Spirit & Soul

[skypair]

JJ

I take it these are the 3 "prooftexts" you are talking about?

Hebrews 10:39 - But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

The saving of the soul is not completed action.

Your missing a critical passage that would have helped you exegete this passage correctly. 1Cor 15:2
"[My gospel] ... By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain."

Those who "draw back unto perdition" saw the truth but did not RECEIVE it by faith. However, those who RECEIVE it are eternally saved in their souls.

James 1:21 - Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness, in humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls.

Why would James tell saved folks, whose souls are saved in your view, that they need to receive the word implanted which is able to save something that is already saved?

Is the word able to save your soul or is it not? And eternally! As shown by the "turn over a new leaf" wording, Peter is calling them to REPENTANCE from SELF and RECEIVING of the WORD for salvation of their souls NOW.

Furthermore, James was written to "the 12 tribes that are scattered abroad," Jas 1:1. By no means does this suggest, much less prove, that they are saved already!

I Peter 1:9 - Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

Faith is not over. We have to continue to have faith until the end. If we do our souls will be saved. They aren't saved yet.

You leave out the preceding verse -- 1Pet 1:8 -- "Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:... Receiving the end of your faith..." They believed and the end of their faith, which they received already, was their rejoicing and the salvation of their souls." Basically you have lifted this from context to make your point. These Christian's souls were ALREADY SAVED AND REJOICING. Both were the "ends of their faith!"

JJ, someone is "shooting you a crooked arrow," man. These are not even close to saying what you contend they do. Are you sure you even understand the gospel, 1Cor 15:1-4?? If not, me and max can convene a soul-saving confab right here on line for YOU.

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

No -- because once you are "justified," you don't have to be "re-justified" or "saved again. As you no doubt know, we dare not "crucify Christ again and put Him to an open shame!" (Heb 6:6).

The Bible speaks of a past justification and it also speaks of a present justification. The Hebrews 6:6 passage you speak of it not talking about eternal salvation (which I call the salvation of the spirit and you call salvation of the soul). It is speaking of something that is beyond that point, but that's for another thread.

Your missing a critical passage that would have helped you exegete this passage correctly. 1Cor 15:2
"[My gospel] ... By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain."

Those who "draw back unto perdition" saw the truth but did not RECEIVE it by faith. However, those who RECEIVE it are eternally saved in their souls.

Funny that's not what Hebrews says. It doesn't say they saw the Truth and then did not believe it. The whole book is speaking to and about saved people. Christendom has really worked over the book of Hebrews to get it to say something that it doesn't say.

There's so much more that could be said of your I Corinthians 15 passage, but I don't think it will do any good. It's talking about Paul's gospel. The context is not the gospel of salvation by grace through faith apart from works.

Paul's good news was how Gentiles fit into the kingdom plans since Israel had been set aside.

Again do you believe in eternal security? Because if you answer yes to that question it's going to be awfully hard to prove that one can't lose their salvation just with that verse of Scripture alone which says you are saved "if" and then it speaks of believing in vain. Well when someone believes in the substitionary death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, on their behalf a sinner eternal salvation is a completed event, so there is no believing in vain. You either believed or you didn't.

Paul is talking about something other than eternal salvation. So again your point has gone unproven.

Is the word able to save your soul or is it not? And eternally! As shown by the "turn over a new leaf" wording, Peter is calling them to REPENTANCE from SELF and RECEIVING of the WORD for salvation of their souls NOW.

Furthermore, James was written to "the 12 tribes that are scattered abroad," Jas 1:1. By no means does this suggest, much less prove, that they are saved already!

Can you show me where the 12 tribes were etnerally damned to hell? He calls them brothers in verse two and then tells them to endure the trials that they are facing due to their faith, so it's going to be awfully hard to show that his audience was eternally damned folks.

You leave out the preceding verse -- 1Pet 1:8 -- "Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:... Receiving the end of your faith..." They believed and the end of their faith, which they received already, was their rejoicing and the salvation of their souls."

Oh my . . .

Whom having not seen - they hadn't seen Jesus.
Though now ye see him not - they still had't physically seen Jesus, yet their were believing (had faith). They were rejoicing becuase of this faith.

They faith was not complete because they still had not seen Jesus. They had to continue in the faith until they did see Jesus. Once we see Jesus there will be no need for faith becuase we will see. Fatih is the evidence of things hoped for and not yet seen.

At the end of their faith, which doesn't happen while we are alive, becuase without faith it is impossible to please God, we will receive the salvation of our souls.

Basically you have lifted this from context to make your point. These Christian's souls were ALREADY SAVED AND REJOICING. Both were the "ends of their faith!"

They were currently receiving not had received past action. So I fail to see how I'm the one taking something out of context when I am saying that it was present, which it was and you are chagning the text to a past action, which is not what the text says.

So please explain to me how I'm taking it out of context and you are leaving it in?

JJ, someone is "shooting you a crooked arrow," man.

Quite the contrary Skypair.

These are not even close to saying what you contend they do.

Actually they are and it totally destroys your doctrine that the soul is saved. You can't change present into past and say look I told you so. You have to let Scripture say what Scripture says and then deal with it.

Are you sure you even understand the gospel, 1Cor 15:1-4??

It depends on what you are talking about. The question is do you understand the complete picture of the gospel? The gospel is not just eternal salvation.

There is a good news to the dead man and that is Christ died to atone for their sins and shed His blood so that if they believe in His death and shed blood on their behalf a sinner they will be saved.

Then there is also a good news to the one that has been past from death until life from darkness into the light and that is that Christ arose again the third day according to Scriptures. And because of that you are able to have a part with Him in His coming kingdom if you will do what is necessary to have your self approved to rule and reign with Him.

It seems you are doing what most of Christendom does and that is combine the two messages into one message. And that is where mistakes are made, because they are not the same message.

 

[skypair]

JJ,

Your salvation -- which you admit is not eternal -- has strong overtones of legalism. You've actually mixed Israel's "kingdom gospel" with Paul's "grace gospel." That is not the gospel I believe in.

Your 2 gospels at once has led you astray from the gospel of Christ. You obviously believe there is no eternal salvation -- no assurance that anyone is saved -- which the book of 1John vehemently denies.

It would be fruitless to continue this discussion -- apparently you reject the proffered "confab" and reject the gospel of the new covenant of which Paul says, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." Gal 1:8

No offense, but yours sounds like the gospel that those who would have brought the Galations into bondage again must have been preaching (Rev 2:4).

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Your salvation -- which you admit is not eternal -- has strong overtones of legalism. You've actually mixed Israel's "kingdom gospel" with Paul's "grace gospel." That is not the gospel I believe in.

Your 2 gospels at once has led you astray from the gospel of Christ. You obviously believe there is no eternal salvation -- no assurance that anyone is saved -- which the book of 1John vehemently denies.

It would be fruitless to continue this discussion -- apparently you reject the proffered "confab" and reject the gospel of the new covenant of which Paul says, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." Gal 1:8

No offense, but yours sounds like the gospel that those who would have brought the Galations into bondage again must have been preaching (Rev 2:4).

Skypair no offense, but this post shows you have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about.

I do believe in eternal salvation. It's the salvation of the spirit. I do believe in eternal security, becuase eternal salvation is based on the finished works of Christ and faith in Him alone (Acts 16:30-31, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4).

Where you have missed the mark is saying there are two different gospels, meant for two different sets of people ie Israel's kingdom gospel and Paul's grace gospel.

Eternal salvation has ALWAYS been and ALWAYS will be by grace through faith apart from works, for OT believers and NT believers as well.

The gospel of the kingdom was intended for Israel, but they rejected it (see the Gospel accounts) and therefore that good news is now availble to the Gentiles.

Paul was given the mystery of how gentiles fit into the gospel of the kingdom. He wasn't given a different gospel for Gentiles.

Unfortunately modern-day Christendom has done a very poor job of teaching what gospel means and how it is used in the Bible.

There is a gospel to those that are spiritually dead and that is Christ died and shed His blood on their behalf a sinner. If they believe that then they are saved.

Once they are made alive spiritually then there is a gospel that says Christ rose again and is in the heavenly sanctuary acting on our behalf as a High Priest based on His shed blood on the mercy seat (if we will allow Him to do so). And because of this good news if we allow Him to wash us (sanctify us) then we can have a part in His coming kingdom.

I'm sure we can both agree that we are supposed to be faithful, obedient to Christ's commandment and overcomers . . . right? If so how can you call that a gospel of bondage?

 

[skypair]

Skypair no offense, but this post shows you have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about.

I do believe in eternal salvation. It's the salvation of the spirit. I do believe in eternal security, becuase eternal salvation is based on the finished works of Christ and faith in Him alone (Acts 16:30-31, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4).

Thank you for clearing that up. However your theory that we are saved by grace and earn our rule in the kingdom of Christ on earth through works is still troubling. Apparently you are not aware the the church will be in NJ for the MK.

Where you have missed the mark is saying there are two different gospels, meant for two different sets of people ie Israel's kingdom gospel and Paul's grace gospel.

Let's just be honest, shall we? What did John the Baptist, Jesus, 12 disciples and then 70 disciples preach?? "Behold, the kingdom is at hand." NO "Supreme Sacrifice" had been made yet, had it. Israel was to be watching for her Messiah, weren't they. What was the promise of Messiah's coming? Resurrection and forgiveness of sin. That is precisely what the church receives upon belief! That is what Israel missed because they did NOT receive and believe! Ergo -- the "kingdom gospel" was postponed (cf, Mt 22, Dan 9:23-27).

Thus was ushered in the gospel of grace following Christ's resurrection. NOW the "Supreme Sacrifice" was in place, right? How can someone receive a promise that they have not been offered nor received, JJ??

Eternal salvation has ALWAYS been and ALWAYS will be by grace through faith apart from works, for OT believers and NT believers as well.

True! Faith has ALWAYS been the key. But faith in what? OT -- in God; NT -- in Christ. You can't have faith in something that doesn't exist! That's false religion!

The gospel of the kingdom was intended for Israel, but they rejected it (see the Gospel accounts) and therefore that good news is now availble to the Gentiles.

RIGHT ON!

Paul was given the mystery of how gentiles fit into the gospel of the kingdom.

NO. Wrong! We do NOT fit into the MK nor into Israel's kingdom. Where do you get that the Gentiles are anything but added in since Christ to God's eternal purposes/"8th day" for Israel??

Unfortunately modern-day Christendom has done a very poor job of teaching what gospel means and how it is used in the Bible.

It's YOU that's "out of step" with gospel truth. You seem not to see or comprehend dispensationalism.

There is a gospel to those that are spiritually dead and that is Christ died and shed His blood on their behalf a sinner. If they believe that then they are saved.

Once they are made alive spiritually then there is a gospel that says Christ rose again and is in the heavenly sanctuary acting on our behalf as a High Priest based on His shed blood on the mercy seat (if we will allow Him to do so). And because of this good news if we allow Him to wash us (sanctify us) then we can have a part in His coming kingdom.

Agree up to the italics. We are part of His earthly kingdom NOW, such as it is -- the church. We will NOT be part of an earthly kingdom/MK. If you can show me this, be my guest. Even Rev 2:26 is speaking of that part of Thyatira that is "left behind" and so will be resurrected postrib into Christ's kingdom. This is NOT, however, the hope of Philadelphia, the BELIEVING church.

And it's not a matter of "allowing Him to wash us." Phil 1:6 tells us that God WILL wash us by the Holy Spirit whether we want to be washed of not (which usually we don't on account of our flesh)!!

I'm sure we can both agree that we are supposed to be faithful, obedient to Christ's commandment and overcomers . . . right? If so how can you call that a gospel of bondage?

The "gospel of bondage" that I see is your insistence that we obey in order to become "kings" in the earthly kingdom/MK when, in fact, we will be in NJ.
Furthermore, the Holy Spirit is able -- and WILL -- bring ALL things into subjection to Him (Phil 3:21) and we have the Holy Spirit IN us already!!

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Thank you for clearing that up.

Sure thing!

However your theory that we are saved by grace and earn our rule in the kingdom of Christ on earth through works is still troubling.

It is troubling when one is first introduced to it, because it has not been widely taught in Christendom for some time now, and it will get worse and worse the further we go.

When I first discovered the gospel of the kingdom I thought the guy had lost his mind. And as I studied more about his background he said the same thing about the man that introduced the material to him.

The bottom line is that when we let Scripture say what Scripture says without putting our spin on the matters it can not be refuted.

Apparently you are not aware the the church will be in NJ for the MK.

Actually the Bible teaches that only a portion of believers will rule and reign with Christ. This can be found in OT type as well as NT teaching.

Let's just be honest, shall we? What did John the Baptist, Jesus, 12 disciples and then 70 disciples preach?? "Behold, the kingdom is at hand." NO "Supreme Sacrifice" had been made yet, had it. Israel was to be watching for her Messiah, weren't they. What was the promise of Messiah's coming? Resurrection and forgiveness of sin. That is precisely what the church receives upon belief! That is what Israel missed because they did NOT receive and believe! Ergo -- the "kingdom gospel" was postponed (cf, Mt 22, Dan 9:23-27).

Thus was ushered in the gospel of grace following Christ's resurrection. NOW the "Supreme Sacrifice" was in place, right? How can someone receive a promise that they have not been offered nor received, JJ??

They were awaiting their King. That is correct. And when the King arrived He offered a part in His kingdom that is not of this world system. They rejected that offer. However there still needed to be folks to fulfill those positions.

Those positions are now being offered to Christians. This offer is now ours to accept or reject.

The gospel of the kingdom was never postponed. It was merely transferred from one group of people to all people.

Paul wasn't the one that brought God's grace to humanity. As I have said eternal salvation has always been by grace through faith apart from works.

True! Faith has ALWAYS been the key. But faith in what? OT -- in God; NT -- in Christ. You can't have faith in something that doesn't exist! That's false religion!

Faith is believing what God has said about a matter. What God asked the people of the OT and the Jews of the NT was/is different than what He has revealed to us as far as eternal salvation goes. There we agree.

But believing in Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, is the beginning of salvation, not the end. Faith in His substitutionary death and shed blood secures our eternal destiny, but it doesn't gaurantee our destiny for the 1,000 years prior to eternity beginning for mankind.

RIGHT ON!

If you agree that the gospel of the kingdom was offered to Israel and then rejected and is now offered to Gentiles as well why are you arguing with me? Maybe it's that we are differing on what the gospel of the kingdom is?

NO. Wrong! We do NOT fit into the MK nor into Israel's kingdom. Where do you get that the Gentiles are anything but added in since Christ to God's eternal purposes/"8th day" for Israel??

So we don't have a part to play in the kingdom? Going to be awfully hard to prove that with Scripture. But I would be interesting to see how you do that.

We are not fit into Israel's kingdom, because the offer of the kingdom was taken away from Israel and offered to the new creation . . . the one new man in Christ. This offer isn't offered to everyone. It is offered to the spiritually alive.

If you are still spiritually dead the only message that you can entertain and therefore accept or reject is that Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, died and shed His blood on your behalf a sinner. Until you believe that nothing else matters.

It's YOU that's "out of step" with gospel truth. You seem not to see or comprehend dispensationalism.

Funny I have been accused of being too dispensationalist.

Agree up to the italics. We are part of His earthly kingdom NOW, such as it is -- the church.

That's not the kingdom that I am speaking of. I'm speaking of the kingdom that is yet to come.

We will NOT be part of an earthly kingdom/MK.

I agree. The earthly kingdom has been promised to the nation of Israel. We are not a part of that nation. The kingdom that Scripture speaks of is called the kingdom of the heavens and it is the the kingdom that Satan and his fallen angel followers are currently ruling from.

If you can show me this, be my guest.

I would love to show you. The question is are you going to believe it if I do? Most people aren't interested.

And it's not a matter of "allowing Him to wash us." Phil 1:6 tells us that God WILL wash us by the Holy Spirit whether we want to be washed of not (which usually we don't on account of our flesh)!!

Really that's not what He told Peter, who didn't want to be washed. He said if I don't wash you then you have no part with me. And Peter made the decision to allow Him to wash him. He didn't force Himself on Peter.

So either the interaction with Peter didn't happen and Scripture is lying to us or Philippians isn't saying what you think it is. The teaching of Jesus is clear, so we must see Phillipians 1:6 in that Light.

The "gospel of bondage" that I see is your insistence that we obey in order to become "kings" in the earthly kingdom/MK when, in fact, we will be in NJ.

Well Scripture is on my side, because says that not everyone that says to me Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of the heavens, but those that do the will of My Father. There are MANY others, but one should be enough.

It's no my insistence, but Scripture that says we must be found faithful, obedient and overcoming to rule and reign with Christ. We have one of two choices. We can beleive what the Text tells us and arrange our lives accordingly, or we can say it is hogwash and face the consequences that come with unbelief. I for one believe and I hope and pray that it is making a difference in my walk. Because if it isn't making a difference in my walk, then my believing is dead and useless according to James.

 

[skypair]

JJ,

Well, the discussion is getting interesting again - even it off track.

It is troubling when one is first introduced to it, because it has not been widely taught in Christendom for some time now, and it will get worse and worse the further we go.

Actually the Bible teaches that only a portion of believers will rule and reign with Christ. This can be found in OT type as well as NT teaching.

I believe that is correct. Later you even hint at what I was saying -- that some part rules from heaven/heavens such that angels do their bidding (John 1:51). To me, it is all the pretrib-raptured church that rules from the heavens. I'm with you on that one.

They were awaiting their King. That is correct. And when the King arrived He offered a part in His kingdom that is not of this world system. They rejected that offer. However there still needed to be folks to fulfill those positions.

This is where you lose me. Christ came and offered to set up His earthly kingdom at that time. Unless the kingdom comes, there are no "positions" in this world to be "filled" physically. Spiritually, we are "priests and kings" (Rev 1:6) -- all of us who believe.

Those positions are now being offered to Christians. This offer is now ours to accept or reject.

Explain, please. Are you talking about the 'gifts" to the church, Eph 4:11?

The gospel of the kingdom was never postponed. It was merely transferred from one group of people to all people.

I can say unequivocally no to that one. The gospel of the kingdom is NOT preached to the church but it will be preached again in the tribulation, Mt 24:14. Thus, it's results, establishing the kingdom, were postponed.

Faith is believing what God has said about a matter.

Absolutely!!

But believing in Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, is the beginning of salvation, not the end.

We call that beginning being "born again." Of course it is the beginning of salvation.

Faith in His substitutionary death and shed blood secures our eternal destiny, but it doesn't gaurantee our destiny for the 1,000 years prior to eternity beginning for mankind.

I can see what you are saying somewhat. We will be engaged in administering the MK for 1000 years and then we will be enjoying to Kingdom of God on New Earth thereafter. But if you got some "job postings" to offer during the MK, I'd like to hear about them. I personally would like to be a teacher.

So we don't have a part to play in the kingdom? Going to be awfully hard to prove that with Scripture. But I would be interesting to see how you do that.

From heaven as I've said.

I agree. The earthly kingdom has been promised to the nation of Israel. We are not a part of that nation. The kingdom that Scripture speaks of is called the kingdom of the heavens and it is the the kingdom that Satan and his fallen angel followers are currently ruling from.

Go on... Where do you find this?

Really that's not what He told Peter, who didn't want to be washed. He said if I don't wash you then you have no part with me. And Peter made the decision to allow Him to wash him. He didn't force Himself on Peter.

I said nothing about Peter. I quoted from Phil 1:6 and it says that the good work He has begun, He will continue in us (3:39) by the power (HS) by which He brings ALL things in subjection to Himself. It is the Holy Spirit that saved us -- the Holy Spirit that washes/sanctifies us -- the Holy Spirit that raises us to glory! That's what I'm talkin' about!

The teaching of Jesus is clear, so we must see Phillipians 1:6 in that Light.

Amen -- so see thou doest likewise as I have done. :laugh:

Well Scripture is on my side, because says that not everyone that says to me Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of the heavens, but those that do the will of My Father. There are MANY others, but one should be enough.

Unfortunately you frame this as if those saying "Lord, Lord" were believers. They're NOT! Jesus does not even suggest that they are.

It's no my insistence, but Scripture that says we must be found faithful, obedient and overcoming to rule and reign with Christ.

What text are we talking about here?? Mt 7:21?? There's a few things you ought to know about that text: 1) what I said above -- they won't all be believers. 2) what is "the will of My Father?" To receive Christ as Savior and Lord (i.e. BELIEVE). 3) Timewise, the context here (Mt 5-7) is the MK! Do you not realize that the HUGE problem in the MK is HYPOCRISY?? But none of those hypocrites are going to heaven that merely say "Lord, Lord!" They are only saying it to protect their filthy necks from the direct judgment of Christ the King!! That's the larger picture to which it is true that at no time will those who didn't believe be admitted to His kingdom.

So I'm not sure what else you can make out of that particular passage. Got anything else?

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

To me, it is all the pretrib-raptured church that rules from the heavens. I'm with you on that one.

Well not all of the church will be found qualified to rule and reign with Christ from the heavens. There will be some believers that were not sanctified and will miss their inheritance as Esau and Reuben did.

They are still a part of the family, but they will not be adopted as first born sons. Hebrews 12 tells us that they are illegitimate. And only first-born sons can rule.

So are you still with me? :thumbsup:

This is where you lose me. Christ came and offered to set up His earthly kingdom at that time. Unless the kingdom comes, there are no "positions" in this world to be "filled" physically. Spiritually, we are "priests and kings" (Rev 1:6) -- all of us who believe.

Your view can not be correct because even yourself by a previous post contradict yourself. You said that we are not going to have a part to play in the "physical, earthly kingdom", but you also agreed that the offer that was given to Israel is now given to Gentiles (or at least I think you said those things - I may be getting my threads mixed up and if so my apology and please correct me where I have mistated).

Regardless Christ was not offering to set up His earthly kingdom. He was offering the kingdom of the heavens, which is the spiritual kingdom. He said My kingdom is not of this world. He wasn't there offering the physical kingdom. The reason being is that it was already promised to Israel. He was offering the spiritual kingdom to the nation and that is what they rejected.

Explain, please. Are you talking about the 'gifts" to the church, Eph 4:11?

No. Positions within the kingdom of Christ are our reward for being found faithful, obedient and overcoming. He will be the King of kings and the Lord of lords (we will be those kings and lords ruling under Him). There is so much more to this that it is hard to write it all here. If you want more detailed study material I can certainly get it to you.

But if you got some "job postings" to offer during the MK, I'd like to hear about them. I personally would like to be a teacher.

They are not specific job postings. The offer is you can have a part in the coming kingdom (whatever He determines that part to be) or you can miss out on it.

I can say unequivocally no to that one. The gospel of the kingdom is NOT preached to the church but it will be preached again in the tribulation, Mt 24:14. Thus, it's results, establishing the kingdom, were postponed.

Sorry but your view is just not Scripture. There is nowhere in Scripture that says the kingdom offer was postponed. Again there just isn't time and space to write what needs to be written. If you are open then I will send you some study material. If your mind is already made up then we are quickly coming to the pointless area again.

From heaven as I've said.

We will never rule from heaven in the sense of heaven as where God is currently. Christians, if found obedient, faithful and overcoming will rule with Christ from the heavens, but that is not the same place as God's heaven where He is currently sitting on His throne.

Go on... Where do you find this?

Again there is not time enough or space enough. I would be glad to send you some resource material that deals specifically with what Scripture says regarding the matter.

Unfortunately you frame this as if those saying "Lord, Lord" were believers. They're NOT! Jesus does not even suggest that they are.

There is nothing in that passage or any other passage in Scripture that says they are unsaved. Quite the opposite is actually true. Scripture tells us that no one can call Him Lord without the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not indwelling unsaved folks. Look at the "works" that they did. They cast out demons. Unsaved folks can not cast out demons. It is an impossibility.

As much as Christendom wants those folks to be unsaved it's just not backed by Scripture.

What text are we talking about here??

It's all over the entire NT.

Mt 7:21?? There's a few things you ought to know about that text: 1) what I said above -- they won't all be believers. 2) what is "the will of My Father?" To receive Christ as Savior and Lord (i.e. BELIEVE). 3) Timewise, the context here (Mt 5-7) is the MK! Do you not realize that the HUGE problem in the MK is HYPOCRISY?? But none of those hypocrites are going to heaven that merely say "Lord, Lord!" They are only saying it to protect their filthy necks from the direct judgment of Christ the King!! That's the larger picture to which it is true that at no time will those who didn't believe be admitted to His kingdom.

So I'm not sure what else you can make out of that particular passage. Got anything else?

You have bougth hook, line and sinker into church tradition. I don't know how far this tradition goes back, but when tested with Scripture it just doesn't hold up. It fails miserably.

Again if you are truly open to searching the Scriptures out then I will be more than happy to get the resource material to you. But if your mind is already made up that there can't possibily be another way to look at things, then it really would be pointless.

 

[skypair]

Well not all of the church will be found qualified to rule and reign with Christ from the heavens.

So are you still with me? :thumbsup:

Sure I am! You're talking about the "foolish virgins." You're talking about converts of Thyatira in the passage I gave you.

Your view can not be correct because even yourself by a previous post contradict yourself. You said that we are not going to have a part to play in the "physical, earthly kingdom",...

Yes, this part I said. We won't be here -- church age believers raptured pretrib will rule from heaven.

Regardless Christ was not offering to set up His earthly kingdom. He was offering the kingdom of the heavens, which is the spiritual kingdom.

Most scholars know this -- the offer of a physical, earthly kingdom was withdrawn in Mt 13. It had been rejected in the time before Mt 12 and, if you can read the parables properly, you can see the church (spiritual kingdom), the mustard seed, is now for the first time, in view.

He said My kingdom is not of this world.

Of course, this is LONG after Mt 13.

He wasn't there offering the physical kingdom. The reason being is that it was already promised to Israel.

Yes, indeed. Promised at His coming, I might add. Until Mt 13. Then He offered the spiritual kingdom because the physical wasn't going to be accepted nor set up on that account.

No. Positions within the kingdom of Christ are our reward for being found faithful, obedient and overcoming.

Absolutely -- if you are a "foolish virgin" and plan on being around and converting during the tribulation! Show me the texts you are using -- I'll show you how they apply.

Sorry but your view is just not Scripture. There is nowhere in Scripture that says the kingdom offer was postponed.

Mt 13. There are others, I believe, as well.

We will never rule from heaven in the sense of heaven as where God is currently. Christians, if found obedient, faithful and overcoming will rule with Christ from the heavens,...

Do you have a passage or 2 I can look up on that?

There is nothing in that passage or any other passage (Mt 7) in Scripture that says they are unsaved. Quite the opposite is actually true. Scripture tells us that no one can call Him Lord without the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not indwelling unsaved folks. Look at the "works" that they did. They cast out demons. Unsaved folks can not cast out demons. It is an impossibility.

I think you have a conundrum on your hands then. Maybe it is that you don't understand how things work in the MK? For instance, your quote about not being able to confess Christ without the Holy Spirit -- the Holy Spirit can "fill" whom He will in the MK just as He did in the OT. I would think that those who are in Christ's presence WOULD have their minds, emotions, and wills focused on Him (which is what being "filled with the Spirit" is). I should think they would easily confess something with their mouths on that occasion which they never believed in their hearts. Same goes for the GWT. "Every knee will bow and every tongue confess..." but not all unto salvation, right?

As much as Christendom wants those folks to be unsaved it's just not backed by Scripture.

You're just another who hasn't made the connection between 5 wise virgins (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergammum, Sardis, and Philly) who are raptured all or in part and 5 foolish virgins (Ephesus, Pergammum, Thyatira, Sardis, and Laodicea) who are left behind all of in part. You haven't considered John's "sign miracles" showing that 5 BARLEY loaves (Gentile converts during the trib) and 2 fishes (2 witnesses) will be broken (martyred) to feed the trib mulititude and their "scraps" carried acorss Galilee to the shore of the MK to appear in the "resurrection of the just" Rev 20:4)! There is indeed, a portion of the church left behind who converts upon the knowledge that they should have done so pretrib!!

2Thes 2 teaches the same thing -- some "church" believers "obtain the glory" - others perish/martyred or are damned/never convert.

Again if you are truly open to searching the Scriptures out then I will be more than happy to get the resource material to you. But if your mind is already made up that there can't possibily be another way to look at things, then it really would be pointless.

I'd have to find myself in agreement with the premises before I would wade into such a project, but thanks. As you can see, I think there are other conclusions to draw from scripture.

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Well with that Skypair I think we have returned to another profitless portion of our discussion. You mind is solidified in what you believe, so it seems there is nothing that I can do or show you that is going to make you think otherwise.

So with that I bid you well wishes. I pray that we both will be found obedient, faithful, overcoming believers and will meet in His Glorious kingdom that is to come!

 

[PASTOR MHG]

The discussion (and sometimes rant) has been interesting and insightful with you both. I haven't posted in a couple of days because I felt as though JJump and I had come to a standstill and were getting a little edgy with each other.:tongue3:

I guess we can agree to disagree, and if I have said anything in the midst of my arguments that have offended in any way, please forgive me.

God bless you both in your studies of His Holy Word. Keep digging!

Your brother in Christ,

Max

 

[skypair]

Well with that Skypair I think we have returned to another profitless portion of our discussion. You mind is solidified in what you believe, so it seems there is nothing that I can do or show you that is going to make you think otherwise.

So with that I bid you well wishes. I pray that we both will be found obedient, faithful, overcoming believers and will meet in His Glorious kingdom that is to come!

Wow! And you're from Texas -- just where I'm going for Christmas! Think there is room enough for both of us there?? :laugh:

So I see you're not into Bible study. Ah, well. Sorry to hear you have made up YOUR mind -- rather than consider the "mind of Christ."

Merry Christmas, anyway! :love2:

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Wow! And you're from Texas -- just where I'm going for Christmas! Think there is room enough for both of us there?? :laugh:

Actually I'm leaving and heading north, Lord willing, so we should be okay :wavey:

So I see you're not into Bible study. Ah, well. Sorry to hear you have made up YOUR mind -- rather than consider the "mind of Christ."

Well I was hoping this was a joke, but since there is no smiley face behind it I will take it as you are serious. And how ABSURD a statement. It's one thing to say that my mind is made up which I will address in a minute, but to think that you know me in such a way that you can make such an asinine statement as "So I see you're not into Bible study," is WAY over the line.

You don't have to agree with me, which obviously you don't, but you don't have to call into question my desire to study Scripture. And in light of an offer to give you "Bible study" materials it further amazes me that you would make such a false statement.

My mind is made up until someone can prove me wrong. And to date neither you nor Max (who was at least gracious in his departure from the conversation) has done that. I don't say that as in it is your responsibility as it is not. Your responsibility is to share what you consider to be the "Truth" and then let the Holy Spirit use that.

I have not been led to believe you. Neither of you have shown that the three passages I have spoken of say anything different than what I have said they say which is not a past action, but a present and future action in regard to the soul.

But instead of just saying let's agree to disagree you have to attack my character on your way out. That's pretty typical.

So I will leave you with this. You say you have the mind of Christ, and that may be so, although you haven't proven it here, so if you feel comfortable where you are knowing that you will have to face your Judge some day then by all means continue on.

I know full well that I am going to have to face my Judge some day. And at this point at least doctrinally I feel okay about that coming day. I know that I don't know it all at this point and am always striving to "know" Him in a more close and intimate way and will continue to make adjustments to my theology as the Holy Spirit directs.

I hope you will do the same.

 

[skypair]

JJ,

My mind is made up until someone can prove me wrong.

Which will be HOW if you don't answer our challenges to your assertions with biblical responses but just "blow us off?"

Neither of you have shown that the three passages I have spoken of say anything different than what I have said...

Well sure I did -- as recently as the previous page. Post #101. Your post didn't even reply to me on Heb 10:39 -- asked questions about the 12 tribes regarding Jas 1:21 -- and IPet passage you assume that they weren't saved because they hadn't seen Jesus -- or some such.

so if you feel comfortable where you are knowing that you will have to face your Judge some day then by all means continue on.

I'm sure max and I both feel comfortable defending scriptural truth. As a matter of fact, (perhaps you didn't know this) the "gold, silver, and precious stones" in 1Cor 3:12 are the wisdom of God, the thoughts of God, and the glory of God but the "wood, hay, and stubble" are the wisdom of men, the thoughts of men, and the glory of men which will be consumed by fire!

Be careful how you "build," JJ. Max and I have done our best show you a more scriptural, more cogent paradigm. It would be interesting if you could actually explain this idea of who stays behind and rules on earth with Christ and what believers merely go to Heavenly Jerusalem. But apparently you are demuring out of impatience or lack of knowledge. Sorry.

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Which will be HOW if you don't answer our challenges to your assertions with biblical responses but just "blow us off?"

Skypair for some reason you have it backwards. You have to prove what I believe is wrong. That doesn't mean I answer your questions, that means you answer my questions. If I wanted to prove your "theory" incorrect then I would need to answer your questions. However you don't have any desire to change so I have nothing to prove to you. I could answer every question you put forth, but you still wouldn't change your mind.

Well sure I did

Well you certainly did attempt to, but you certainly didn't disprove that those three passages are talking about a present and a future event. And as such that disproves your so called evidence that the soul is saved. Those three passages say the soul is either currently being saved or will be saved in the future, not saved in the past as you proclaim. There is NOTHING past tense in either of those three verses. Sorry but they don't line up with what you believe.

I know you tried to spin them out of context and make them seem as though they are past events, but they are not. The simple fact of those three verses is they are current in the present or future. They were written to saved people, so if they were already saved, which the text says they were then if their souls were currently being saved or were going to be saved in the future that destroys your "soul is already saved" idea.

and IPet passage you assume that they weren't saved because they hadn't seen Jesus -- or some such.

Skypair you must have a serious case of selective reading, because I have not one single time said that the people in any of these three verses were unsaved. I have always said they are saved and that is what proves my point.

I'm sure max and I both feel comfortable defending scriptural truth. As a matter of fact, (perhaps you didn't know this) the "gold, silver, and precious stones" in 1Cor 3:12 are the wisdom of God, the thoughts of God, and the glory of God but the "wood, hay, and stubble" are the wisdom of men, the thoughts of men, and the glory of men which will be consumed by fire!

No I didn't know that's what you believe. That's certainly not what Scripture says. If so I look forward to seeing that passage of Scripture that I have missed.

Be careful how you "build," JJ.

I pray that I do!

Max and I have done our best show you a more scriptural, more cogent paradigm.

Well if that's the best shot you got . . . well . . .

It would be interesting if you could actually explain this idea of who stays behind and rules on earth with Christ and what believers merely go to Heavenly Jerusalem. But apparently you are demuring out of impatience or lack of knowledge. Sorry.

I wouldn't mind sharing at all if I thought you were actually interested, and it might do some good, but you obviously disagree with where I am coming from, so it doesn't matter if I show you or not, you aren't going to believe are you? Is this the special question that if it gets answered is going to show you that the Bible disagrees with what you have been saying?

 

[skypair]

JJ,

I wouldn't mind sharing at all if I thought you were actually interested, and it might do some good,...

I said I was interested. The only thing holding you back is selfish pride, my friend. If you were like max or me, you wouldn't hesitate to help a brother to grow regardless of what our ignorances.

So basically, I'm calling your bluff. Do you love us as much as we love and care for you? Apparently not.

Thanks, too, for commenting on 1Cor 3 as you did. Didn't even have to look that one up to disagree, did you? :laugh: So you didn't happen to notice what the following verses said, did you. I would suggest that, just as max said, He offered YOU those scriptures -- you denied them without countering with scripture -- WE are left with trying to prove what you cannot see rather than what you CAN see.

See. it's one thing to rebut our scriptures -- it's another to present your own that provide us unequivocal proof.

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

I said I was interested. The only thing holding you back is selfish pride, my friend. If you were like max or me, you wouldn't hesitate to help a brother to grow regardless of what our ignorances.

So basically, I'm calling your bluff. Do you love us as much as we love and care for you? Apparently not.

Thanks, too, for commenting on 1Cor 3 as you did. Didn't even have to look that one up to disagree, did you? :laugh: So you didn't happen to notice what the following verses said, did you. I would suggest that, just as max said, He offered YOU those scriptures -- you denied them without countering with scripture -- WE are left with trying to prove what you cannot see rather than what you CAN see.

See. it's one thing to rebut our scriptures -- it's another to present your own that provide us unequivocal proof.

That's odd. Usually when someone is interested in learning what Scripture has to say they have a much more humble spirit about them. You are seriously lacking in that area. How is selfish pride holding me back, and secondly how in the world do you think through one post you know me well enough to make that judgment.

Let me give you just a little hint in the art of communicating with another person. If you want to have a civil conversation you don't make pompous comments like these:

The only thing holding you back is selfish pride, my friend. - If you were like max or me, - Do you love us as much as we love and care for you? Apparently not.

So how is it that I'm actually supposed to think you want to learn, when obviously you think you know it all? Obviously you think I don't know my head from a hole in the ground because "I'm not like you or Max."

If you trully want to continue a discussion with me then I will trust you will back away from your statements and carry yourself in a much more approachable manner. I hope that will be the case!

 

[J. Jump]

Skypair check your PM box.

 

[skypair]

That's odd. Usually when someone is interested in learning what Scripture has to say they have a much more humble spirit about them. You are seriously lacking in that area. How is selfish pride holding me back, and secondly how in the world do you think through one post you know me well enough to make that judgment.

Let me give you just a little hint in the art of communicating with another person. If you want to have a civil conversation you don't make pompous comments like these:

The only thing holding you back is selfish pride, my friend. - If you were like max or me, - Do you love us as much as we love and care for you? Apparently not.

So how is it that I'm actually supposed to think you want to learn, when obviously you think you know it all? Obviously you think I don't know my head from a hole in the ground because "I'm not like you or Max."

If you trully want to continue a discussion with me then I will trust you will back away from your statements and carry yourself in a much more approachable manner. I hope that will be the case!

JJ -- got your PM. Had trouble on my nephew's computer with a Toshiba popup so you may not get my response. Anyway, you're taking my comments the wrong way. YOU need to provide some "original" material for YOUR assertions. What we're hearing is only denial of our assertions. I just want you to be "straight arrow" with us, eh?

I can admit that I haven't been swayed by your POV so far, OK? What about the soul? How do you prove that it is the "knowledge" center of man or that the spirit is the "throne" of God/Christ in the saved person? How does the Holy Spirit commune with the soul rather than with our spirits? What I get so far is disjoint hypothesis.

skypair