Temporal Salvation

[Revmitchell]

I dont see it.....you will have to enlighten me. I will also share with you that Ive had more q&A conversations with Old School Baptists & more instruction in the gospel given to me by this group of men then any other group on this BB thing....and off....so where you coming from?

Gotta go back to work.

If you are looking to be discipled by the BB then you will be sorely disappointed. The setting on a forum is just not feasible for that. As far as the group of men that you have been having conversations with I believe it is good that you have that. However, I suggest that you expand your influence beyond that group. You can do this by way of books, commentaries, your own Bible, preaching by others that can readily be found all over the internet and television.

Now I am not understanding what it is that you "don't see".

 

[JonC]

They're coming from an anti-missionary viewpoint: why go and evangelize, since God has 'eternally saved' his elect in yonder holler, continent, etc.?

It was dreamt up to excuse their anti-missionary dogmas.

It does remind me of the doctrine of Daniel Parker. Not necessarily the article, but the presuppositions in general.

 

[Jerome]

EWF, I wasn't inquiring when the PBs arose, but when some of them began teaching this time/eternal innovation.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If you are looking to be discipled by the BB then you will be sorely disappointed. The setting on a forum is just not feasible for that. As far as the group of men that you have been having conversations with I believe it is good that you have that. However, I suggest that you expand your influence beyond that group. You can do this by way of books, commentaries, your own Bible, preaching by others that can readily be found all over the internet and television.

I do that as well...always have (or at least for the last 5 years)...just dont broadcast it like......ahhh never mind.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

EWF, I wasn't inquiring when the PBs arose, but when some of them began teaching this time/eternal innovation.

I dont know....but that is an interesting word, "innovation".....you will have to prove to me that its an innovation. I'm all ears.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Now I am not understanding what it is that you "don't see".

I dont see them as anti evangelical......primarily because I see more of them in the neighborhoods preaching the gospel, because Ive seen their initiatives in other countries, because you will never find a old school church that has ever stopped anyone from preaching the gospel. What I see lacking with them is the Hypocrisy of saying that we will be spreading the gospel; always preaching that they will but rarely ever taking the time or effort to do it.....and that has been quite an eye opener for me. But now I'm getting off on my own tangents.

Please prove to me why you feel this theology is wrong if you are up to the task.

 

[Revmitchell]

I dont see them as anti evangelical......primarily because I see more of them in the neighborhoods preaching the gospel, because Ive seen their initiatives in other countries, because you will never find a old school church that has ever stopped anyone from preaching the gospel. What I see lacking with them is the Hypocrisy of saying that we will be spreading the gospel; always preaching that they will but rarely ever taking the time or effort to do it.....and that has been quite an eye opener for me. But now I'm getting off on my own tangents.

Please prove to me why you feel this theology is wrong if you are up to the task.

Well, I did that in my first post. It is in direct conflict with scripture in John 1:12. Those who become the Sons of God do so only after belief. The phrases "Sons of God" and "children of God" are synonymous.

See the underlying issue here is what is man's responsibility in salvation. Does God require man to respond to the gospel in belief in order to be saved? Can God reach into a man's heart and enable him to be able to respond to the gospel or reject it. Does God have the ability to do that?


Or, is God limited by man's inability? Is it impossible for God to give man the ability to respond or reject the gospel?

I believe God has the power, authority, and ability to reach into a man's heart and allow him to respond or not to respond. The God I believe in is just that big and powerful.


Now if God opens man's heart to be able to respond to him does man then get some or all of the credit for his salvation? Absolutely not. That does not require that man get any of the credit.

And that is really the crux of the matter between cals and others. It is all about assigning credit for salvation.

I believe that regardless of how much man responds to the gospel He who has the power and authority to give salvation gets all the credit.

 

[Jerome]

Read Crowley's 'The Primitive or Old School Baptists':

https://books.google.com/books?id=p...sly+in+several+places,+and+it+quickly+spread"

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Well, I did that in my first post. It is in direct conflict with scripture in John 1:12. Those who become the Sons of God do so only after belief. The phrases "Sons of God" and "children of God" are synonymous.

See the underlying issue here is what is man's responsibility in salvation. Does God require man to respond to the gospel in belief in order to be saved? Can God reach into a man's heart and enable him to be able to respond to the gospel or reject it. Does God have the ability to do that?


Or, is God limited by man's inability? Is it impossible for God to give man the ability to respond or reject the gospel?

I believe God has the power, authority, and ability to reach into a man's heart and allow him to respond or not to respond. The God I believe in is just that big and powerful.


Now if God opens man's heart to be able to respond to him does man then get some or all of the credit for his salvation? Absolutely not. That does not require that man get any of the credit.

And that is really the crux of the matter between cals and others. It is all about assigning credit for salvation.

I believe that regardless of how much man responds to the gospel He who has the power and authority to give salvation gets all the credit.

And I truly like the very matter of fact way that Don Fortner presents it.....namely, if God leaves ya alone, you are going to hell! That pretty much summarizes it for me. Take a listen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo49Un4SNss

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Read Crowley's 'The Primitive or Old School Baptists':

https://books.google.com/books?id=p...sly+in+several+places,+and+it+quickly+spread"

Before I read him, who is Crowley? Never mind, I read the commentary & its to brief to be substantial to my taste.

 

[Revmitchell]

And I truly like the very matter of fact way that Don Fortner presents it.....namely, if God leaves ya alone, you are going to hell! That pretty much summarizes it for me. Take a listen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo49Un4SNss

And I can whole heartedly agree with that. I just do not believe God leaves anyone alone, at least not initially.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

And I can whole heartedly agree with that. I just do not believe God leaves anyone alone, at least not initially.

Well I cant see anyone saying "NO" & wiz off to God....not after they have shown the wonderful mercy & grace given to them & that's where we differ.....He makes ya understand, He enlightens you to the Truth & to all your sin errors, he breaks your heart & develops your conscience. Someone would have to be mightily depraved (well beyond human characteristics) to reject God after that. I know that I was brought low, I was both ashamed & saddened by my sin condition....more importantly extremely humbled by the Grace & Mercy giving to me...one soooo undeserving. Wow, my sins were forgiven by the actions of Christ dieing on the cross......too unfathomable....a true GIFT.

If everyone experiences that same level of Love, Mercy, Forgiveness then they must submit.....but you are saying they dont. I'm sorry but then they would have to be dead not to submit.

 

[PreachTony]

And I truly like the very matter of fact way that Don Fortner presents it.....namely, if God leaves ya alone, you are going to hell! That pretty much summarizes it for me. Take a listen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo49Un4SNss

Yes, if God never moved in a person's heart to draw them to salvation, then of course they will go to Hell. But from my study of the scripture, and from the conviction I've felt from the Spirit, I don't see God leaving anyone alone. In fact, Romans 1 claims that God is evident in nature, therefore arguably observable by all, but the sinfulness of man has lead us away from Him.

There are all sorts of verses in which we read about "whosoever will," and about how God loved the world so much that He sent Christ for our salvation. Of course, believers in elect-only theology (trying to avoid certain terminology) will tell us that when the Bible says "the world," it actually means "the elect." When it says "whosoever will," it actually means "whosoever of the elect will."

The idea that people are not able to say "no" to the Lord isn't, in my opinion, scriptural. The Holy Spirit is just as much "the Lord" as Jesus, correct? Yet the Bible tells us to "quench not the Spirit." Why would we be told to not quench the Spirit if it were impossible for us to from the outset?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes, if God never moved in a person's heart to draw them to salvation, then of course they will go to Hell. But from my study of the scripture, and from the conviction I've felt from the Spirit, I don't see God leaving anyone alone. In fact, Romans 1 claims that God is evident in nature, therefore arguably observable by all, but the sinfulness of man has lead us away from Him.

There are all sorts of verses in which we read about "whosoever will," and about how God loved the world so much that He sent Christ for our salvation. Of course, believers in elect-only theology (trying to avoid certain terminology) will tell us that when the Bible says "the world," it actually means "the elect." When it says "whosoever will," it actually means "whosoever of the elect will."

The idea that people are not able to say "no" to the Lord isn't, in my opinion, scriptural. The Holy Spirit is just as much "the Lord" as Jesus, correct? Yet the Bible tells us to "quench not the Spirit." Why would we be told to not quench the Spirit if it were impossible for us to from the outset?

Why would you ever "after being regenerated" ever even fathom rejecting God? To me anyway, even the idea of it is ludicrous.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

...and now this conversation is tilting toward C & A.....not my intent and my appology for vearing in that direction. I want to head back in the origional direction of discussing "Temporal Salvation....please :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Rippon]

I dont know....but that is an interesting word, "innovation".....you will have to prove to me that its an innovation. I'm all ears.

It's an "interesting" word because it is quite appropos. So-called 'Time Salvation' is a novel concept unheard of in historic Christian theology. No Puritan or Reformer ever taught it. Your Calvinistic heroes never preached upon it. It is an aberration from the Faith once delivered. Conditional time salvation is not found in Holy Writ.

 

[Rippon]

And I truly like the very matter of fact way that Don Fortner presents it.....namely, if God leaves ya alone, you are going to hell! That pretty much summarizes it for me. Take a listen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo49Un4SNss

I can't access Youtube, but Don Fortner is no advocate of this time salvation business.

 

[PreachTony]

...and now this conversation is tilting toward C & A.....not my intent and my appology for vearing in that direction. I want to head back in the origional direction of discussing "Temporal Salvation....please :smilewinkgrin:

I'm not sure, EWF, if we can discuss a topic that some have labeled "two aspects of a single salvation" without veering into the C & A argument. The notion that man has no input in his salvation is, from what I've noticed around here, the heart of the C & A argument.

As to the other question you posed me: Have you ever been sitting in church and feel the impetus to get up and do something, like give a testimony, or simply go and hug someone and offer them encouragement, but then not gotten up and done it? Maybe you just sat there trying to sort out if you were actually supposed to do that, or if you just thought you were? Whatever the reason, if the Lord tells you to do something, and you squash it down, have you not "quenched the Spirit?"

 

[T Alan]

It is practical. I hope I am being fair to the author. For me, there are other issues that prevent my acceptance of the doctrine. One is a PB understanding of Christ's death (the author assumes an understanding which I reject, but I am probably not his intended audience). So I have obstacles at the onset (and theological differences can also mean I do not fully understand the impact of the article).

Have you ever seen the pictures that have a hidden picture within the greater picture, It's usually accompanied by a phrase like, "When you see It you'll be amazed that you couldn't see it soon as you looked" (clean version).

That's the way the Doctrine of Actual Atonement (probably the biggie from the DoG that you struggle with)is JonC, When (if) God opens your eyes to it you will be so amazed that you didn't see it from the beginning. It's so clear and so weaved throughout the entire Word it's amazing.

 

[T Alan]

I am Primitive Baptist, out of a SBC (First Baptist) Church. I was evangelistic then, I am evangelistic Now.

Does that mean we believe in the "Modern" "gimmicks" used to get man to "walk the aisle to the Alter"or "hands going up all over the room" or "repeat these words after me....If you did this PTL your a child of God now"? Nope

Does it mean that we tell others the complete Gospel and trust Jehovah to be powerful enough to "convert" (temporal salvation) His? Yep