Pastor friend describes "The Passion of the Christ"

[Daniel David]

Pinoy, I am not putting God in any box. His work is that he would bring his elect to salvation. That id done based on the merit of Christ and effected by the believing of the gospel. That is how God ordained it. You weaken God by insisting that he CANNOT get the gospel message out to his elect.

By the way, when Christ called out 'it is finished', he wasn't talking about salvation. Paul said in Romans 4 that Christ died for our sins but raised for our justification. 'It is finished' came three days too soon according to you primitives.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Daniel David:

You are an odd electionist. Here you say that in order for the elect to be brought to salvation, God needs a preacher. So, are you saying that God, in eternity past, chose somebody unto salvation, had his Only begotten Son crucified on the cross, but put the final outcome of that election on the ability of mortals to go and preach the Gospel ?


That the Gospel, in the final analysis, is where the power of God to save is ? It is grace PLUS belief in the gospel ? Grace PLUS faith ? Grace PLUS repentance ? Grace PLUS theology ? Grace PLUS church membership ?

On the other hand, I am saying that salvation is of the Lord, and God is not limited by the ability of those in the ministry to obey the command to go and preach the gospel to God's children.

So, who's putting God in a box ? Me ?

If Christ wasn't talking about salvation, then what was he talking about ? Was he delirious ? Did he actually mean to say, "I am done for" ?

His death on the cross satisfied the full requirements of the law (the wages of sin is death) when he took upon himself every sin, every sin, that his people had committed, therefore their salvation from God's wrath is complete.

The justification of their faith follows in the Resurrection. By the way, we again part ways in faith. It is not your faith, or my faith, that justified us before God. It is Christ's faith that God honored, and imputed on us also. Just like his righteousness, and his holiness are both imputed on his children. Of course, there is faith in practice, and practical holiness, and practical righteousness.

 

[blackbird]

So, Pino---you say that Jesus had faith?? God in flesh required faith??

Brother David

 

[pinoybaptist]

Hello, blackbird:

No. The Bible says so.

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: Romans 3:21-22

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified..Galatians 2:16

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.. Galatians 2:20

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. [/b]

Why should it be odd that Immanuel needed faith ?
If we do, then we ought to find it odd also that He had to obey His own laws and be righteous so He can impute that righteousness to His people.

The Bible says without faith it is impossible to please God. Does any man have inherent that kind of faith which pleases God ? No. But Christ did.

 

[Daniel David]

Pinoy, you do realize that the KJV completely missed this one also don't you?

The Greek does not indicate that it is Christ's faith. It is our faith.

You are basing your theology upon a translation of the greek, not what God actually inspired.

The NASB, NKJV, and ESV got it right.

Stick with an accurate version.

 

[pinoybaptist]

No, Daniel David. The KJV got it right. Now, I am not a KJVO guy, but, knowing what the Bible says about man, how can God honor such a fickle faith ? So the KJV got translators got it right.

Or will you start strutting again and say that your faith is perfect and absolutely strong that it deserves to be honored by a perfect God who demands perfection in everything.

 

[Daniel David]

Pinoy, I very much doubt you know greek. I seriously question it based on the above.

In your mind, you have it that faith is fickle, therefore that can't be the INTERPRETATION.

You have already started with the conclusion. Very well played.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Ya'll are so far off topic my little 'ole west texas head is a spinnin'.

Lacy

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Doesn't the Bible say something about faith cometh by hearing? I am not sure I understand the argument here, but what do you gentlemen make of this verse?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
Pinoy, I very much doubt you know greek. I seriously question it based on the above.

In your mind, you have it that faith is fickle, therefore that can't be the INTERPRETATION.

You have already started with the conclusion. Very well played.

Oh, I don't know Greek, Daniel David, nor Hebrew, nor German, nor Latin. If you do, good for you, congratulations.

But I know one thing. If it were my faith that God will honor in order to save me, then my own Creator does not know me.

Prior to regeneration, the lost's faith is at worst non-existent, at best, as I called it, fickle.

When Adam and Eve sinned against God, they displayed not only disobedience but lack of faith in God's Word - "on the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." They had more faith in the serpent, just as many men today have more faith in anything but God's Word.

Yet God, who is perfect and holy, demands perfect obedience, compliance, observance, and submission to the entire Law, not just a part of it. And He required faith for "without faith, it is impossible to please Him."

Many here on this board and elsewhere think that faith is not works. But it is. Faith is a kind of works, because it is something you do. What is it that James said in essence ? Faith and works express each other. By your good works you declare your faith.

You act and put your faith in Christ,which is good works before God, because it is Christ who fulfilled all the requirements of law and faith before God. That is why He is the Cleft of the child of God's rock.
He is the Rock.
In Him and behind Him the elect are spared from God's wrath. Out of Him and before Him, no one is spared, not even one who all his life have been religious and trusting in his personal faith and the body of faith, the theology, he holds on to, for "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

 

[Lacy Evans]

start a new thread!

 

[donnA]

Mel made a movie based on Emmerich's writing of her 'vision', and it's called biblical, I wonder if a muslim wrote a movie about Jesus based on a muslim 'vision' of Jesus would it be called biblical too? Emmerich no more believed in the biblical model of Jesus then the muslim does. Several times the link has been posted to read what she wrote and how the movie is exact with it, I wonder if any pro passion movie people bothered to read it, if they did they'd see this movie is based on the vision, and the vicion contained a few pieces of truth and a lot of junk.

 

[pinoybaptist]

donnA:

Well, I don't know who's calling that movie Biblical. I'm not.

 

[donnA]

And I'm glad your not, but I've seen it more then once here since it was released.

 

[vaspers]

If The Passion is biblical, based strictly and reverently on the actual Gospel records...

...then what was THE GOSPEL OF JOHN film--and other relatively faithful to the Word depictions of Jesus' crucifixion...??? "Too sanitized, like the gospels themselves, too sanitized" they say.

The Passion is a blatant attack on the Gospels and on respect for our Savior.

Jesus dangling on a chain from a cliff, Mary kissing the feet of the dead or dying body of Jesus, getting His blood in her mouth...

...horrible delusions and disrespect. Can't evangelicals see anything at all anymore?

 

[pinoybaptist]

vaspers said:

... Can't evangelicals see anything at all anymore?

Hopalong Cassidy ? Cable has a rerun of my favorite Cowboy.

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:

Please understand that I do not conform to the doctrines of Roman Catholics, nor of the JW's, or the SDA's, or Moslems, or Animists.

I do challenge, however, the attitude of some in this board, who would put God in a box, and say, that God's Almighty hand which is not shortened that it cannot save, cannot possibly elect unto salvation somebody who is a Catholic, or who will be born and raised a Catholic, like Mel Gibson, for example.

Election, according to the Bible, was done before the foundation of the world, even before Adam was created. The adoption of each elect child of God is not based on his earthly theology, but in the finished work of Christ on the cross, and the shed blood of the Lamb. These are what made the adoption of sinners into the kingdom of God legal. Christ paid for their sins, and those sins included wrong theology.

Now, I am not saying that Mel Gibson is indeed an elect child of God. I don't know that, but neither do I know, nor does anyone for that matter, that he is not, based simply on the fact that he happened to have been born and raised a Catholic, and his view of the gospel is what it is. He just had the luck to have the money to produce a film which he intends for evangelism, Catholic style.

I find it odd that we Baptists love to say that religion or church membership does not save anyone, and then turn right around and say that theology determines whether one is a child of God or not.

My friend, theology does indeed effect salvation, for if one is indoctrinated into false theology they will not understand the reguirements of the gospel. Now I fully recognize your continued use of the term "elect" and I want to remind you that we have a forum for the cal/arm debate and it is not here. If one looks at it in that light and one of God's elect is raised in a catholic church or any other false religion then our God is fully capable of calling that person out of that false religion and into the truth. In the middle of your ranting about us not having any involvement in salvation I noticed you used this verse

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified..Galatians 2:16

Please notice Paul says "even we have believed in jesus Christ" I will join Daniel David and declare that the RC doctrine does not lead a person to place their faith in Christ alone therfore their doctrine and theology is soul damning. I welcome your continued argument on this subject but I demand that this thread get back on topic so if you want to discuss your view of salvation start a new thread.
Murph

 

[Dr. Bob]

Have had some more friends and co-workers attend and felt it was a good movie, not as violent as "Saving Private Ryan", and I loved one comment:

"Not as good as the book."

Amen

 

[pinoybaptist]

C.S> Murphy:

Thank you for putting your thoughts in a kind manner. I respect your opinion, but still believe that theology does not affect one's eternal destiny which has been settled long before anybody's birth.

It does affect your walk in this life, and I agree with what you said that God is fully capable of effecting His call to His child. I do not agree, however, that all the elect will know the Name or read the Book in this plane we call time.

Again, I thank you for being gracious in your speech.

 

[donnA]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:
donnA:

Well, I don't know who's calling that movie Biblical. I'm not.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This movie is not only Biblical but so realistic that you cannot help but be moved by not only what Jesus did but what His FATHER had to do for his son.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw the film yesterday and saw no doctrinal errors. In fact, what I saw was a lot of research, both Biblical and historical, that went into this film.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be very accurate historically and biblically.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am KJV and have seen the movie and found nothing wrong with it, nothing out of line with Scripture, certainly nothing anti-Scripture.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What ERROR are you talking about? Stop with the mindless rhetoric about promoting ERROR when you are not naming something that is ERROR.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I found NOTHING about the movie to be in ERROR.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are NO errors.