The flimsy foundation of ME

[J. Jump]

Psalm 139

Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there.

Exactly where is the problem?

 

[Hope of Glory]

1. Not only Calvinists, but those who believe in eternal security, teach that once saved you can live however you want to. That is dangerously unbiblical.

A saved person can live however he wants. He's capable of it.

But, he may not. He does not have permission to do so.

Works don't play into whether or not you're born from above into the family of God, whether to get that way, stay that way, or to prove that you're in the family. Once you're born into the family, your spiritual DNA cannot be changed. That's secure.

But, we are accountable for our actions.

Do you believe in security? Do you believe in accountability?

 

[Hope of Glory]

I believe we gain entrance into the Kingdom by a combination of our fruit, our works (in Christ), our attitude, our resisting the flesh, our watchfulness, and especially, the amount of mercy that we show.

That would be why it's the Judgment Seat of Christ, eh?

 

[EdSutton]

Lazarus ME is the intials for the derogatory way that opponents to the gospel of the kingdom refer to folks that hold to the doctrine. It stands for millenial exclusion or millenial exclusionists. It's simply another way that opponents deal in emotionalism instead of Scripture.

Can we say that ME is simply a 'shorthand' for "millennial exclusion", without assuming one is saying something "derogatory" or is even necessarily "an opponent" of the teaching? I have used the initials, but I do not recall 'dealing in emotionalism' when I used the initials, at all. Nor have I even actually voiced my position on the issue, but have given a couple of information bits, only. I do not consider myself one of these to whom you are referring, merely because I have used these 'shorthand' initials.

As always, I claim to speak for none other than myself.

Ed

 

[Hope of Glory]

1. You make a lot of lists.

2. Christians ought to bear fruit and bring glory to God (John 15:7, 8).

2. "Ought" and "will" are two different things. We have stated repeatedly said that we ought to do these things, just as you have here. Yet we are called legalists for saying we ought to do these things.

3. If nothing else, experience teaches us that we must honor God in our everyday life or our conscience will not be kind to us.

3. This is also something that we have said repeatedly.

4. You make a lot of lists.

 

[Amy.G]

When a person is saved, God puts within that person His Spirit. His Spirit causes that one to walk in His statutes, to keep His judgments and to do them.

If the person has no desire to serve the Lord and keep His commandments the last 4 years of his or her life, it shows that the person did not truly have the Spirit of God... only a form of godliness prior to his revealing his true nature.

Judas, the son of perdition walked with Jesus and His disciples for nearly 4 years. He was even given the title of Apostle by Jesus... yet, in the end, he proved his true nature. He was unsaved.

The tree is known by its fruit. If the tree does not bear fruit, it is good for nothing but to be cut down and cast into the fire. Christ said the tree was good for nothing but to be cast into the fire. He did not say put it into the fire and then it will be good for me.

Good post!:wavey:

 

[TCGreek]

A saved person can live however he wants. He's capable of it.

But, he may not. He does not have permission to do so.

Works don't play into whether or not you're born from above into the family of God, whether to get that way, stay that way, or to prove that you're in the family. Once you're born into the family, your spiritual DNA cannot be changed. That's secure.

But, we are accountable for our actions.

Do you believe in security? Do you believe in accountability?

1. I believe in eternal security because those whom the Lord predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified (Rom 8:30).

2. And I believe in accountability because God is glorified when we bear mcuh fruit (John 15:8).

 

[npetreley]

Can we say that ME is simply a 'shorthand' for "millennial exclusion", without assuming one is saying something "derogatory" or is even necessarily "an opponent" of the teaching? I have used the initials, but I do not recall 'dealing in emotionalism' when I used the initials, at all. Nor have I even actually voiced my position on the issue, but have given a couple of information bits, only. I do not consider myself one of these to whom you are referring, merely because I have used these 'shorthand' initials.

As always, I claim to speak for none other than myself.

Ed

What could be more derogatory than the doctrine itself, regardless of what you call it? The term "kingdom salvation" speaks of another salvation by works, which is anathema. How much more derogatory can you get than "cursed"?

 

[Hope of Glory]

A gift is a gift and a prize is a prize. I believe in both.

That's why there are seemingly contradictory passages.

One says that salvation is apart from works, while another says it's contingent upon them.

One place tells us that he justifies us once and for all, and many others tell us to cause ourselves to be justified.

The Bride of Christ is told to clothe herself in white linen, and linen is the righteous acts of the saints. (Linen is also of the earth and is obtained through much labor.)

One place tells us that salvation is secure the moment we believe, others tell us that we need to make our salvation secure.

These passages have to be contradictory, or referring to diferent things. If they're contradictory, the Bible is worthless.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Believers cannot forfeit eternal life in heaven because:

Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Do you believe in salvational security?

 

[TCGreek]

1. You make a lot of lists.



2. "Ought" and "will" are two different things. We have stated repeatedly said that we ought to do these things, just as you have here. Yet we are called legalists for saying we ought to do these things.



3. This is also something that we have said repeatedly.

4. You make a lot of lists.

1. We may use some of the same terms, but where they eventually lead is what is under consideration.

2. Once called upon to defend orthodoxy, I will from my understanding of Scripture.

 

[Hope of Glory]

An inheritance is a reward?

from Wikipedia,

Inheritance is the practice of passing on property, titles, debts, and obligations upon the death of an individual. It has long played an extremely important role in human societies.

Please don't reward me with your inheritance. I'd hate to think I had to work to inherite your debts and oblitations.

Well, I like Wikipedia, but let's see what God has to say about it, shall we?

Colossians 3:24: Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

It's recompense. It's given back in return.

It's what you've earned.

Do we earn being born from above?

 

[Hope of Glory]

1. I believe in eternal security because those whom the Lord predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified (Rom 8:30).

2. And I believe in accountability because God is glorified when we bear mcuh fruit (John 15:8).

Well, besides disagreeing on "called" and "called out", we're in agreement so far. (And agreement on those terms is not important in this discussion.)

So, what if a person is saved, and he chooses to misbehave? What if he simply chooses not to do the works that would bear good fruit?

What does that mean? Is he accountable or is he unsaved?

 

[TCGreek]

Well, besides disagreeing on "called" and "called out", we're in agreement so far. (And agreement on those terms is not important in this discussion.)

So, what if a person is saved, and he chooses to misbehave? What if he simply chooses not to do the works that would bear good fruit?

What does that mean? Is he accountable or is he unsaved?

1. The Elect of God will be in glory, not worrying about a layover in outerdarkness.

2. Those He justified, He glorified. While experience teaches us that some believers are more fruitful than others, Scripture also teaches us that to those Christ have given eternal life, they will never perish and no one will snatch them out of His Hands (John 10:28). There would be no layover on the way to glory.

 

[npetreley]

1. The Elect of God will be in glorify, not worrying about a layover in outerdarkness.

Amen.

Col 3:4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

It's a done deal. No "you MAY appear with Him in glory if you've been a good boy, otherwise burn in hell for 1,000 years".

 

[TCGreek]

It's a done deal. No "you MAY appear with Him in glory if you've been a good boy, otherwise burn in hell for 1,000 years".

1. Col 3:3, 4 is one of my favorite places of Scripture to camp out.

2. To all these Christians who were undoubtedly at different levels in their spiritual growth, Paul offers the identical hope, "When Christ who is our life appears, we shall appear with him in glory." There's no layover in this amazing passage of Scripture.

3. We ought to muse over it for days.

 

[jne1611]

Lazarus, ME is the foolish doctine preached by many that saved people, those who Christ has sealed with His Holy Spirit, will spend the 1,000 years during the Millenial Reign of Christ in either
1. Outer Darkness
2. Hell
or
3. The Lake of Fire

To date, they have not been able to give Scriptural proof for the doctrine. When they do use Scripture, it is twisted out of context to fit their theory.

Grab a Bible and find one verse that says God's saved ones will be in one of the three places during the 1,000 year reign. It ain't there. Yet the ME proponents keep insisting it is... with no proof.

Amen! The very concept is outrageous. That blood washed, born again, forgiven, sanctified, complete in Christ, Spirit indwelt, eternally secure and every thing else that we have in God's GREAT salvation will spend any time in hell at all is preposterous!

 

[jne1611]

Even more satanic is to try to get them to "really really truly believe" so they can know that they "know that they know that they know" that they are "truly really really truly" saved because they have enough good works to be in npetreley and Lazarus' club.

lacy

No, why not instead, tell them their going to hell for 1000 years! That sounds like a plan. I have not seen any of these people try to say that works will get you to heaven. They are trying to get it a cross that hell is not a correctional facility for the saints! Hell is a place reserved for the Devil and his angels. All sinners who die outside the grace of God go to hell. The Second Death has no power over blood washed saints. Hell has no claim on them. The blood is more powerful than that.

 

[jne1611]

We absolutely agree. We just happen to be able to leave in the part about "yet so as by fire".

Lacy

Are you forgetting the part, "the fire shall try every mans work"? Shall we all go to hell?

 

[Lacy Evans]

That poses yet another problem for ME. Does God withdraw the Spirit for the 1,000 years? That isn't much of a seal of the promise, now is it? But, unless God withdraws the Spirit, the Spirit will be spending 1,000 years in the lake of fire/hell/etc. inside believers.

Psalms 139:7-8
7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.