Salvation of the Soul (purchased possession)

[steaver]

Since we have only touched the tip of the iceberg that brings down this "soul not yet saved" doctrine, we will continue with a second thread.

Quote: (steaver)
You have showed nothing

(Jump)...Man you really do just want to hold on to "your" doctrine don't you. I have showed you that the Scriptures you are using to base "your theory" on don't even say what you are claiming they say. Yet I have showed nothing . . . ?

Okay . . . well if you want to think that be my guest. Time for me to exit again, so I don't get lecutered again on my maturity level So until some more new material comes up I am out.

By the way did "you" develop this doctrine? Is that why you are holding on so tight? Or did you learn it from someone that you have up on a pedestal? And it would be too much to knock them off?

I'm trying to figure out why you are clinging so much to this doctrine when you have been clearly shown through the plain reading of Scripture that it is not correct. It just blows my mind.

Or is it just too much that you would have to tell your brother he was right? I know that would be some hefty crow to eat, but trust me he would rejoice, and he probably wouldn't even say told ya so

All you "said", giving zero support for, concerning Romans 5 is "just because you see the word blood it doesn't mean it is speaking about the soul". That is not showing someone anything. Show me why the blood is not speaking about the soul in Romans 5.

Your mind should not be blown at all. If you take the time to answer a few questions for yourself you will see clearly that the soul has been purchased by the blood of Christ and is possessed of Christ. But you clearly ignore this scripture in favor of clinging to this strange doctrine that infiltrated your race. You was probably running a good race until someone threw this monkey wrench onto you. I know my brother was.

I will try it again....this new material has been ignored thus far...so give it a shot.

Can you answer the following Qs? I gave a hint for 2 and I gave my answer for 4. I would like to hear your answers. Maybe you can change my mind and show me how Christ did not purchase souls with His blood and show me how Christ does not possess these souls until the redemption.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Q1) Who is the church of God? Believers? Yes or No?

Q2) Who is the blood an atonement for? A soul? Yes or No? (Leviticus 17:11)

Q3) Did Christ's blood purchase souls? Yes or No?

Q4) What is the purchased possession? Purchased by the blood is souls. Possessed by Christ is souls.

"until the redemption of the purchased possession"....it is already purchased by the blood, it is already owned by Christ, redemption is promissed, therefore Christian souls have been saved, are being saved, and will be saved. James, Peter and Hebrews declares the future finality of this truth.

Eph 1:12That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

Eph 1:13In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.)

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

Show me why the blood is not speaking about the soul in Romans 5.

I've done it four times now. If you haven't gotten it by now a fifth time isn't going to help I don't think. Like I said I don't know why you are clinging to this doctrine so much but you obviously are going to believe what you want to believe despite what Scripture says. And you are entitled to do that if you so choose.

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....So until some more new material comes up I am out.

Can you answer the following Qs? I gave a hint for 2 and I gave my answer for 4. I would like to hear your answers. Maybe you can change my mind and show me how Christ did not purchase souls with His blood and show me how Christ does not possess these souls until the redemption.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Q1) Who is the church of God? Believers? Yes or No?

Q2) Who is the blood an atonement for? A soul? Yes or No? (Leviticus 17:11)

Q3) Did Christ's blood purchase souls? Yes or No?

Q4) What is the purchased possession? Purchased by the blood is souls. Possessed by Christ is souls.

"until the redemption of the purchased possession"....it is already purchased by the blood, it is already owned by Christ, redemption is promissed, therefore Christian souls have been saved, are being saved, and will be saved. James, Peter and Hebrews declares the future finality of this truth.

Eph 1:12That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

Eph 1:13In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.)

God Bless!

 

[steaver]

Jump made some very revealing points to this strange doctrine he has fallen prey to.

(Jump)...I know this doctrine doesn't sound right. I struggled with it. One of the ones that I learned it from struggled with it when he was first introduced to it, but brother this is the Truth of Scripture.

(Jump)...The main one that I read through at first I thought he was off his rocker as most people do when first introduced to this material.

My brother said the exact same things and said that his pastor said the same as well. This alone should cause great pause for the Holy Spirit is the One who is to guide us into truth. If this doctrine were true the Holy Spirit wouldn't have fought it so desperately. Finally after wrestling with the Holy Spirit's rejecting of this teaching the flesh wins out and the blood of Christ suddenly takes a back seat.

You will notice how Jump declared that this teaching is "strong meat". But then he also claims it is the plain simple reading of the text, no tuff chewing needed. It is contradictory at every twist and turn.

Here is why the Holy Spirit causes such a struggle in those believers who come accross this false teaching. This teaching takes the blood of Christ and tramples it under foot. Suddenly the blood of Christ, this precious and brutal sacrifice for souls, is brushed aside and self becomes this believer's new focus. They can say all they want that this is not so but they deceive themselves. This believer now becomes focused on saving their own souls needing the blood of Christ only as a formality.

How many Holy Spirit inspired hymns are sung every Sunday with the blood of Christ being the central focus of the believers salvation? My brother and his pastor told me that many of those hymns were written by people who did not understand. They "did not understand" but when these hymns are sung the spirit wells up inside the believer who holds the blood of Christ as special, with humility and humbleness, and as the perfect atonement for their soul.

'Nothing but the blood of Jesus' would be a lie and many hymns would have to be stricken from the worship service if this doctrine were true.

I wonder which it is they want us to believe. Simple plain reading of the text or strong meat and a struggling to accept it. This debate has been very telling and I feel blessed by God to have had the opportunity to shed some light on this false teaching. It is sad to lose even one sheep to this but I thank God only a few have abandoned the true salvation of the soul that is 'nothing but the blood of Jesus'.

God Bless!

 

[BobRyan]

The person who is the soul and the person who is the spirit are not two different persons. It is one Person -- and a person CAN NOT be BOTH lost AND saved!

There is no text in all of scripture saying "soul lost BUT SPIRIT SAVED".

There is no text in all of scripture saying "spirit lost BUT SOUL SAVED".

There is no text in all of scripture saying that you can divide the soul and spirit as to different people - they are ONE person. No "body sharing".

The PERSON thinks. The PERSON will go to heaven or hell.

This is incredibly easy to read in scripture. "WHOSOEVER WILL" is not a reference to "just the spirit".

And that is Steaver's side - that has truth in it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Matt 18 "Forgiveness revoked" for the PERSON
John 15 Cast out of the vine of Christ and burned in the fire --
Romans 11 REMOVED as a branch from Christ exactly as the lost Jews.

Romans 6 the "reward" for evil deeds is the second death.

2Cor 5:10 we must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ - to be judged according to deeds DONE IN THE BODY (i.e. deeds of the PERSON) whether they be good OR evil.

These texts are NOT about "less candy in heaven" as J. Jump points out.

These are all J Jump's texts - the part where he does have truth in his argument.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[J. Jump]

My brother said the exact same things and said that his pastor said the same as well. This alone should cause great pause for the Holy Spirit is the One who is to guide us into truth.

Again your argument makes no sense. If we were to use this Steaver logic then we would have to say that the simple gospel message of salvation by grace through faith isn't true either, because there are many people that struggle with the message before they are saved.

Just because one struggles with the Truth, doesn't mean it isn't true. That's just silly.

If this doctrine were true the Holy Spirit wouldn't have fought it so desperately.

I don't even understand this statement. The Holy Spirit doesn't fight. It is we as fallen humans that wrestle with Truth sometimes.

Finally after wrestling with the Holy Spirit's rejecting of this teaching the flesh wins out and the blood of Christ suddenly takes a back seat.

Well that is certainly your opinion and you are entitled to it, but it's wrong. Never once have I said the blood of Christ takes a back seat. The blood of Christ is the very foundation! So please don't accuse me of believing "your" opinion.

You will notice how Jump declared that this teaching is "strong meat". But then he also claims it is the plain simple reading of the text, no tuff chewing needed. It is contradictory at every twist and turn.

Man you are just desperate to find "something" aren't you This "doctrine" is strong meat. That doesn't mean that every verse of Scripture that supports this doctrine is difficult . . . wow.

This teaching takes the blood of Christ and tramples it under foot. Suddenly the blood of Christ, this precious and brutal sacrifice for souls, is brushed aside and self becomes this believer's new focus. They can say all they want that this is not so but they deceive themselves. This believer now becomes focused on saving their own souls needing the blood of Christ only as a formality.

Utter nonsense. All you are doing is trying to shovel "your" opinion of this doctrine onto its believers.

How many Holy Spirit inspired hymns are sung every Sunday with the blood of Christ being the central focus of the believers salvation?

Wow so now we are supposed to drop what we believe and believe what you believe because of some songs. Again . . . wow. By the way the blood of Christ IS the central focus. Without the shedding of blood there is NO remision of sins! Can't get any more important than that.

but when these hymns are sung the spirit wells up inside the believer

That's called an emotional high. The same thing can happen if you watch that home improvement show on ABC. One must be VERY careful about letting their emotions rule the moment!

'Nothing but the blood of Jesus' would be a lie and many hymns would have to be stricken from the worship service if this doctrine were true.

Well the only thing that I can remember of that song is "what can wash away my sins . . . nothing but the blood of Jesus." So I would agree with that statement. And yes there are a number of hymns that are great songs, but theologically incorrect. That shouldn't come as any surprise. Whether one believes "this" doctrine or not that is true.

I can't believe you now want us to turn away from this because of songs.

I wonder which it is they want us to believe. Simple plain reading of the text or strong meat and a struggling to accept it.

Well I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think many would take issue with this . . . I just want people to let the text say what the text says instead of approaching the text with a slant. We are told that Scripture contains milk, meat and strong meat, so I'm not sure why you would try to argue that point? Some texts are easy to understand, while some texts are more complicated. I don't know why you would try to argue that point. You are the only person that I have ever come across that says the entire Bible is easy to understand. To me that's a pretty bold and arrogant statement to make. I don't know of any theologians that have even made that statement.

I feel blessed by God to have had the opportunity to shed some light on this false teaching.

:laugh: Thanks for the good chuckle. I needed that. That's just a riot. :laugh:

 

[J. Jump]

The person who is the soul and the person who is the spirit are not two different persons. It is one Person -- and a person CAN NOT be BOTH lost AND saved!

There is no text in all of scripture saying "soul lost BUT SPIRIT SAVED".

Bob again just because you type this doesn't make it so. I know that's your "mo," but it's just not true. It is possible to be lost and saved at the same time. Scripture declares it to be so.

And while you are correct there is one person . . . that person is made up of three separate components. We are made in the image of God three in one. And yes those three things can be separated, and its not hard to see that, where one believes in the gospel of the kingdom or not.

 

[DQuixote]

Steaver, you are driving a Cadillac. JJump keeps sending you Volkswagen parts - for free. That's how he wants you to keep your Caddy running.

Seriously -- I'm expecting another translation of the Bible at any time now, written by J. Jump and his teacher. They will have all the verses they choose changed to reflect their doctrine, and/or they'll footnote with "that's not talking about the soul" or "that's not talking about the spirit" or "that's not talking about the body."

You can put it on your library shelf right next to the Book of Mormon, the New World Translation, and the Bible according to Kenneth Copeland.

In fact, JJump, perhaps you could give us a one-time list of all the scriptures that you have to "adjust" to fit your doctrine. Get the reference right, but then reword each verse so that it means what you say it means. Since you are convinced in your doctrine, you'll have no problem adjusting the words in each verse. That way, we'll can compare all of your version to the original. Maybe we'll all be enlightened!

:1_grouphug: <----Wow! Look at this! Here's what it REALLY means!

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Steaver, you are driving a Cadillac. JJump keeps sending you Volkswagen parts - for free. That's how he wants you to keep your Caddy running.

Seriously -- I'm expecting another translation of the Bible at any time now, written by J. Jump and his teacher. They will have all the verses they choose changed to reflect their doctrine, and/or they'll footnote with "that's not talking about the soul" or "that's not talking about the spirit" or "that's not talking about the body."

You can put it on your library shelf right next to the Book of Mormon, the New World Translation, and the Bible according to Kenneth Copeland.

In fact, JJump, perhaps you could give us a one-time list of all the scriptures that you have to "adjust" to fit your doctrine. Get the reference right, but then reword each verse so that it means what you say it means. Since you are convinced in your doctrine, you'll have no problem adjusting the words in each verse. That way, we'll can compare all of your version to the original. Maybe we'll all be enlightened!

:1_grouphug: <----Wow! Look at this! Here's what it REALLY means!

What’s wrong with J. Jumps interpretation? Well, short answer…it conflicts with yours, and what makes yours better than his? But hey…this is what Sola Scriptura is all about huh?


-

 

[J. Jump]

I'm expecting another translation of the Bible at any time now,

I suppose your are a King James only person huh. Even if not maybe you can tell me why almost every translation that is readily available for purchase "never" translates portions of Matthew and John correctly.

Go back to a Greek text. Anyone of your chosing, because it doesn't matter. Every reference in Matthew, where any of the Bible translators that you deem to be acceptable, have translated the phrase kingdom of heaven. You will see that in the Greek text (again all of them that I am aware of) the phrase is actually the kingdom of the heavens. The article "the" is always used and heaven is always plural. Yet somehow your acceptable translators missed that one. But I guess that's okay huh. That one really doesn't matter huh?

And by the way the first first manuscript, the aleph text also has the same phrase in John 3.

I don't think we want to get into a translation discussion do we? I mean if you believe one version to be inspired that is your business, but it doesn't make it so.

In fact, JJump, perhaps you could give us a one-time list of all the scriptures that you have to "adjust" to fit your doctrine.

Yeah . . . here you go. Are you ready? Got your pen and paper handy. NONE. There's my list. Not a single one of them. Sorry to disappoint you.

By the way DQ I wouldn't quit my day job, because comedy really isn't in your future. :sleeping_2:

 

[J. Jump]

and what makes yours better than his?

That's what I keep asking, but no one wants to step up to the plate. Everybody is a bench warmer these days I guess. One would think those splinters start to hurt after a while.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

That's what I keep asking, but no one wants to step up to the plate. Everybody is a bench warmer these days I guess. One would think those splinters start to hurt after a while.

Some people like being told 'what to think' J. Jump, and when you challenge or encourage someone to step out of their comfort zone and think for themselves, they get defensive.


-

 

[J. Jump]

Some people like being told 'what to think' J. Jump, and when you challenge or encourage someone to step out of their comfort zone and think for themselves, they get defensive.

Boy you hit the nail on the head there my friend!

 

[steaver]

Some people like being told 'what to think' J. Jump,

Very true!

Who is it that steaver has referenced in 30 pages of post that he declares he has received his doctrines from? Answer is NNE.

Who is it that Jump has referenced that he has received his doctrines from? Answer; Arlen Chitwood, Watchman Nee and "the man who first introduced this doctrine to Jump".

I have no person trail, Jump does. But like you said, some people like being told what to think. Mormons, Catholics, JW's, SDA's (sorry Bob) all have someone other than sola scripture that they deem as a superior authority to scripture. I have NONE.

If this person had not come accross Jump's path, Jump would not be swallowed up in this phony teaching. He would have never found it in all of his hours upon hours of study. Why is that Jump? Why couldn't you ever see this doctrine BEFORE another PERSON happened to point it out? Did you not study the scriptures over and over? Why did such a plain simple reading of the text elude you for such a long time?

My brother's pastor was a walking bible for twenty years plus. One day he called my brother up and said, brother I came accross something on the internet that I want you to see! After twenty years of pastoring and twenty years of intense bible study, this man somehow never understood the plain simple reading of the scriptures. It took my brother two years to finally accept it and now he says it was like a light bulb going off. I say it was the Spirit turning them over to a depraved mind because they refused to turn away from the heresy.

Trace this doctrine back in time and you will not find it in any teachings of the earliest churches. I have not been able to trace it back any farther than Nee. Can anyone tell me what MAN started this doctrine?

Jump has declared that he received this teaching from another man. Apparantly several years of bible study never resulted in the plain reading of the text until this man came along to show him the truth. At his own admission, as everyone testifies the same to, they struggle with the strange doctrine and then wa-la, it suddenly makes all sense and now the scriptures plainly and simply say that the soul is not yet saved. How amazing indeed!

God Bless!

 

[steaver]

Gal 2:20I 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.

Isa 53:10¶Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Isa 53:11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.


One Soul given for many souls. The spirit does not need justified by the blood, the soul does! "If a soul sin" (Lev 17) . The spirit is the life line of the soul to God. Spirit testifys with spirit that we are the children of God.....

Rom 8:16The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:


How should we read this verse?

a) The Spirit itself beareth witness with spirits' spirits, that spirits are the children of God.

b) The Spirit itself beareth witness with souls' spirits, that souls are the children of God.

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

I have no person trail,

I have NONE.

Well that explains a lot, and answers my question that I raised previously. But it seems odd that you have "no" person trail. You've "never" been to church? You have "never" had a Sunday School teacher? You have been self-taught the entire way through Scripture?

If this person had not come accross Jump's path, Jump would not be swallowed up in this phony teaching. He would have never found it in all of his hours upon hours of study.

How do you know that to be true 100%?

There are actually a couple of people that I know of that discovered the difference between eternal salvation and the kingdom on their own study and it was only at that time did they start searching for others who had discovered the same thing. So again your theory holds very little water.

I say it was the Spirit turning them over to a depraved mind because they refused to turn away from the heresy.

Well to be perfectly honest and it certainly isn't to be rude, I'm just not interested in what you have to say. I'm not interested in what Arlen Chitwood has to say, or Watchman Nee or Charles Stanely or _______________ you fill in the blank. I am only interested in what the Scripture has to say. That doesn't mean the Holy Spirit doesn't use men to teach us, because He does. Well at least some of us . But unless they are saying what Scripture says their words mean very little.

So what you "think" about the situation has no relevance whatsoever. You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is just that - opinion.

Trace this doctrine back in time and you will not find it in any teachings of the earliest churches.

Well from what I have been told (I don't put a lot of credence and study in the so-called church "fathers" - that's for another discussion), there is at least a couple of them that touched on the subject when dicussing aionios life.

How amazing indeed!

It truly is amazing. I continued to be amazed the more I look into Scripture and see how things connect. And while most of Christendom would't admit as I am sure you will deny it as well, most of Christendom doesn't want to hear the Truth about much more than grace through faith apart from works. They want to have their own brand of religion that doesn't take them out of their comfort zone where as long as you are saved everything is okay and you can just coast the rest of the way home.

The Truth is there if we desire to learn it. But that doesn't mean the Truth is always easy to take in. Again Steaver if everything was as easy as you think it is there wouldn't be 500 zillion denominations. Obviously things aren't as simple as you would like to think.

Again I would love to visit with your brother and his pastor. How about passing along an email address or something?

 

[J. Jump]

How should we read this verse?

a) The Spirit itself beareth witness with spirits' spirits, that spirits are the children of God.

b) The Spirit itself beareth witness with souls' spirits, that souls are the children of God.

Neither. That is Steaver speak, not Scripture. And you have way too much Steaver speak instead of just Scripture IMO.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Who is it that Jump has referenced that he has received his doctrines from? Answer; Arlen Chitwood, Watchman Nee and "the man who first introduced this doctrine to Jump".

I have no person trail, Jump does. But like you said, some people like being told what to think. Mormons, Catholics, JW's, SDA's (sorry Bob) all have someone other than sola scripture that they deem as a superior authority to scripture. I have NONE.

I've had this tactic used on me so many times, I've come to expect it.

Because the opponent cannot answer the scriptural arguments of Jjump, Myself, James Newman, Joey Faust, Arlen Chitwood, etc., they cry that history is on their side.

"NNE HAS EVER TAUGHT THAT DOCTRINE!!!"

So you then show them the literally hundreds of well respected published, teachers that taught ME throughout history (RE Neighbour Robert Govett, GH Lang, SS Craig, JA Seiss, WH Griffith Thomas, WF Roadhouse, http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/booksonline.htm just to name a few)
they cry:

"YOU'RE FOLLOWING A MAN!! I FOLLOW THE BIBLE"

What a silly trap.

Lacy

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said
Quote:
The person who is the soul and the person who is the spirit are not two different persons. It is one Person -- and a person CAN NOT be BOTH lost AND saved!

There is no text in all of scripture saying "soul lost BUT SPIRIT SAVED".

Bob again just because you type this doesn't make it so.

As is the case with your claims about spirit saved while soul lost. What you "need" is a Bible text that says that - which is my point above - which makes my statement true.

Until you actually respond WITH the text that says that - you are stuck.

BTW - it is instructive that your response to my statement saying that you had not text for that view of yours - was to simply respond again with "no text".


I know that's your "mo," but it's just not true.

It is possible to be lost and saved at the same time. Scripture declares it to be so.

If youi had a text saying "Soul list WHILE at the same time spirit saved" you would have posted it just then.

Instead you give another "no text" assertion.

That is instructive.

And while you are correct there is one person . . . that person is made up of three separate components.

Not three seperate persons where you could save one but not the others. It is just ONE person and the PERSON must be saved or lost.

There is no escaping this. You can not be BOTH. Sorry but - no purgatory!

In Christ,

Bob