why?

 

1. These two Scriptures are enough to prove my point.

2. Unless, you fail to see a difference.

 

I know it's hard to stay away from these wise crack one-liners when you don't have much to offer, but please show me how I have made a very simple message difficult.

I said as Acts 16:30-31 and Ephesians 2:8-9 that if you believe in Jesus Christ you will be saved. How is that difficult. I don't think you can accuse me of making a simple message difficult, but that's never stopped the false accusations before, why should this time be any different.

 

JJ

Dr. Evans has a book out

What A Way to Live

I think there's a subtitle

The Kingdom Agenda


Pretty good book although Dr. Evans writes a "tad" different than he preaches

Kingdom teaching is no more and no less that what we call Abundant Life living---living in obedience to the Word---if that makes sense.

I preached a series on Kingdom Living-----Kingdom Families, Kingdom Dads & Moms, Kingdom Children, The Workplace and the Kingdom, The Church & The Kingdom

Blackbird

 

:laugh: This is funny. Once again you totally ignore one portion of the text in order to make "your" point.

So let me again ask the question since you seemed to have missed it. Jude DOES in fact make a distinction between common salvation and the faith.

So what common salvation could Jude be talking about other than salvation by grace through faith? What other salvation did they have in common if it's not that.

 

So he applies the kingdom to the here and now? Am I reading your correctly?

 

1. When you can reason from the Greek, then we can discuss things a little bit better.

2. Once again, you have ignored the Greek completely.

3. Find a good greek grammar and do some serious studying.

4. I cannot discuss a matter when someone sidesteps the greek text.

 

I believe so!!

Why?? Do you think its "Way beyond the Blue"???

 

Ignoring one piece of the text to prove "your" point is NOT "reasoning from the Greek." Sorry.

I'm sorry is "common salvation" not in the Greek text? Uh I think it is. So who's ignoring what here?

I think a better quote would be "I cannot discuss a matter further when someone want let me pick and choose what I want to talk about."

 

I was just curious. I think again that would be another proving point that he doesn't really believe in the gospel of the kingdom as we have put it forth, but I still could be wrong. I've just not found any evidence for it.

I'm not sure what you mean by your way beyond the blue question.

Are you asking if I think his assessment of the kingdom being the here and now is correct? If so I would say no. The kingdom is not here yet. It is coming and will last 1000 years with Christ as the King of kings and Lord of lords.

If that's not what your question was try me again .

 

1. I have already addressed the issue of a "Common Salvation," but that doesn't seem to mean anything to you.

2. Isn't that what you are doing with your focus on "Common Salvation," when it is not even what Jude is addressing primarily?

 

This is precisely what we have been saying.

This is precisely what we have been saying, but some people seem to say "the gospel" is always referring to being born from above, in spite of the contradictions of one place saying simply "believe" and in other places saying to do all these works.

Not just Jude, but the entire NT.

 

How do these two verses prove your point? They are completely different words.

1 Peter 2:17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

2 Timothy 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

In 1 Peter 2:17, it's "phobeiste"; it's in both senses of reverence and dread, and it's present, middle, imperative; it's a command, and we are to keep fearing, and we do it ourselves.

2 Timothy 1:7 is the word "deilia"; it's "fearfulness". It's an old word, and it's always used in a bad sense for "cowardice". Timidity.

You should know better than what you are saying about these verses.

 

Looks like another book I need to place on my wish list. See, until I was an adult (and have been one for many years), I had not read any books by any Kingdom teachers, except the Bible. I was raised with it, but not very difinitively, and only from context, but I was also raised with the opposite. However, once I learned to read the Greek, I saw that the grammar and the context never contradict one another.

As an adult, I have read a little writing of others, and for the most part, we have come to the same conclusions, sometimes from the teachings of others, and sometimes strictly from the Bible.

The former pastor at the church where I was preaching up until recently had gone to a "good" Baptist colled in PA, and he spouted off the stuff they taught him, until one day, while studying a "contradiction", it dawned on him that the contradictions seemed to stem from passages that were talking about a "Kingdom", although his "good" Baptist college had taught him that they were the same thing, or the Kingdom was simply some mystical good feeling, depending upon which professor was teaching.

He started teaching it, and that's what drew me to that church while I was awaiting assignment to a pastorate out in the bush. We studied together indepth. He told me that he had discovered that "hell" and "lake of fire" were not always the same. (Of course, at that point, I challenged him to show me where they were ever the same, and he realized that "hell" (gehenna) is a warning to saved people.)

I've never read Hodges' works. A dear friend of mine knows him, and they have fellowshipped, but I've not read anything that he's written, and AFAIK, I've only ever read half a sentence that's attributed to him. That was posted here, and I intentionally skimmed over it because I wanted to read the entire thing in context myself.

S. S. Craig certainly is not "new" to Kingdom teachings. He realized long ago that "aionios" cannot mean "forever", and wrote a book called "The Dualism of Eternal Life".

I've not read Faust's works, although I want to. I've not read Evans' works. I've read Chitwoods' works, and although we agree for the most part, there are a few things that we disagree on. (Accountable informed me while he was up here that Chitwood has changed some of his beliefs that we disagreed upon.)

But, growing up, when we would visit a church, while travelling or visiting or something, about half the time (probably a little less), the churches would preach the Kingdom, some better than others. About the same number would teach "get saved!" and that that's all the Bible talks about. A hanful of them would teach something else, either somewhere in between or somewhere out in left field. The Kingdom teaching churches have dwindled drastically, and many of them have dropped "Baptist" from their names because of the way that the Baptist denomination has changed. I've rarely encountered a Kingdom preaching church that was not Baptist, although I do have a friend who is a AoG preacher who preaches the Kingdom, and he's accused by other AoG churches of being a Bapti-Costal. (I'm working on his pentecostal beliefs, but we're not there yet.)

I've never read anything from most of these men, and the ones I have only in the last few years, yet I've been accused of being their disciples. Yet, I get my information from the Scriptures alone.

 

I missed this part. Still, I'll have to read it and see.

 

Well please redirect me to the post number because obviously I missed your "addressing" of a "common salvation."

No it's not. I am merely letting the text tell me what is being talked about instead of some sort of preconceived idea. I understand that Jude said he wanted to talk about A, but instead he is talking about B.

So all I am doing is understanding what A is, noticing that he is "not" addressing A like he wanted to, but in fact is going to focus on "B."

Again if you have answered the question of what this common salvation is if it isn't eternal salvation please again direct me to the post number so I can go back and review it.