Whosoever Will

[Rippon]

Are you trying to tell me every time someone used one of those phrases they are referring to "Historical Theology"?

I know your reading comprehension is challenged. You had said who had determined the terms and their meanings. I said : Have you ever heard of Historical Theology? Of course most folks don't care at all to investigate -- they just launch out on their own and invest the terms with their own meaning regardless of the historical moorings of the terms.

Why am I still called an Arminian then by your camp (when I'm clearly NOT)?

You are clearly not a Calvinist. Your theology is much more akin to Arminianism.

 

[webdog]

I know your reading comprehension is challenged. You had said who had determined the terms and their meanings. I said : Have you ever heard of Historical Theology? Of course most folks don't care at all to investigate -- they just launch out on their own and ivest the terms with their own meaning regardless of the historical moorings of the terms.

I'm not debating the historical meanings...I'm debating the perceived meanings, the very ones used HERE. I cannot automatically assume everyone is familiar with your historical meanings of the phrases in question. The fact is krydneck referred to the phrases in question, oelig asked what HE meant by them, and was promptly accused of being a liar and not knowing what the meant, when in fact oelig was asking krydneck's definition of what HE meant. Either the reading comprehension is actually not your strongest point, or you just like to argue for the sake of arguing.

You are clearly not a Calvinist. Your theology is much more akin to Arminianism.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[psalms109:31]

Holy Spirit

Luke 24:
45Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48You are witnesses of these things. 49I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high."The Holy Spirit Promised

Acts1:
4 And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; 5 for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” 6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me[Or in ] in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Acts 2
Coming of the Holy Spirit
1 When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord[NU-Text reads together.] in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
The Crowd’s Response

5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. 7 Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, “Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” 12 So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “Whatever could this mean?”
13 Others mocking said, “They are full of new wine.”
Peter’s Sermon

14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
17 ‘ And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God,
That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
Your young men shall see visions,
Your old men shall dream dreams.
18 And on My menservants and on My maidservants
I will pour out My Spirit in those days;
And they shall prophesy.
19 I will show wonders in heaven above
And signs in the earth beneath:
Blood and fire and vapor of smoke.
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness,
And the moon into blood,
Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD.
21 And it shall come to pass
That whoever calls on the name of the LORD
Shall be saved.’[Joel 2:28–32 ]

Acts 19
Paul in Ephesus
1While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[Or after ] you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
3So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"
"John's baptism," they replied.

4Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5On hearing this, they were baptized into[Or in ] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues[Or other languages] and prophesied. 7There were about twelve men in all.

The Holy Spirit before the cross was to prepare the way the return was to make us one amoung others that Jesus promised us from the Holy Spirit.

 

[psalms109:31]

Acts 4:
11He is
" 'the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the capstone.[Or cornerstone ]'[Psalm 118:22 ] 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

 

[psalms109:31]

No Man

There is no man who can prepare the way for our Lord and Saviour But God through His Holy Spirit

 

[OldRegular]

OldRegular,

Thanks man, you always seem to come along at the most appropriate time....:thumbs:

Always glad to help!

I thought that the Bible was given to us by GOD, not Paul.

My bad, guess I am a bit rusty. When I used to get this same retort from the Catholics I learned I should phrase it as:
"the gospel message given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ through the apostle Paul."
OldRegular, you have read the 13 books written by Paul haven't you?????

I believe you are hyper dispensational!!!!! Only a hyper would distinguish between the Gospel that Paul received and the Gospel that Jesus Christ taught HIS disciples. What about the 500+ Jews,who constituted the first church? What were the Apostles commanded to teach in the Gospel of Matthew, 28:19, 20?

That sounds a little like Ituttut the hyper dispensationalist. Could it be possible???

Awww, there you go again with your pigeon-holein'. :smilewinkgrin:

Nawww, not to worry, I am not a "hyper" for I do believe in believer's baptism and celebrating the Lord's Supper.

But you bring up an excellent point. To some degree everyone is a dispensationalist because dispensationalism is only the recognition that God gave a different message to different folks at different times.

OldRegular I bet you too are a dispensationalist to some degree.:thumbs:

God told Noah to build an ark, are you building an ark? If not why not?????

Built one 42 years ago!

God told Moses and the children to follow the law...OldRegular are you obeying all the diet laws of Lev?
Are you going annually to the Temple to offer your sacrifices?
I bet not.....
So you see, OldRegular, you too are a dispensationalist.

Apparently you have not understood Paul. Consider:

Ephesians 2:15. Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Colossians 2:14. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Colossians 2:20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

The age of Grace started when GOD slew the first animal to make atonement [temporary] for the rebellion of Adam and Eve.

Perhaps I should have termed it the "Church Age",,,sorry.
But I bet you knew what I meant because even though it is not a Biblical term, the term does have a constant meaning, agreed upon by those who enjoy it.

Scofield believed that Salvation in the Old Teatament was by keeping the law. There is a thread on this Forum about the heretical teaching of dispensationalist Hagee and the Salvation of the Jews

COLOR="royalblue"]What is all this about a 7 year tribulation????? Sorry, GRreat TRribulation.[/COLOR]

Its that period of time in the future spoken of by Daniel.
You have read the book of Daniel haven't you?
Its also mentioned in the Revelation when 2/3 of the folks will be killed and hail stones the size of a talent (about 130 lbs.) will fall from heaven.
Its a time when all the rivers will run with blood. Rev 16:4)
Jesus spoke of the time in Matt 24.
No matter what your age is, I bet you haven't seen these things nor heard of them in history.

You need to read Daniel again. He does not teach anything about a future gRreat tRribulation. That is just more dispensational error.

Given that you cannot understand Daniel don't worry about Revelation!

 

[DHK]

Scofield believed that Salvation in the Old Teatament was by keeping the law. There is a thread on this Forum about the heretical teaching of dispensationalist Hagee and the Salvation of the Jews

Can you document this?

 

[olegig]

Hey there OldRegular,,

I believe you are hyper dispensational!!!!! Only a hyper would distinguish between the Gospel that Paul received and the Gospel that Jesus Christ taught HIS disciples.

Naww, hypers of all following seem to be without love for their fellow Christians and constantly arguing with anyone who does not hold to their precise position.
Since they cannot defeat the arguments with reason, they often turn to name calling and questioning others salvation.

I would simply answer to being a Bible Believing Christian.
But you may call me anything you wish, just don't call me late to supper.

Concerning the gospels preached by Paul and that of the disciples, I cannot bestow any supernatural ability on the disciples which would give them the ability to know the revelations of our Lord Jesus Christ given through Paul even before they were revealed to Paul.
Can you?????

I would call your attention to what Peter said of the matter:

2 Peter 3:15-16 (King James Version)
15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Several things happen in the above passage:
1. Peter confirms Paul's ministry.
2. Peter confirms that many things were revealed through Paul ("given unto him").
3. Peter confirms that Paul's epistiles are indeed scripture.
4. Peter confirms these mysteries are hard to understand.
5. Peter says the unlearned and unstable have trouble with them. (I call special attention to this one)
6 Peter even goes so far as to say those who do not pay close attention to the words given through Paul are on the way to destruction.

What about the 500+ Jews,who constituted the first church?
Oh, I am quiet sure they will be in the kingdom getting everything they were promised.
(Please remember, I always take God at His Word. If He made a promise I fully expect He will keep it.)

What were the Apostles commanded to teach in the Gospel of Matthew, 28:19, 20?

Just what the passage dictates: Everything Jesus had commanded them....

Now I ask you, at that time what did the disciples know other than Jesus was truly the promised Messiah sent from God?
And I ask you, did they do it?

Apparently you have not understood Paul. Consider:

Ephesians 2:15. Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Colossians 2:14. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Colossians 2:20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

why OldRegular, I see that you too wear the moniker of dispensationalist for you do see a difference in the message from God to His people. :thumbsup: (promise, I won't tell)

Scofield believed that Salvation in the Old Teatament was by keeping the law.

I shudder to think what would become of them if they did not do what God told them to do......:tear::tear::tear:
But here perhaps we should keep in mind that keeping the law was not the same as not sinning.
Its kind of like when you get a speeding ticket, (you have broken the law or sinned); but when you go pay the fine (Temple sacrifice), you have kept the law.

You need to read Daniel again. He does not teach anything about a future gRreat tRribulation. That is just more dispensational error.

Make ya a deal, OK? I will rethink my position when you tell me of the historic events of giant hail stones and all the rivers running with blood,,,etc....

Now OldRegular you just cannot gloss over the things you don't like or to which you have no answer.

How do you expect to make any headway in a discuss when all you've got is to tell the other to re-read something or re-think something when you don't offer any proof of any kind to the contrary?

 

[OldRegular]

olegig

There is one Gospel, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul states of the Gospel in Romans 1:16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Elsewhere in Scripture we read the following:

Mark 1:1.The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

Note that Mark is talking about the one Gospel, the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

Galatians 1:6-9
6. I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8. 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.
9. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Now the Apostle Paul states that those who teach there is more than one Gospel is accursed. I agree with Paul. I discussed this at length with ituttut, the hyper-dispensationalist, some months back. I have no intention of discussing it further with you, another hyper-dispensationalist. As far as I am concerned, and I repeat, those who believe or teach that there is more than one Gospel are accursed.

 

[olegig]

OldRegular,

I agree with Paul.

Well, it seems you feel free to pick and chose to which verses of Paul you agree.
It does not seem you agree with Paul when he speaks of the Church being caught up off the earth before the wrath of God is manifested. 1Cor 15:51ff,,1Thes 4:14ff
And it does not seem you agree with Paul when in 2Cor 5:16 he tells us that we should no more follow Christ after the flesh.

As far as I am concerned, and I repeat, those who believe or teach that there is more than one Gospel are accursed.

Here I would agree with you to a point for there is just one Gospel by which men today are saved. Our job is to rightly divide the Word (2Tim 2:15) and discern that Gospel.

IMO the Gospel by which men today are saved is found in 1Cor 15:1ff, or at least that is the Gospel Paul says we are saved by, and you do agree with Paul....don't you?

One will find in the passage of 1Cor 15 the mention of the resurrection, now one must ask one's self how could Jesus have taught this Gospel message before the cross?

Also please consider:

2 Timothy 1:15 (King James Version)
15This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.

Here again we find one must ask if they are turning from away from Paul, then to what are they turning to?

From history we see they are turning back to legalism, the things argued at the counsel of Acts 15. They are burdening the gentiles with the early message given to the Jews. They are trying to Replace the Jew with the gentile.
They are hatching the Catholic church which only follows the Kingdom Gospel because they believe those called out of the gentiles have Replaced the Jew as God's chosen people.

I have no intention of discussing it further with you, another hyper-dispensationalist.

Sounds great, perhaps there are others who would like to discuss the meat of scripture and this way the discussion won't be so negative.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Olegig:

You said :

"Here I would agree with you to a point for there is just one Gospel by which men today are saved. Our job is to rightly divide the Word (2Tim 2:15) and discern that Gospel.

IMO the Gospel by which men today are saved is found in 1Cor 15:1ff, or at least that is the Gospel Paul says we are saved by, and you do agree with Paul....don't you?

Well and good.
Here is 1 Corinthians 15:1-3:

" Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received , and wherein ye stand ;
By which also ye are saved , if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received , how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
And that he was buried , and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Now, do you discern this man, Paul, saying that one is saved by remembering the gospel, how it is preached, the elements and meat of it ?
That, if they forget, and there is no reason given on the why's and wherefore's of forgetting, or of not remembering, then they have just become, or can become "unsaved" ?
You yourself said in one of your posts that Scripture ought to be compared to Scripture, to get its meaning.
Well, if Scripture says that God's people were redeemed by Christ, through Christ, by Christ, and none other, then why is Paul saying the gospel must be remembered, kept in mind, if one is to remain saved ?

Suppose a preacher faithfully served his Lord for twenty-some years, and at the end of his years, he develops Alzheimer's or some form of dementia and forgets all he has preached for years, and suddenly feels that he is so much of a sinner, so unclean, that he cannot possibly enter into the rest of the Lord when he dies, then he has forgotten, never mind the reason, is he, in your opinion, based on the above, still "saved" ?

 

[OldRegular]

olegig

It is you and your fellow dispensationalists who believe you are free to pick and choose what Scripture you accept. You "rightly divide the Word" okay and throw out that part that does not agree with dispensational error. The dispensationalism of Darby and Scofield and their adherents have corrupted Scripture beyond belief.

1. The false Doctrine of two gospels came from Darby/Scofield dispensationalism.
2. The false doctrine of "the parenthesis church" came from Darby/Scofield dispensationalism.
3. The false Doctrine of the future two event coming of Jesus Christ came from Darby/Scofield dispensationalism.
4. The false doctrine of the great seven year tribulation came from Darby/Scofield dispensationalism.
5. The false doctrine of the Jewish dominance during the so-called millennial reign came from Darby/ Scofield dispensationalism.
6. The false doctrine of two peoples of God; an earthly people, the Jews; and a heavenly people, the Church; came from Darby/Scofield
7. The false doctrine of Darby/Scofield dispensationalism came at the same period in history when other false doctrines such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, and Christian Science rose and flourished.

Perhaps I should add the name of Scottish mystic, Margaret MacDonald, along with Darby/Scofield. Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his book, The Church and Last Things, asserts that Darby was influenced by Edward Irving, a charismatic Scottish preacher, who established a new church in London called the Catholic Apostolic Church. As reported by Lloyd-Jones [page 138] the origin of ‘the secret rapture’ is the result of a prophetic utterance in the Catholic Apostolic Church. This utterance was supposedly in tongues, interpreted by someone and considered ‘a revelation’. There is much dispute as to whether the so-called revelation occured in Irving’s church or elsewhere and was then discovered by Irving. The origin of this ‘revelation’ has been attributed to Margaret Macdonald of Port Glasgow, Scotland. Her revelation was first published in Robert Norton's Memoirs of James & George Macdonald, of Port Glasgow (1840), pp. 171-176. Norton published it again in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861), pp. 15-18. Whether all of this is historical truth is subject to debate. However, it is apparently historical fact that there was a split within the Plymouth Bretheren as the result of Darby’s acceptance of the two event Second Coming and the ‘parenthesis church’. One truth should be evident. If the two event Second Coming is based on a revelation claimed by Margaret Macdonald, Edward Irving, or John Darby, or anyone in the Catholic Apostolic Church it is inherently false doctrine since the special revelation of God to man, the Scriptures, ceased with the Apostolic Age.

Anyone interested in pursuing further this ongoing debate regarding the influence of Margaret MacDonald may do so by doing an internet search of Margaret Macdonald or The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861).

Philip Mauro (1859-1952) seduced by dispensationalism upon conversion later wrote in The Gospel of the Kingdom [Introduction, pages 6, 7] or http://www.dispensationalism.org.uk/, as follows:

It is mortifying to remember that I not only held and taught these novelties myself, but that I even enjoyed a complacent sense of superiority because thereof, and regarded with feelings of pity and contempt those who had not received the "new light" and were unacquainted with this up-to-date method of "rightly dividing the word of truth." For I fully believed what an advertising circular says in presenting "Twelve Reasons why you should use THE SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE," namely, that:

"First, the Scofield Bible outlines the Scriptures from the standpoint of DISPENSATIONAL TRUTH, and there can be no adequate understanding or rightly dividing of the Word of God except from the standpoint of dispensational truth."

What a slur is this upon the spiritual understanding of the ten thousands of men, "mighty in the Scriptures," whom God gave as teachers to His people during all the Christian centuries before "dispensational truth" (or dispensational error), was discovered! And what an affront to the thousands of men of God of our own day, workmen that need not to be ashamed, who have never accepted the newly invented system! Yet I was among those who eagerly embraced it (upon human authority solely, for there is none other) and who earnestly pressed it upon my fellow Christians. I am deeply thankful, however, that the time came (it was just ten years ago) when the inconsistencies and self contradictions of the system itself, and above all, the impossibility of reconciling its main positions with the plain statements of the Word of God, became so glaringly evident that I could not do otherwise than renounce it.

Others who were brought to the truth were:

http://www.dispensationalism.org.uk/

G. Campbell Morgan (1863-1945) in a Letter to Rev. H. F. Wright. 1943;. See C. G. & E. M. Weston. Analyzing Scofield. wrote:
I am quite convinced that all the promises to Israél are found, are finding and will find their perfect fulfilment in the Church. It is true that in time past, in my expositions, I gave a definite place to Israél in the purposes of God. I have now come to the conviction, as I have just said, that it is, the new and spiritual Israél that is intended.

A. W. Pink (1886-1952) in Biblical Refutation of Dispensationalism. wrote:
Dispensationalism is a device of the enemy, designed to rob the children of no small part of that bread which their heavenly Father has provided for their souls? a device wherein the wily serpent appears as an angel of light, feigning to "make the Bible a new book" by simplifying much in it which perplexes the spiritually unlearned. It is sad to see how widely successful the devil has been by means of this subtle innovation.


Thank GOD there is a movement away from classic and hyper dispensationalism called Progressive Dispensationalism. Hopefully these people will come to accept the whole Counsel of GOD.

 

[olegig]

hello pinoybaptist,

(I'm still interested in the meaning of your name, does it mean you are Filipino?)

Now, do you discern this man, Paul, saying that one is saved by remembering the gospel, how it is preached, the elements and meat of it ?

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (King James Version)
1 Corinthians 15
1Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

First concerning the "if" of vs 2.
IMO even though Paul addressed the letter to the saved folks at Corinth, (1Cor 1:2) I feel he is always mindful of the fact there could certainly be some folks in the congregation who were yet unsaved. (A thing we should all always keep in mind.:thumbs

When anyone is asked about their perceived salvic experience, they are always able to tell of it, whether it was Biblical or not.
IMO Paul is simply saying "if you remember what I am about to tell you in vs's 3&4, then you have not believed in vain.

Then Paul goes on in vs's 3&4 to list the 5 parts of the gospel to which he refers in vs 1.
They are:
1. death 2. sins 3. burial 4. resurrection 5. according to the scriptures
and even mentions the 5th twice.

Now please note, in this list there is no repentance or water baptism, both of which are things found in the Kingdom gospel message given by Peter in Acts 2:38.

This is the big difference between the Gospel of Grace revealed through Paul and the Kingdom Gospel. For now there are no legalistic works involved in the free gift of salvation-----only belief.

That, if they forget, and there is no reason given on the why's and wherefore's of forgetting, or of not remembering, then they have just become, or can become "unsaved" ?

My view on the permanency of salvation for those today saved by the Gospel of Grace is that they can never loose their salvation.

I feel the permanency of salvation for those in the Body has roots all the way back to the Davidic Covenant. (Ps 89:28-36; 2Sam 7:12)
The Bible is certain to trace the linage of Jesus back to David showing Jesus to be a descendant of David; therefore the sure mercies of David are on Christ. (Acts 13:34)
Now since the believer is placed "in Christ" (Rom 12:5; 16:7; 1Cor 1:30; 2Cor 5:17; etc...) the sure mercies of David are also granted to the believer.
Therefore we learn from Ps 89:33 that God promises to never remove His lovingkindness from those in Christ.

 

[RAdam]

Paul is presenting a situation where one is saved by the gospel if he keeps in memory what Paul preached to them. Chapter 15 is about the resurrection of the dead. There are some who are saying there is no resurrection of the dead. The way Paul is going to prove them wrong is by using the resurrection of Jesus Christ. He, of course, argues that if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ isn't raised up from the dead, and if that is so then all is vain. So, he first sets out to establish this fact, and he reminds the Corinthians that this was what he preached to them at the first, they received it, and now they stand in that truth. What Paul is saying is you'll be saved from this error (the no resurrection error) if you keep in memory what I preached to you, how that Christ rose from the dead, and this was according to the scriptures (by which he means the Old Testament scriptures).

 

[pinoybaptist]

This is the big difference between the Gospel of Grace revealed through Paul and the Kingdom Gospel. For now there are no legalistic works involved in the free gift of salvation-----only belief.

So far you have been civil in your discussions, and I am beginning to appreciate you for that.

Yur post was long and I am not being picky but I just need you to explain the above portion a little bit more.

As far as I am concerned, know that I am a Primitive Baptist and discussing salvation with me can be pretty frustrating and aggravating for you other Baptists (whether Arminian or Calvinist doesn't matter) because I hold to eternal salvation, and gospel salvation.
I view any salvation mentioned in the same breath as anything that resembles input from the believer (repentance, faith, remembrance, faithfulness, good works, etc) to be timely salvation, and eternal salvation to be all OF Christ, independent of any input from the recipient such as the aforementioned in parenthesis and independent of the recipient's theology, doctrine, race, geography, chronology, and other such in this fallen world that divides fallen man.

That, if they forget, and there is no reason given on the why's and wherefore's of forgetting, or of not remembering, then they have just become, or can become "unsaved" ?

My view on the permanency of salvation for those today saved by the Gospel of Grace is that they can never loose their salvation.

The Gospel of Grace does not save anyone. Again, it is merely the good news of grace, translated. If I came to you with the good news that a faraway uncle whom you do not know has left a sizeable amount of treasure for you and therefore you are rich, you are not rich because you believed the news, neither do you become poor (which you already are) if you don't believe it. Acting on the news, or disregarding it, does not make the news true or untrue.

I feel the permanency of salvation for those in the Body has roots all the way back to the Davidic Covenant. (Ps 89:28-36; 2Sam 7:12)
The Bible is certain to trace the linage of Jesus back to David showing Jesus to be a descendant of David; therefore the sure mercies of David are on Christ. (Acts 13:34)
Now since the believer is placed "in Christ" (Rom 12:5; 16:7; 1Cor 1:30; 2Cor 5:17; etc...) the sure mercies of David are also granted to the believer.
Therefore we learn from Ps 89:33 that God promises to never remove His lovingkindness from those in Christ.

I would suggest pay attention to the fact that the believer is "in Christ".
He is accepted "in the beloved" (Christ).
He is seated in heavenly places "in Christ".
He is chosen "in Christ".
He is crucified and risen "with Christ".
Everything he is, he is, because of Christ.
No one claiming to be a child of God amounts to nothing outside of Christ.
The permanency of the child of God's eternal salvation depends on the fact of the permanency of Christ's finished work.
(Yet, there are those on this board who would disagree that all honor ultimately belongs to God and Christ).

 

[olegig]

OldRegular,

Good to have you back, I was afraid you might hold good to your word.

It is you and your fellow dispensationalists who believe you are free to pick and choose what Scripture you accept.

Well, I enjoy all the scriptures; but yes, I feel we are to rightly divide among the scriptures when searching for the doctrinal truths.
The key here is the criteria used to sort all this out. IMO we should rightly divide the doctrinal truths of scripture based on to whom the writer is speaking.
If the writer is speaking to Noah,,,then nope, not doctrine for me.
If the writer is speaking to a Jew under the law,,,then nope, not doctrine for me.
If the writer is speaking to a lost gentile,,,bingo, that was me.
Or if the writer is speaking to a member of the Body of Christ,,,then again bingo, that's me.
As a rule of thumb for you, the doctrines to members of the Body of Christ can be found in the 13 books beginning with the word "Paul".

But I thought we were past that when even you showed your dispensationalism.
Remember, you said we are no longer under the Levitical laws because of things brought to light through Paul?
OldRegular, are you plagued with a short memory? Must we re-visit this often, or can we move on????

Concerning the rest of post 192, you know I can C&P with the best of 'em. For every author you can find to support a topic, I can find one to refute, or visa-versa.

OldRegular, do you really think any of those guys are going to stand up for you before the great white throne in judgment?
I would suggest to you, and anyone else, to get in the Book yourself and read for yourself; because no one is responsible for your salvation but yourself.

 

[DHK]

olegig

It is you and your fellow dispensationalists who believe you are free to pick and choose what Scripture you accept. You "rightly divide the Word" okay and throw out that part that does not agree with dispensational error. The dispensationalism of Darby and Scofield and their adherents have corrupted Scripture beyond belief.

1. The false Doctrine of two gospels came from Darby/Scofield dispensationalism.

I don't know of any dispensationalist who believes in two gospels. Thus I believe your accusation here to be false. I have a Scofield Bible, and used if for years, and never found any such thing. You are a confused man.

Secondly, dispensationalism is a natural outgrowth of premillinnialism.
Thirdly, almost all the ECF were pre-millennialist. Look it up. The key word is Chiliastic or chiliasm. They were millenialist in their thinking and trusting the Lord to come at any time. Dispensationalism is simply a natural outgrowth of that position. Just because you can't seem to find the material to read of it, doesn't mean it didn't exist.

 

[olegig]

pinoybaptist, hello again......

So far you have been civil in your discussions, and I am beginning to appreciate you for that.

Well, thank you for that.

Yur post was long and I am not being picky but I just need you to explain the above portion a little bit more.

All I am saying is if one compares the message of Peter to that of Paul after Paul's revelation of the mysteries; one can see they are a different message.
For instance:
In Acts 2:38 Peter tells his audience to repent and be baptised.
While in 1Cor 15 Paul tells his audience to believe (+nothing) on the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Peter's audience was all good, God worshipping Jews. They were at Jerusalem doing their annual Temple worship services including all the instructed sacrifices and feasts.
Paul's audience is entirely something different for he is speaking to you and I and everyone else on the face of the earth today.

Now let me say in reguard to this "two gospel" thing.
Although I see more than one gospel in scripture, I in no way wish to imply there is more than one active right now for there is one and only one Gospel by which all men today can be saved.
And that is the Gospel of Grace which is to only believe (+nothing) on the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

As far as I am concerned, know that I am a Primitive Baptist and discussing salvation with me can be pretty frustrating and aggravating for you other Baptists (whether Arminian or Calvinist doesn't matter) because I hold to eternal salvation, and gospel salvation.

Thanks for the input and I am sure your views will be of interest.
But let me make known to you that I go under no title except a Bible Believing Christian.
We'll just let those pesky Arminians and Calvinist fight it out on their own while we stand on the side-line and enjoy.

The Gospel of Grace does not save anyone.
Agreed, perhaps I should have said: "those saved through believing the Gospel of Grace"......

I would suggest pay attention to the fact that the believer is "in Christ".

I agree totally. There is nothing, no glorious hope outside of Christ.
And I would add we are indwelt by the Holy Spirit who is the earnest of our complete and final salvation.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't know of any dispensationalist who believes in two gospels. Thus I believe your accusation here to be false. I have a Scofield Bible, and used if for years, and never found any such thing. You are a confused man.

Now please note, in this list there is no repentance or water baptism, both of which are things found in the Kingdom gospel message given by Peter in Acts 2:38.

This is the big difference between the Gospel of Grace revealed through Paul and the Kingdom Gospel. For now there are no legalistic works involved in the free gift of salvation-----only belief.

My bold in olegig's remarks! Also go to the archive and read ituttut, perhaps he is reincarnated in olegig!

I suggest you and all dispensationalists are confused!!!!! Some are more so than others:tonofbricks:

 

[olegig]

OldRegular,

Just so you will no longer be confused about how old some of these thoughts are, I present you with this C&P job:

Pseudo-Ephraem's Rapture Statement

.....All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins.......

Who is Pseudo-Ephraem?

The word "Pseudo" (Greek for false) is a prefix attached by scholars to the name of a famous historical person or book of the Bible when one writes using that name. Pseudo-Ephraem claims that his sermon was written by Ephraem of Nisibis (306-73), considered to be the greatest figure in the history of the Syrian church.
http://www.raptureme.com/tt14.html

OldRegular, please note this statement predates Darby, Scofield, and maybe even Calvin.....