C.S. Murphy
New Member
Are we allowed to say poo-pooh.ha.ha.
Welcome to the board even if you bring some strange vocabulary to our eyes.
Murph
Welcome to the board even if you bring some strange vocabulary to our eyes.
Murph
-
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!
Pastor friend describes "The Passion of the Christ"
- Thread starter Greg Linscott
- Start date
Daniel David
New Member
Because Catholic theology is soul-damning as I have pointed out time and time again without serious rebuttal. There were a few nonsensical (borderline insane) objections by certain folks though.
Because Catholic theology is soul-damning as I have pointed out time and time again without serious rebuttal. There were a few nonsensical (borderline insane) objections by certain folks though. </font>[/QUOTE]Sadly though, some people want to keep a closed eye to the truth you have presented to them.
by Daniel David:
Now, I am not saying that unbiblical doctrine is irrelevant to a gracious life. Biblical doctrine results in a gracious life, a correct understanding of God and His holiness and sovereignty, an understanding which will reflect on one's way of life and thinking. Biblical doctrine gives us the opportunity to "save yourselves from this untoward generation", like Peter said.
Exiting the Catholic church or any unChristian church and joining a Bible based, Bible believing, Christ honoring congregation will benefit an elect child of God here on this plane called time , in that he/she belongs in a sheepfold fed by an undershepherd (assuming that the undershepherd is a faithful child of God called by God to that office) with food for the spirit, but the elect's eternal salvation does not rest on any of these things, it rests on the finished work of Christ, the shed blood of Christ, and God's election from before the foundation of the world motivated by mercy alone.
So, in that sense, I do not point my finger at anyone, Mel Gibson, or anyone else, and say, gosh, he cannot be a Christian. After all, do I know who the elect are ? Was I there when God wrote their names on the Book of Life ? Did I hear the Father tell the Son, save this man or woman, and the Son tell the Father, thy will be done, and the Spirit say Amen ?
Do I absolutely, for sure, know that I am one of the elect ? I hope that blood was shed for me, I hope my name is in Heaven's book, and I anchor my hope in Christ and Him alone, that is what it means to me.
Now, as for Rosie O'Donnel, or Elton John, or those "gay" couples feeding on the anarchy created by the liberal mayor of San Francisco, that is another thing. I Cor. 6:9 is my basis for saying they are not of the kingdom of God, neither will they ever see the kingdom of God, unless God Himself changes their hearts.
Soul-damning ? And I suppose Christian theology is soul saving in the eternal sense ? I suppose God damns us or saves us according to our theology ? Christ hang on that cross 2,000 years ago so he can save people IF they will also remove themselves from Catholic theology, or from Judaic theology, or from whatever theology these objects of God's mercy find themselves in ?
Now, I am not saying that unbiblical doctrine is irrelevant to a gracious life. Biblical doctrine results in a gracious life, a correct understanding of God and His holiness and sovereignty, an understanding which will reflect on one's way of life and thinking. Biblical doctrine gives us the opportunity to "save yourselves from this untoward generation", like Peter said.
Exiting the Catholic church or any unChristian church and joining a Bible based, Bible believing, Christ honoring congregation will benefit an elect child of God here on this plane called time , in that he/she belongs in a sheepfold fed by an undershepherd (assuming that the undershepherd is a faithful child of God called by God to that office) with food for the spirit, but the elect's eternal salvation does not rest on any of these things, it rests on the finished work of Christ, the shed blood of Christ, and God's election from before the foundation of the world motivated by mercy alone.
So, in that sense, I do not point my finger at anyone, Mel Gibson, or anyone else, and say, gosh, he cannot be a Christian. After all, do I know who the elect are ? Was I there when God wrote their names on the Book of Life ? Did I hear the Father tell the Son, save this man or woman, and the Son tell the Father, thy will be done, and the Spirit say Amen ?
Do I absolutely, for sure, know that I am one of the elect ? I hope that blood was shed for me, I hope my name is in Heaven's book, and I anchor my hope in Christ and Him alone, that is what it means to me.
Now, as for Rosie O'Donnel, or Elton John, or those "gay" couples feeding on the anarchy created by the liberal mayor of San Francisco, that is another thing. I Cor. 6:9 is my basis for saying they are not of the kingdom of God, neither will they ever see the kingdom of God, unless God Himself changes their hearts.
Daniel David
New Member
pinoybaptist, I seriously object to your primitive baptist theology. It is outside the bounds of Christianity. If one does not repent and believe, he will go to hell. Stop ignoring the entire N.T. to feast upon this rubbish.
Christ will save his elect through the means of the proclamation of the gospel (1 Cor. 1 and Romans 10).
Christ will save his elect through the means of the proclamation of the gospel (1 Cor. 1 and Romans 10).
Daniel David said:
Daniel David
New Member
What? Was that English? No really, exegete those two texts. I know it is problamatic for your view, but go ahead and do it anyway.
Daniel David:
No. You exegete it and prove by so doing that every instance the word salvation is used, that salvation is with regards to eternal salvation and only eternal salvation.
No. You exegete it and prove by so doing that every instance the word salvation is used, that salvation is with regards to eternal salvation and only eternal salvation.
From what I have heard about The Passion from those who have seen it, including my former "pastor," I long ago concluded that Mel Gibson is extremely irreverent and disrepectful to Jesus Christ...
...my very first post on the BB was entitled "Is Mel Gibson Insane?" and I was convinced then that Mel is mentally disturbed, from televised interviews and other indications.
I do not believe that Mel Gibson is a saved Christian man, nor do I believe he has any true reverence for our Savior.
All his ridiculous extra-biblical nonsense does not result in a film that is a good "evangelical tool." Not at all. Just spawns false doctrine, bizarre conceptions, gratuitous violence, and spurious distortions to make an "exciting, stunning, tear-jerker movie."
Praising a biblically inaccurate film about God's plan of salvation is just a prelude to the ushering in of the Anti-Christ, whom most religious and political leaders will endorse and enforce obedience to.
God save the church!
...my very first post on the BB was entitled "Is Mel Gibson Insane?" and I was convinced then that Mel is mentally disturbed, from televised interviews and other indications.
I do not believe that Mel Gibson is a saved Christian man, nor do I believe he has any true reverence for our Savior.
All his ridiculous extra-biblical nonsense does not result in a film that is a good "evangelical tool." Not at all. Just spawns false doctrine, bizarre conceptions, gratuitous violence, and spurious distortions to make an "exciting, stunning, tear-jerker movie."
Praising a biblically inaccurate film about God's plan of salvation is just a prelude to the ushering in of the Anti-Christ, whom most religious and political leaders will endorse and enforce obedience to.
God save the church!
AMENOriginally posted by vaspers:
From what I have heard about The Passion from those who have seen it, including my former "pastor," I long ago concluded that Mel Gibson is extremely irreverent and disrepectful to Jesus Christ...
...my very first post on the BB was entitled "Is Mel Gibson Insane?" and I was convinced then that Mel is mentally disturbed, from televised interviews and other indications.
I do not believe that Mel Gibson is a saved Christian man, nor do I believe he has any true reverence for our Savior.
All his ridiculous extra-biblical nonsense does not result in a film that is a good "evangelical tool." Not at all. Just spawns false doctrine, bizarre conceptions, gratuitous violence, and spurious distortions to make an "exciting, stunning, tear-jerker movie."
Praising a biblically inaccurate film about God's plan of salvation is just a prelude to the ushering in of the Anti-Christ, whom most religious and political leaders will endorse and enforce obedience to.
God save the church!
C.S. Murphy
New Member
You are correct that the church doesn't save (wish the catholics understood)but a person who is indoctrinated into a false religion and places their eternal security on the false teaching they are receiving are lost, write it down big and plain. The catholics are one such false religion but there are others. Can they be saved, yes but not while holding onto their false beliefs. I honestly feel that an atheist has a better chance of finding Christ that a roman catholic or a member of any other ralse religion because satan has them blinded. Unless something changes they will die and go to hell while thinking they are secure. Now concerning you gay comments you note a distinction but really there is none, both groups have created their own God which they falsely worship. The catholics worship the Church, Mary and the Pope and Rosie worships her flesh (don't we all sometimes) while both groups think they are following their chosen agendas they are actually following satan. So after all my ramblings tell me plainly are you going to support the false doctrine of the rc church?
Murph
When anyone, Catholic, Baptist, Mennonite, Greek Orthodox, Methodist, Promise Keeper, whatever, says "you can't find salvation outside of our church, organization, or denomination" that is not a statement coming from a saved Christian, but is a heresy coming from a cult member.
A saved Christian who is truly born again knows absolutely that salvation is in Christ alone, outside any leader or institution or tradition. Christ only. Period. No works or rituals can add or subtract from Christ's free salvation received through faith, by grace alone.
Mel does not understand salvation, said that Christians "just have an easier ride [to heaven]." So how could Mel possibly make a decent Jesus movie, when he seems to not know the Savior at all? Not at all. Totally confused guy, this Mel Gibson.
Boycott "The Passion" if you love Biblical accuracy, reverence, and decency.
Check www.thunderstruck.org for review of ABC's ridiculous distortion, a 2 hour special, "Judas" airing on Monday March 8, 2004. Makes Judas look justified, at least somewhat, and not a flattering portrayal of Christ, not at all.
A saved Christian who is truly born again knows absolutely that salvation is in Christ alone, outside any leader or institution or tradition. Christ only. Period. No works or rituals can add or subtract from Christ's free salvation received through faith, by grace alone.
Mel does not understand salvation, said that Christians "just have an easier ride [to heaven]." So how could Mel possibly make a decent Jesus movie, when he seems to not know the Savior at all? Not at all. Totally confused guy, this Mel Gibson.
Boycott "The Passion" if you love Biblical accuracy, reverence, and decency.
Check www.thunderstruck.org for review of ABC's ridiculous distortion, a 2 hour special, "Judas" airing on Monday March 8, 2004. Makes Judas look justified, at least somewhat, and not a flattering portrayal of Christ, not at all.
Daniel David
New Member
Pinoybaptist, I would first of all like to say that I cannot believe I am defending salvation against another baptist. That always grieves me.
Christ said the following:
If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.
Now, you are supposing that one can reject that and still be saved. So saved people can die in their sins, is that it? Please. I have no more time for foolishness.
Christ said the following:
If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.
Now, you are supposing that one can reject that and still be saved. So saved people can die in their sins, is that it? Please. I have no more time for foolishness.
Daniel David:
For all your "superior" airs, you are unable to rise up to my challenge to your challenge. You said: Cahtolic theology is soul damning.
I challenged that. The gist of my challenge being that one's theology does not save him, nor damn him.
You challenged back and called my Primitive Baptist belief "rubbish", and you said God will save his elect through the proclamation of the Gospel.
I say no to that. In this post. God will save His elect thru the shed blood of Christ, the finished work of Christ, in fact, in God's eternal perspective, every elect is already seated with Christ in heavenly places.
And then I challenged you to prove that every instance when salvation is mentioned in the Bible it is in connection with eternal salvation.
You challenged me to exegete, I said no, you exegete. You prove by exegesis that every mention of salvation is about eternal salvation.
So, now, you say, you have no more time for foolishness ? Who is a fool but he who insists that apart from the finished work of Christ which he did and meant for the elect, born before his time, during his time, and after his time on earth, the finished work is actually ineffective if the elect happens to be holding to an erroneous theology such as Catholicism ?
For all your "superior" airs, you are unable to rise up to my challenge to your challenge. You said: Cahtolic theology is soul damning.
I challenged that. The gist of my challenge being that one's theology does not save him, nor damn him.
You challenged back and called my Primitive Baptist belief "rubbish", and you said God will save his elect through the proclamation of the Gospel.
I say no to that. In this post. God will save His elect thru the shed blood of Christ, the finished work of Christ, in fact, in God's eternal perspective, every elect is already seated with Christ in heavenly places.
And then I challenged you to prove that every instance when salvation is mentioned in the Bible it is in connection with eternal salvation.
You challenged me to exegete, I said no, you exegete. You prove by exegesis that every mention of salvation is about eternal salvation.
So, now, you say, you have no more time for foolishness ? Who is a fool but he who insists that apart from the finished work of Christ which he did and meant for the elect, born before his time, during his time, and after his time on earth, the finished work is actually ineffective if the elect happens to be holding to an erroneous theology such as Catholicism ?
Greg Linscott
<img src =/7963.jpg>
pinoybaptist,
I'm just curious, being new to the board and all-- is this your personal view or is this the standard view of all Primitive Baptists?
Also, in your view, where does the book of Galatians fall into this discussion (if at all)? You know, the whole "another Gospel," "anathema" idea Paul is so outspoken about?
I'm just curious, being new to the board and all-- is this your personal view or is this the standard view of all Primitive Baptists?
Also, in your view, where does the book of Galatians fall into this discussion (if at all)? You know, the whole "another Gospel," "anathema" idea Paul is so outspoken about?
Daniel David
New Member
Pinoy, I know that every instance of 'salvation', 'deliverance', etc., is not about eternal matters as in being saved from sin.
I did mention two texts that can mean nothing else though.
What exactly is their 'salvation' in those texts if not from sin? What is Paul saying they are saved from?
I did mention two texts that can mean nothing else though.
What exactly is their 'salvation' in those texts if not from sin? What is Paul saying they are saved from?
Hello, Glen:
In general, Primitive Baptists hold that God has His elect in all nations, tongues, people, race, everywhere, and that God has no need for human means to save those whom He elected unto salvation. The only means He needed was the blood of Christ.
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.
In general, Primitive Baptists hold that God has His elect in all nations, tongues, people, race, everywhere, and that God has no need for human means to save those whom He elected unto salvation. The only means He needed was the blood of Christ.
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.