Repentance

[Brother Bob]

rjprince:
First let me say that I could never express how sorrow I am over your loss of Matthew. I know the hurt will be there for the rest of your life, but with time and mostly with the help of God, you and your companion and family will be able to deal with it better. Most of all, there is coming a time when there will be a reunion with our love ones, who died in the Lord. God Bless,

Now to the post;

Bro Bob,


Though I understand the "Calvinist" position on regeneration I am never fully comfortable taking that label. I am, however, very comfortable with acknowledging that as a sinner I was "dead in trespasses and sins" and unable to come to God without having been drawn by the Father (Eph 2:1,5; John 6:44). The precise order of hearing the Word, conviction, regeneration, conversion, etc may be debated ad infinitum ad nauseum. The real issue is not what Calvin, Arminius, Spurgeon, Wesley, Hodge, Ladd, or others believed and taught. Rather, the issue at heart, as I am sure we would all agree, is "what saith the Scriptures" (Rom 4:3).

Jhn 12:32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.


Job 32:8But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

Jhn 15:22If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

I think scripture teaches otherwise.

My objection with making "sorrow over sin" a prerequisite to salvation is that although that may be the dominant emotion that some may experience at, or prior to their salvation, "sorrow over sin" is not a Biblical requirement for salvation – BELIEVING FAITH IS. Whatever our definition of "repentance unto salvation" it must fit consistently with EVERY Biblical account of true conversion AND it must also fit with EVERY personal account of true conversion. The fact that one person may have experienced a genuine sorrow for having committed murder prior to his/her salvation does not make that specific sorrow normative for all conversions. If we define repentance unto salvation in a way that includes "sorrow over sin" we have defined salvation in more narrow terms than what we find in Scripture.

I have a question:
1. Are you sorry now you sinned against God, or were you sorry after you did come to the knowledge you had sinned against him?

Of course David felt sorrow over his sin – he was a believer and under the conviction of the Holy Spirit over his very specific sins, which incidentally, were WILLFUL (not sure what you mean by your signature, but if you mean that a willful sin can make you lose it, the passage then teaches that you can NEVER get it back!). He made some very deliberate and calculated choices in his sin, would we say that he "lost" his relationship with God? I hope not, David did not pray for a restoration of his salvation, but rather that God would restore the joy of his salvation (Psa 51:12). His feeling that he may lose the Holy Spirit does not in any way demonstrate that such was a real possibility, only that he genuinely felt he may lose the Spirit. Moses spoke of God blotting his name of the book, that does not mean that it could have happened, only that Moses did indeed express that thought.

My signature does not matter what I mean, it is the word of God and up to ever individual to abide by it. I believe in OSAS, I believe that scripture tells us who the false prophets and belivers are.

The point of David being sorry over his sins should show us that we should be sorry over our sins, I don't know anyone in a conversion state who is gleeful over his sins. Do you?

For the rest of us,


Every word of Scripture is accurate, but NOT every word of Scripture is true. God told Adam and Eve, "Eat the fruit and you will surely die". Satan said, "You shall not surely die". It is accurate that Satan said that, but HE LIED, therefore that phrase, though accurately recorded is not true! It is true that he said it, but what he said was not true.

I am sorry, but you lost me here. I don't know what you mean?

Further to take OT examples of repentance and salvation and use them to support one’s view of repentance and salvation fails to account for the fact that although both OT and NT saints are saved on the basis of their faith, the content of that faith differs vastly! Abraham believed God would be faithful to His promises in Gen 12,15,17, etc. Abraham did not believe that Jesus would die on the cross for the sins of all ages and thereby provide a way for his sins to be taken away once and for all. It is wrong to take ANY PRE-CROSS account of salvation and make it the standard for salvation after the cross. The gospel that John the Baptist preached was not the gospel of the cross. The gospel of the kingdom that the apostles preached when Jesus sent them forth was not the gospel of the cross. The 12, or at least the 11, did not have much understanding of the concept of the cross until after the fact. It is therefore wrong to improperly apply some of the passages speaking of kingdom discipleship in a manner that adds works to salvation. They did not believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus because it had not happened yet. Further, the 12 were quite opposed to Jesus going to Jerusalem to suffer many things at the hands of chief priests, rulers, and Romans. They had no concept of how His death would bring about salvation. To pull a passage out of context willy nilly and make it normative for salvation in this age of grace, the times of the Gentiles, is to mishandle and wrongly divide the Word of Truth.

Was Israel looking for the Messiah or not. I believe that Jesus blood did cover them and all men that have been saved.

Act 4:12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

You surely don't believe some will have "white robes" and some will not in Heaven do you?

Rev 13:8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

To pull a passage out of context willy nilly and make it normative for salvation in this age of grace, the times of the Gentiles, is to mishandle and wrongly divide the Word of Truth.

This kind of language is why we have such "heated" discussions. You may consider it willy nilly, but I do not. It just goes against your theology.

Yes, all Scripture is for us and we may learn thereby. But, not all Scripture applies to us in the same manner. There are some promises and commands that are to Israel and for Israel. It is wrong to make them normative for church-age believers. The law was not given to the Gentiles, it was given to the Jews. Most of the OT covenants are not with the Gentiles, they are with the Jews. Failure to rightly divide in this regard leads to all kinds of problems in many areas of theology, not only in our soteriology but in our ecclesiology and eschatology as well

Well, I am sure you feel you are more capable to "rightly divide" the scripture. I have my belief and it has served me for almost 36 years.

God bless,

BBob,

 

[EdSutton]

First, rjprince, let me add to what some others have said in regard to the passing of your son. I too, cannot fathom such, as it has not happened to me. The closest I can come is that of the loss of my own younger brother at the age of 50, and me being 4 1/2 years older than he was. He was a Christian, as well. Your family has my prayers even though I am just now hearing about this, to my recollection.

One other thought is that more people need to repent of their own self-righteousness than their sin.

You said a mouthful here in one sentence! Perhaps you said more than I can say in this entire post. Scripture declares exactly this, where our salvation is concerned. In fact, here is what Scripture has to say as to the "direction" of repentance in regard to salvation. (My emphases.)

20 how I kept back nothing that was helpful, but proclaimed it to you, and taught you publicly and from house to house, 21 testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts. 20:20-21 , NKJV)

1 Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, (Heb. 6:1 , NKJV)

4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? (Rom. 2:4 , NKJV)

10 For godly sorrow produces a change of mind that leads to an irrevocable salvation, but worldly sorrow produces death. [II Cor. 7:10 ( author's rendering)]

I have not before 'Biblically' comented in this thread. However, as I read Scripture, what you, lbaker, and DHK (and some parts of what some others) have declared, is pretty consistent with the true Biblical teaching of repentance, especially as it is a necessary part of salvation. I have already said this many times in the past, as my posts in older threads will show. I'll not spend the time to list them, but they are all still there, if one looks back, usually to the threads that have 'repentance' in the heading.

And I am one of those who has used these following (or similar) phrases:

1. - "Repent/repentance is, so to speak, the "flip" side of believe/faith, in the matter of salvation."

2. - Repentance is an integral part and parcel of the one 'act' of "believing", in order to be saved.

3. - One cannot believe to salvation, apart from this 'repentance' or change of mind (thinking).

However, let me now here add that this repentance (as found in the above cited Scriptures) is not 'directed' "inwardly" toward sin, in any way, form, or fashion. It must be and can only be directed "toward" God. (Acts 20:21) One can hope (and I most certainly do) that one who believes will certainly change his or her mind toward sin for the purpose of "givng a good report", but simply changing one's mind toward sin, and hence attempting to reform one's life will not and cannot possibly lead to, or give one eternal life, for that is entirely self-centered (and/or "works centered") and that, in fact, is a real "'crossless' gospel" (Hi, Lou M.!), (and one that is totally devoid of grace and faith, FTR) as is being 'cussed' and discussed on another thread. I don't really want to derail this, but would add that "Lordship Salvation" is just another name for, basically, the same thing, which is nothing more than "backloading" works into salvation by grace, through faith.

[Some others may have said some very similar things, here I do not really know, (apart from one 'banned' individual) without looking it up.]

Now you know who has said this "flip-side" comment previously, DHK and Tom Butler.

Oh, I'll toss this one in, once again, for free. The only individual in the OT, who is ever said to "repent" is Job! (Job. 42:6) And only one time is this said. Not Noah, not David, not Solomon, not Jacob, not anyone else. Well, that is aside from God who is said to repent or not repent 30 times. Strange, I somehow never hear a lot about the Lord 'repenting'. Hmmm! (I haven't specifically done the same study in the NT.)

Look that up for yourselves! Don't even necessarily take my word for it! Be a Berean! Don't just repeat stuff that may not be Biblical that others say, folks!

BTW, If you are still passing out the cash there, Brother Bob, and are looking for a place to donate some, I'll take a little of it, here in Central KY. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

You earn all that money driving a cab and want some of mine..........

Jam 2:18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Rev 22:12¶And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

I can't remember DHK believing in Godly sorrow working repentance towards salvation??? Maybe, I am misreading you?

10 For godly sorrow produces a change of mind that leads to an irrevocable salvation, but worldly sorrow produces death. [II Cor. 7:10 ( author's rendering)]

Act 26:20But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and [then] to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

2Pe 3:9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.


Act 17:30And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Act 17:32And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this [matter].

I am wondering if those who say they had no "sorrow" over their sins against God. Are they sorry now or have they ever been sorry they sinned against God???

 

[Brother Bob]

rjprince;

My objection with making "sorrow over sin" a prerequisite to salvation is that although that may be the dominant emotion that some may experience at, or prior to their salvation, "sorrow over sin" is not a Biblical requirement for salvation – BELIEVING FAITH IS. Whatever our definition of "repentance unto salvation" it must fit consistently with EVERY Biblical account of true conversion AND it must also fit with EVERY personal account of true conversion. The fact that one person may have experienced a genuine sorrow for having committed murder prior to his/her salvation does not make that specific sorrow normative for all conversions. If we define repentance unto salvation in a way that includes "sorrow over sin" we have defined salvation in more narrow terms than what we find in Scripture

BBob; I don't think I am saying its a bibical requirement, but a natural thing that takes place in a persons life who has sinned against their God. How could you require sorrow, if it did not come because you were in the stage of loving God and knew you sinned against Him, It would not seem natural to me. I think the "Godly sorrow" that worketh repentance to salvation, was a "cause and effect" thing. You came to the realization you were a sinner against "The Almighty God", of which you were created to give Glory and honor, there must be some kind of reaction of which I believe is "sorrow".

 

[rjprince]

Bro Bob,
Thank you for your kind expression of sympathy over our loss. We are grateful for the many on the board who prayed for us and with us from Feb 2005 through July 2006. Without His grace we could not have made it.

Jhn 12:32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.
Job 32:8But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.
Jhn 15:22If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.
I think scripture teaches otherwise.

Do you believe in universalism, that all men will be saved? If not, is it the will of man that determines the difference? Do I come to Christ for salvation because there is something in me that makes me more worthy to receive it, or something that makes me more righteous because I seek it? Or is it God that calls me to Himself? Not sure what your point was with Job 32:8?

I have a question:
1. Are you sorry now you sinned against God, or were you sorry after you did come to the knowledge you had sinned against him?

I was saved as a young person and did not have a long list of sins to repent over (according to that understanding of repent). I had never done anything really bad. Of course I am sorry for the sins I have committed against the Lord. That is not the point. Doctrine cannot be established based on experience! It must come from consistent interpretation and application of the Word of God. The point is does sound Biblical exegesis teach that repentance is sorrow over sin or that sorrow over sin is required for salvation? I think not. Show me otherwise, if you can. I would add that your evidence must be from passages that deal with salvation or it has little impact on the discussion.

My signature does not matter what I mean, it is the word of God and up to ever individual to abide by it. I believe in OSAS, I believe that scripture tells us who the false prophets and belivers are.
The point of David being sorry over his sins should show us that we should be sorry over our sins, I don't know anyone in a conversion state who is gleeful over his sins. Do you?

The verse at the end of your signature is a classic passage for those who argue AGAINST OSAS. Just not sure why someone who believes OSAS would use that one as a signature.
No believer can rejoice in sin without paying the price. But there is pleasure in sin, even if only for a season (Heb 11:25).


The reference to Satan's lie was to point out that it is imperative to look at a passage in context, not out of context.


Yes, Israel was looking for their Messiah, but not a serving suffering Messiah (Isa 61:1-2a). They wanted the power, glory, and judgment against their enemies (Isa 61:2b). They did not understand and as a nation they did not accept Jesus as their Messiah, though many individuals did. The blood of Jesus covered those who believed on Him as well as OT saints. Those before the cross did not understand the cross. The requirement for salvation in all ages has been the shedding of blood and faith; the content of that faith (what must be believed) has varied throughout the different stages of God's progressive revelation.


Will all the righteous have white robes? I think so. Will they all be part of the church, the body of Christ? I think not.


Not sure what point you were making in quoting Rev 13:8 "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." What does the worship of the beast have to do with this? Or were you emphasizing that the names of believers are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world?

This kind of language is why we have such "heated" discussions. You may consider it willy nilly, but I do not. It just goes against your theology.
Well, I am sure you feel you are more capable to "rightly divide" the scripture. I have my belief and it has served me for almost 36 years.
God bless,
BBob,

This is why I made a distinction between what was directed to you what was directed "to the rest of us". I wanted to make it clear that the "willy nilly" and the "rightly divide" was not directed at you, or anybody in particular. Rather, a caution for all of us to take the passages in all of the context.


I have only been a student of the Word for about 35 years myself (since about 16). I have not arrived. I find myself continually refining my theology to bring it into line with the Word of God. I am not where I was 20 years ago and I hope that should the Lord tarry, I am not where I will be in the future. I do not think I have it all figured out. I have spent most of my life studying, teaching, and preaching the Word of God and I continually find myself making adjustments in my theological positions. No major overhauls, but continual adjustments and refinements. The major overhaul portions were considered in great detail at least 25 years ago. I am always willing to go back and listen to arguments against my own theological constructs that I consider to be non-negotiables. If there is an argument that I cannot answer, either I do not know my Bible well enough, or I need to change my position.


That said, there are some areas of Theology that I have spent a great deal of time over. This is one of those. There are few doctrines of greater significance than our salvation.


AGAIN, NO REFERENCE TO ANYONE IN PARTICULAR, AND CERTAINLY NOT TO YOU BROTHER BOB, I AM SURE WE WOULD AGREE ON FAR MORE THAN WE WOULD DISAGREE ON, but there are some who’s minds are like concrete – thoroughly mixed and well set.
Until we stand in His glorious presence, may all of be willing to hear the other side with grace, trusting God to lead us more and more into a better understanding of Himself and His truth.


In HIS Service, and yours,
rjprince

 

[rjprince]

Bro Bob,

Regarding 2Cor 7:10, I am not sure that the "salvation" produced by "godly sorrow" is necessarily salvation in a primary sense of being saved by belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. The word swteria is used in Acts 7:25 to speak of Moses "delivering" the Jews from Egypt according to the Lord’s command. It is also used in Acts 27:34 when Paul urges the sailors to take some meat for their "health". It may be that their sorrow as believers over their sin led them to repentance that in turn kept them from experiencing God’s chastening.

In any case, the passage says that "godly sorrow worketh repentance", NOT that "godly sorrow IS repentance". I will readily admit that many people do experience a great deal of sorrow when they understand that their lives have been an affront and an insult to the righteousness of a thrice Holy God. This does not demonstrate that EVERY ONE must experience a great deal of sorrow in order to be saved.

There is NO indication that any sorrow was experienced in Acts 10 at the household of Cornelius (Acts 10:42-44,48). Would we therefore conclude that they weren’t saved? Or would we insist that certainly there must have been sorrow, even though it wasn’t mentioned?

 

[Brother Bob]

Regarding 2Cor 7:10, I am not sure that the "salvation" produced by "godly sorrow" is necessarily salvation in a primary sense of being saved by belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. The word swteria is used in Acts 7:25 to speak of Moses "delivering" the Jews from Egypt according to the Lord’s command. It is also used in Acts 27:34 when Paul urges the sailors to take some meat for their "health". It may be that their sorrow as believers over their sin led them to repentance that in turn kept them from experiencing God’s chastening.

In any case, the passage says that "godly sorrow worketh repentance", NOT that "godly sorrow IS repentance". I will readily admit that many people do experience a great deal of sorrow when they understand that their lives have been an affront and an insult to the righteousness of a thrice Holy God. This does not demonstrate that EVERY ONE must experience a great deal of sorrow in order to be saved.

There is NO indication that any sorrow was experienced in Acts 10 at the household of Cornelius (Acts 10:42-44,48). Would we therefore conclude that they weren’t saved? Or would we insist that certainly there must have been sorrow, even though it wasn’t mentioned?

I will take the small one first, if you don't mind.
2Cr 7:10For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

Seems to me, scripture plainly says worketh repentance "to Salvation". What really put the clincher on it is, to have sorrow the other way worketh death. So, you can have sorry to God which give eternal life, Or you can have sorrow to the world or satan which brings "death". IMO

I can understand if you believe in the very young being baptized. Of course the younger the less sorrow. Many come to know God and realize they were never saved. That is why I do not believe in infant baptism.

In Cornelius case, he had been praying and making alms. I believe that would indicate, he was in trouble over his sins.

 

[rjprince]

BBob,

I certainly do not hold with Paedobaptism. I do hold that children who are capable of understanding that they are lost are also capable of receiving the Lord Jesus.

Again, the fact that godly sorrow WORKETH repentance does not mean that godly sorrow IS repentance or that a person cannot be led to repentance on the basis of the goodness of God, as opposed to sorrow...

Rom 2:4 "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?"

There is no mention of sorrow here either...

Re Cornelius, there is NOTHING in Acts 10:1-4 to in any way indicate sorrow or penitance, only worship and reverence.

 

[Brother Bob]

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Jhn 12:32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.
Job 32:8But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.
Jhn 15:22If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.
I think scripture teaches otherwise.


Do you believe in universalism, that all men will be saved? If not, is it the will of man that determines the difference? Do I come to Christ for salvation because there is something in me that makes me more worthy to receive it, or something that makes me more righteous because I seek it? Or is it God that calls me to Himself? Not sure what your point was with Job 32:8?
Quote:

Of course I do not believe in Universalism. I believe we are saved by Grace "through" faith. Not of works lest any man should boast, but if you read closely the scripture is speaking of the works of the Law, such as Circumcism.
Rom 8:20For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope,
We were made subject to vanity, (sin), but not willingly, (God did not want us to sin) but by reason of Him (God) who hath subjected the same in hope. (Jesus Christ)
Now, I consider faith as a "work" of God but do not believe it is a work to us. I believe that man can either believe or reject.
Jhn 1:9[That] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
I am not going to post a bunch of scripture of which has been posted countless of times. It is that I believe that man can believe and that God made him that way. If you want more scripture I would be happy to provide, but of course we been this trail many times.

I was saved as a young person and did not have a long list of sins to repent over (according to that understanding of repent). I had never done anything really bad. Of course I am sorry for the sins I have committed against the Lord. That is not the point. Doctrine cannot be established based on experience! It must come from consistent interpretation and application of the Word of God. The point is does sound Biblical exegesis teach that repentance is sorrow over sin or that sorrow over sin is required for salvation? I think not. Show me otherwise, if you can. I would add that your evidence must be from passages that deal with salvation or it has little impact on the discussion.

I though you would be sorry now, so you should be able to see looking from my perspective how I believe I can be sorrow before salvation?

Will all the righteous have white robes? I think so. Will they all be part of the church, the body of Christ? I think not.

I think scripture will prove that the "white robes" came from the blood of the Lamb.

I have only been a student of the Word for about 35 years myself (since about 16). I have not arrived. I find myself continually refining my theology to bring it into line with the Word of God. I am not where I was 20 years ago and I hope that should the Lord tarry, I am not where I will be in the future. I do not think I have it all figured out. I have spent most of my life studying, teaching, and preaching the Word of God and I continually find myself making adjustments in my theological positions. No major overhauls, but continual adjustments and refinements. The major overhaul portions were considered in great detail at least 25 years ago. I am always willing to go back and listen to arguments against my own theological constructs that I consider to be non-negotiables. If there is an argument that I cannot answer, either I do not know my Bible well enough, or I need to change my position.

I am sure you have and I have a great deal of respect for you and have no trouble calling you my Brother in Christ.

 

[TCGreek]

1. Why not combined both realities?

2. In our salvation we have experienced both: it was His kindness to begin with and our godly sorrow is that conviction of sin which led to repentance.

3. But I do not necessarily equate godly sorrow with tears and the like. I see it as that conviction wrought by the Spirit.

4. With that in mind, I see 2 Cor 7:10, though addressed to Christians, as an objective statement and reality.

 

[Brother Bob]

I certainly do not hold with Paedobaptism. I do hold that children who are capable of understanding that they are lost are also capable of receiving the Lord Jesus.

Again, the fact that godly sorrow WORKETH repentance does not mean that godly sorrow IS repentance or that a person cannot be led to repentance on the basis of the goodness of God, as opposed to sorrow...

Rom 2:4 "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?"

There is no mention of sorrow here either...

Re Cornelius, there is NOTHING in Acts 10:1-4 to in any way indicate sorrow or penitance, only worship and reverence.

Well, I grant you there is nothing mentioned in Acts 10:1-4, except he was praying before Peter got there, but there is something mentioned 2Corth 7:10

I agree it does not have to be sorrow to led you to repentance. I just believe it will be there if you have enough understanding to realize what you have done against God.

 

[Brother Bob]

1. Why not combined both realities?

2. In our salvation we have experienced both: it was His kindness to begin with and our godly sorrow is that conviction of sin which led to repentance.

3. But I do not necessarily equate godly sorrow with tears and the like. I see it as that conviction wrought by the Spirit.

4. With that in mind, I see 2 Cor 7:10, though addressed to Christians, as an objective statement and reality.

I can amen that TC;

 

[rjprince]

I’ll keep an eye on this to see if anything new comes up, but in the words of the great philosopher, chocolate lover, soldier, ping-pong player, long distance runner, and famous shrimp fisherman –

(must be read with a deep southern drawl) – "and that’s all I have to say ‘bout that".

 

[TCGreek]

I can amen that TC;

1. Part of the work of the Spirit is to convict of sin (John 16:8), and I see Acts 2:37 as evidence of that at the point of salvation.

2. But I also see the conviction of the Spirit as a reality in the ongoing life of the Christian as in 2 Cor 7:10.

3. So that is why I see the statement in 2 Cor 7:10 as an objective reality, though the context of Acts 2:37 and 2 Cor 7:10 are different.

4. So the salvation of Acts 2:37 would be a different concept than that of 2 Cor 7:10.

 

[EdSutton]

You earn all that money driving a cab and want some of mine..........

Well, I thought it was worth a shot, bein' as I saw a picture of you thumbing through a big wad of bills and saw where you asked another how much they needed. :saint: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

TC;

1. Part of the work of the Spirit is to convict of sin (John 16:8), and I see Acts 2:37 as evidence of that at the point of salvation.

2. But I also see the conviction of the Spirit as a reality in the ongoing life of the Christian as in 2 Cor 7:10.

3. So that is why I see the statement in 2 Cor 7:10 as an objective reality, though the context of Acts 2:37 and 2 Cor 7:10 are different.

4. So the salvation of Acts 2:37 would be a different concept than that of 2 Cor 7:10.
__________________

We have to get away from this thinking that because its to the church at Corth, that they all are saved. We know some of them were not. Some were saying there was no resurrection. Others were fornicators and Lord knows. In the days of Paul and the Apostles, it was a time of transition, when many of the Jews joined in to see what and who was Jesus. They didn't have Him, so they were not saved, but were part of the Church of Corth. Paul knew that and that is why he continuly preached repentance to them.

BBob,

 

[rjprince]

1. Part of the work of the Spirit is to convict of sin (John 16:8), and I see Acts 2:37 as evidence of that at the point of salvation.

Just gotta jump back in for a minute, the Holy Spirit does not convict unbelievers of sin in general, but of the sin of unbelief...

Joh 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me.

 

[Brother Bob]

Well, I thought it was worth a shot, bein' as I saw a picture of you thumbing through a big wad of bills and saw where you asked another how much they needed. :saint: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

Ed; if the crowd gets much smaller there won't be anyone except you and me and a couple more. I may have to share with you. Hang in there...............

 

[Brother Bob]

Just gotta jump back in for a minute, the Holy Spirit does not convict unbelievers of sin in general, but of the sin of unbelief...

Joh 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me.

That "unbelief" covers a big territory the same as "belief" covers many things also.

 

[TCGreek]

TC;

We have to get away from this thinking that because its to the church at Corth, that they all are saved. We know some of them were not. Some were saying there was no resurrection. Others were fornicators and Lord knows. In the days of Paul and the Apostles, it was a time of transition, when many of the Jews joined in to see what and who was Jesus. They didn't have Him, so they were not saved, but were part of the Church of Corth. Paul knew that and that is why he continuly preached repentance to them.

BBob,

1. I think the context should guide us along. Paul wrote them a previous letter asking them to repent of various sins (v.7:8).

2. The letter caused them sorrow (v.8).

3. It was a sorrow according to God, so that they will not suffer loss (v.9). Now, we must ask ourselves, What kind of loss would they have suffered if they didn't repent? Clearly, not that of eternal salvation.

4. I believe Paul was address Christians and the loss that did would suffer would be one of favor with God, because failure to repent would mean displeasure from God, but they would still be considered saved.