Any Grace Believers Here i.e. OSAS?

[AVBunyan]

And secondly, you never mention anything about repentance and conversion. "REPENT AND BELIEVE" Your witness is "accept what Jesus did and 'poof', you are going to heaven". Wrong.

Francis when a sinner gets truly save he will repent without me telling him to - he will turn by the work of the Spirit; The Spirit will convict him of his way of life and he knows.
2 Cor 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Would you be so kind as to define the word regeneration as it is used in the following verse? Feel free to use a good dictionary.
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

One more - would you be so kind as to define the word quickenedas it is used in the following verse? Feel free to use a good dictionary.
Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins:
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

When a sinner gets truly converted he will change - if there is no change then there was no work done in the man by the Spirit.

My life changed when I got saved - did yours? If so - in what way may I respectfully ask?

God bless

 

[francisdesales]

Francis when a sinner gets truly save he will repent without me telling him to - he will turn by the work of the Spirit; The Spirit will convict him of his way of life and he knows.

I disagree that a person doesn't need to be told that. Repent and believe has been the witness' proclamation to mankind since John the Baptist - and even earlier, if we count the prophetic exclamations to Israel. That is how God chooses to work - through us clay vessels. Do you not agree with that? Certainly, God doesn't need us, but there it is.

I believe it is wrong to give only partial truths to people. If a person is pro-abortion, it is paramount that they be told that this is AGAINST God's will, for example. Men and women need to be told to convert, not a phony baloney idea that they can say one sentence and be saved for heaven. I suppose many Americans would love that gospel - "I believe, and now I can get on with my life because my eternal destiny is set..."

It is wishful thinking. And is nowhere the idea that we are to STRIVE for the narrow gate.

Would you be so kind as to define the word regeneration as it is used in the following verse? Feel free to use a good dictionary.
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Paul is speaking about Baptism, the washing of regeneration. It is at this point that the Holy Spirit seals us, makes us a child of God, and comes to us in a special way, beginning our sanctification, beginning our transformation to "another" Christ - IF we desire this. God does not force Himself upon us. That is not how love works.

One more - would you be so kind as to define the word quickenedas it is used in the following verse? Feel free to use a good dictionary.
Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins:
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Listen, I think it is only fair that YOU answer MY questions that have gone unanswered for over a half a dozen posts before I continue on. This is a dialogue, not an inquisition. I will happily answer your questions, but I expect the same from you. If you believe your stance is the correct one, then you should have no problems with answering me.

I presume that you still think Jesus is your Lord and Savior. Please explain to me why you do not heed His Words regarding eternal life and justification. Please tell me what is the POINT of sanctification in your scheme?

When a sinner gets truly converted he will change - if there is no change then there was no work done in the man by the Spirit.

I respectfully disagree again. There are a number of places in Scripture that speak of "grieving" the Holy Spirit, not obeying Him, allowing His graces to fall upon us in vain. Thus, despite what you believe about mankind, there is some sort of response required from man to make these graces effective for us. God has given us commandments. Even in the OT, we see that man can obey them and can be seen as just in God's eyes, made righteous by God because they were under a system of grace. Jesus fulfilled this, taught it, and established it for us in time. But if we look at the OT, (as the witness of Hebrews 11 states!), we see people were ALREADY living the life of faith in God's eyes. Clearly, as 1 Cor 10 states, many people who were "saved" at first did NOT persevere. Paul SPECIFICALLY WARNS Christians to BEWARE that YOU do not falter. I pray that you do not take your salvation for granted and do not falter.

Our transformation is a result of our willingness to heed God and utilize His graces. Even the DESIRE for me to do this is a gift! It is NOT from me ALONE. I can DO NOTHING GOOD without God. But it doesn't follow that because God must move my will, that I do nothing at all. That is the BASIS for my own JUDGMENT to heaven or hell. ALL of us will be judged based on what we do and the motives behind them. There are too many Scriptural passages for me to quote you on this. Practically EVERY book of the NT talks about it. It is a fundamental message of the Bible. God desires that we become holy as He is holy. He desires a holy people, one set apart, one that shines to the rest of the world to proclaim HIS glory. One that obeys His will.

But what GOOD is salt, once it loses its savor? It IS THROWN OUT!

Thus, our "worth" in God's eyes is dependent upon how we use His gifts, whether natural gifts or supernatural ones. Are we still the light of the world? Or do we hide under a bushel? Will we be thrown away?

Because we are now under a sytem of grace, because of Christ's CONSTANT intercessions, the Father decides to overlook His wrath that our sins deserve. The Holy Spirit has come to ALL believers. The question is whether that believer decides to "crucify himself" as Paul says in Galatians. We must die to ourselves. Isn't that the message of Christ?

It is not some fairy-land fantasy of "I believe, now punch my ticket while I continue with my life".

My life changed when I got saved - did yours? If so - in what way may I respectfully ask?

[/quote]

Of course my life has changed. Before I returned to Christ, I didn't read the Scriptures, I didn't worship Him, and my actions were with me in mind first. Sure, I knew God created the world, but I didn't see His work in my life. I presumed that I was responsible totally for my position in life, my health, and so forth. When I was called to sacrifice for the sake of my children or wife, I did it grudgingly. I was arrogant and proud. And I certainly didn't come onto forums to spread Christ's gospel... As a result of some Assembly of Christ people down the street, I returned back to the Catholic Church. Ironic, perhaps, but being a lover of history, I could NEVER become Protestant after seeing the continuity of the Catholic Church with the writers of Scriptures. The more I read about Catholicism, the more I realized it was God's plan that I return to Him through His Church.

I have learned much more about my faith, I have experienced Christ in prayer, Bible reading, and during the Divine Liturgy (Mass). I am more in-tune to His intersections in my life, although I may not recognize it immediately. I am more vocal in sharing my faith. I teach it to others at my parish - to people desiring to become Catholic. I am more willing to sacrifice, and am sometimes more humble. I still am growing in the faith, but I realize this is a "long-haul" thing. I have reconverted later in life, only an active Christian for the last 7 years or so. I grow in virtue as a result of my imperfect following of the Spirit's promptings. So, yes, my life has changed in many ways since I have returned to active participation in my Christian walk.

Regards

 

[AVBunyan]

Paul is speaking about Baptism, the washing of regeneration.

Baptism is not within 6 chapters in any direction - private interpretation.

So now baptism is part of your plan of salvation? - of course it is - Rome believes baptism is essential for salvation don't they?

BTW - Funny you used the word inquisition isn't it?

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

Speaking of doctrine - You got folks here:
Asking God for forgiveness, speaking in tongues, losing their salvation. heading through the tribulation, getting baptized, mixing the body of Christ with Israel, haniging on to Jewish covenants, and so much other stuff it makes it nearly impossible to discuss the simple Christian life because you have to spit out so many bones to get to the meal.

Um, I have a few objections to your list - I don't understand why you put those there. Asking for forgiveness is bad? The Lord's prayer teaches us to ask for forgiveness daily. Getting baptised? And what is wrong with keeping an ordinance of our Lord? Now as for the green section, you've got me confused here. Do you mean confusing promises given to Jews with the Church or are you (please don't tell me you believe this) subscribing to the rediculous "replacement theology" (which I thought we cleared up a long time ago here). If the former, then yes there are some things in the prophets which will happen literally for only Israel but we as spiritual heirs of Israel will also inherit the same ultimate promises (for example being a nation of priests - which was promised specifically to Israel, but will be extended to "spiritual Israel" to rule the unbelieving & newly believing Gentiles during the Millenial reign).

I must ask you to exaplain the purpose of your list here, and what you were trying to say.

God Bless

~Josh

 

[AVBunyan]

Um, I have a few objections to your list –

1. Speaking of doctrine
2. Asking God for forgiveness
3. getting baptized
4. mixing the body of Christ with Israel
5. haniging on to Jewish covenants,

Josh – I know the list is hard and contrary to modern Christianity but you asked me to explain so because I believe you to be a sincere searcher of truth I will answer. Please allow me to use links to articles on my site since typing is very difficult for me at the present time – Also, there may be some sarcasm in there and it is not directed towards you personally – they were written years ago and I need to go back to edit them. I stand by them - I believe the doctrine is sound.

1 Gifts - http://av1611bible.com/articles/gifts.htm
Bottom line – these were in affect when God was dealing with Israel as a nation up through the end of the Acts transitional period from the Jewish kingdom to God’s revelation of the mystery of the body.

2. . Forgiveness - http://av1611bible.com/articles/confession.htm
In the Gospels (under the Gospel of the kingdom) they had to forgive to get forgiveness – we (true redeemed saints in this age) are already forgiven.

3. Water baptism - http://av1611bible.com/articles/baptism.htm

4. The major source for all the confusion – God two major callings:
a. An earthly calling that is intended for Israel and will be on earth.
b. A heavenly calling that is for the body of Christ where t he saints will dwell in Christ above the heavens. Ephesians covers this.

5. Study just how many times the word covenant shows up – around 282 times I think – Now how many of those references are found in Paul?

1but we as spiritual heirs of Israel will also inherit the same ultimate promises (for example being a nation of priests - which was promised specifically to Israel, but will be extended to "spiritual Israel" to rule the unbelieving & newly believing Gentiles during the Millennial reign).

We are not spiritual Israel – sounds good Josh but just won’t fit – you have to spiritualize too much to get this to work. See #4 – I just don’t have the time nor the wrist to cover it all. Bottom line – the nation of Israel and the body are two distinct entities with different callings and doctrines associated with them.

I doubt the above will not suffice for you and I understand –

God bless 8-)

 

[Drew]

4. The major source for all the confusion – God two major callings:
a. An earthly calling that is intended for Israel and will be on earth.
b. A heavenly calling that is for the body of Christ where t he saints will dwell in Christ above the heavens. Ephesians covers this.

5. Study just how many times the word covenant shows up – around 282 times I think – Now how many of those references are found in Paul?

1but we as spiritual heirs of Israel will also inherit the same ultimate promises (for example being a nation of priests - which was promised specifically to Israel, but will be extended to "spiritual Israel" to rule the unbelieving & newly believing Gentiles during the Millennial reign).

We are not spiritual Israel – sounds good Josh but just won’t fit – you have to spiritualize too much to get this to work. See #4 – I just don’t have the time nor the wrist to cover it all. Bottom line – the nation of Israel and the body are two distinct entities with different callings and doctrines associated with them.

I doubt the above will not suffice for you and I understand –

God bless 8-)

I believe that a compelling and strong case can be made for a single covenant - there is no covenant with national Israel that ultimately does not fuse into God's plan for all mankind (and is therefore in no meaningful sense a "separate" covenant. I think that we are indeed "spiritual Israel" and when one sees the rich and coherent way God's plan for "national Israel" can be seen (in hindsight, mind you, as Paul does in Romans) as really a plan for all mankind as fulfilled on the Cross, a new appreciation for the subtletly and sovereignty of God emerges.

Here are some of the reasons I believe show the unity of the covenant:

1. I assert that the real purpose of the original covenant was to solve the Adamic problem of sin. And, of course, Adam's sin contaminated all of creation, not just the Jews. God' s intention in establishing the original covenant with Abram is to save the whole world, not to set in motion a thread of history for the Jews that is decoupled from God's plan of redemption for the whole world. We have the following from Isaiah 49:6

I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth.

2. Taking the words of NT Wright, I agree that "what the covenant / creator God was supposed to do for Israel at the end of history, God has done for Jesus in the middle of history". I submit that if one reads Romans with this theme in mind, a new clarity emerges. Jesus, as messiah who truly represents Israel, bears the destiny of faithless Israel, and ensures that God remains faithful to his original covenant - that the entire world will be set to rights through the agency of Israel although, as if often the case, God fulfills his promises in a manner that we might not expect. God does not have a covenant with the Jews that in any sense can be disentangled from his global redemptive plans.

The fact that there is really only a single covenant is seen when one realizes that Jesus, in fact, "becomes Israel" and all the promises of the original covenant promises to "ethnic Israel" are thereby (through this identification of Jesus with Israel) transferred through Him to the true church - the body of Christ.

God did not need a new covenant as if His original plan to solve the Adamic problem needed to be reworked because "it was not working out" - he needed a faithful Israelite to stand in the place of faithless Israelite and deal with sin once and for all.

3. Here are some other elements of what I see as a single unified covenantal plan (copied from an NT Wright paper on the book of Romans):

(a) Israel’s vocation to be the covenant people of the creator always envisaged
that it would be the means of rescuing the whole world.
(b) This vocation could be, and was, distorted into the idea of Israel s privileged
position over against the rest of the world, but in Christ this distortion has been shown up
for what it is.
(c) The divine intention was, always, to deal with the evil of the world (“sin,â€Â
personified as in chap. 7) by heaping it up into one place and there passing and executing
sentence of judgment upon it.
(d) This “place†was always intended to be the Messiah himself.
(e) The necessary precondition for this judging of sin in the person of the Messiah
was that Israel, the people of the Messiah, should itself become the place where sin was
gathered together, in order that this burden might then be passed on to the Messiah alone.
(f) Israel was thus, as part of its covenant vocation, called to be the “vessels of
wrath,†the place where the wrath of the creator against the wickedness of the whole
creation would be gathered together in order that it be dealt with.

A lot more could be said. I see many reasons to believe that a covenant "for ethnic Israel alone" cannot be distilled out of what appears to be a grand and unified single covenant whose promises (and possible whose "conditions") devolve onto the body of Christ.

 

[francisdesales]

Baptism is not within 6 chapters in any direction - private interpretation.

:

It is in that very verse...

The washing of regeneration is baptism. According to Peter, baptism saves. And to Paul in Romans 6, it is by baptism that we die and are risen with Christ. Titus merely gives us another way of saying "baptism" by the "washing of regeneration", because that is when it happened - when we are baptized.

So now baptism is part of your plan of salvation? - of course it is - Rome believes baptism is essential for salvation don't they?

Baptism is part of God's plan of salvation, not mine. There has always been an entrance ritual into the People of God, beginning with Abraham. Is this surprising? But baptism, as Paul says in Colossians, is something more than circumcision. This UNITES us with Christ, according to Romans 6! And Christ's last words to the Apostles were to baptize SO AS TO SAVE them.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believes not shall be condemned. Mark 16:15-16

And Jesus came and spoke unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, behold, I am with you always [even] unto the end of the age. Mat 28:18-20

Oh, yea, sorry, you have already made it abundantly clear that Jesus is NOT your King, so you don't believe what He says...

You need to move beyond reading those 25 verses they teach you to memorize and actually read the entire NT.

Regards

 

[golfjack]

It's washing of the Word, not water. When someone believes, he is saved. It doesn't say believe in the water. Use Romanns 10:9-10 to be saved. It is that simple. We can confess in church or out of church. Noone is going to run to the nearest river, pool, or lake to obtain salvation.



May God bless, Golfjack

 

[AVBunyan]

Oh, yea, sorry, you have already made it abundantly clear that Jesus is NOT your King, so you don't believe what He says...Regards

Nowhere have I ever said Christ was not my king nor did I not believe what he said - This is character assassination and misrepresentation at its best - low down Francis - low down. :x

I do not doctrinally apply everything Jesus says to me but I believe all he said.
Do you believe everything Moses said is for you - such as sacrificing a lamb? Oh you don't - then you don't believe Moses do you? You see how it is done?

BTW - Nobody who can say regeneration is water baptism because he sees the word washing is not running on all cylinders. :crazyeyes:

Works salvation is what you have - you will get to explain your obedience at the great white throne.

You weary me Francis - you crossed the line with your false accusation regarding what I believe about Christ - you are not worth my time anymore - you are spiritually draining.

You just went on my Ignore list. Bye Francis.

 

[francisdesales]

Nowhere have I ever said Christ was not my king nor did I not believe what he said - This is character assassination and misrepresentation at its best - low down Francis - low down. :x

And then he continues...

I do not doctrinally apply everything Jesus says to me but I believe all he said.

That says it all. :o

Double-talk. "I believe in Christ", but "I don't apply what He says to me"... Please, who are you trying to kid?

No wonder every time that I quote from Jesus Christ, you ignore it. It is not doctrinally important to you because you don't consider Him the Lord of your life. It is not charecter assissination or misrepresentation, it is just the obvious truth from what I see from your posts. At least you finally admit it.... You don't apply Jesus' teachings to your life!

Read Matthew 7:21. Carefully. You BETTER apply it doctrinally, because Jesus tells us that NOT doing the Father's Will has repurcussions, even for the self-proclaimed saved. ESPECIALLY for people such as yourself, because this verse is ADDRESSED to the self-proclaimed saved! Ignore me, I don't care. Ignore Christ, you do so at your own peril. But don't go around telling everyone that Jesus is your Lord and King when you don't "accept what He says doctrinally"... That is just being dishonest.

Works salvation is what you have - you will get to explain your obedience at the great white throne.

You don't have a clue because you don't know what a "work" is. Same old song. Same old cliche. Hey, if you can't bring out Scripture to prove your point, I suppose you can always fall back on the typical baloney, like "works salvation". What is funny is that you don't even know what that means.

You weary me Francis - you crossed the line with your false accusation regarding what I believe about Christ - you are not worth my time anymore - you are spiritually draining.

Truth hurts, doesn't it. You have not ONCE answered one of my posts that destroys your concept of OSAS. DOZENS of verses, ignored by you!

Of course you are spiritually drained. I hope that leads to repentance and a return to the ways of Jesus Christ. One of obedience to the Father. Because NO ONE will enter heaven who does not take Christ's Words of obedience to God "doctrinally".

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

1 Gifts - http://av1611bible.com/articles/gifts.htm
Bottom line – these were in affect when God was dealing with Israel as a nation up through the end of the Acts transitional period from the Jewish kingdom to God’s revelation of the mystery of the body.

That's not a proof for gifts being invalid, that only talks about tongues! That's also one of the shortest saddest articles I've ever seen.

I suppose Paul's command "earnestly desire spiritual gifts" doesn't carry past the 1st century for you.

BTW Don't be narrow minded and think the charismatic/pentecostal movement is the only group of believers who speak tongues or assume that they "founded" it. My Dad speaks tongues when praying sometimes privately in his bedroom, and I've never heard him ever use it in public, but both he and I (also my Mom) can attest that it is a real gift. Don't be narrow minded AV.

2. . Forgiveness - http://av1611bible.com/articles/confession.htm
In the Gospels (under the Gospel of the kingdom) they had to forgive to get forgiveness – we (true redeemed saints in this age) are already forgiven.

Oh please, making 1 John 1:9 obsolete? Get real! You have no sense of practical grace and forgiveness do you? Justification does not negate the necessity of asking forgiveness from God (not from men - I don't know where you got that idea) when you sin to continue in God's daily grace (not salvatory grace).

3. Water baptism - http://av1611bible.com/articles/baptism.htm

Don't get legalistic on me AV. Water Baptism doesn't save you, only the Baptism of the Spirit does but water baptism is good in that Jesus commanded it and it provides an occasion for confession ("if you confess me before men I will confess you before the Father"). Water baptism is of course not 100% necessary though because confession unto salvation can be made apart from the physical sacrament of water Baptism, because it is the Spiritual Baptism of the Holy Spirit which truely saves.

4. The major source for all the confusion – God two major callings:
a. An earthly calling that is intended for Israel and will be on earth.
b. A heavenly calling that is for the body of Christ where t he saints will dwell in Christ above the heavens. Ephesians covers this.

So God's plan since the foundation of the world infact was divided all along in two completely different elections? Gee, I guess maybe the universal reconcilliation guys had a point then that God perhaps only uses election as a convenience, and in the next age God will elect those who are burning in hell to be purified through their sufferings from all their sin and then save them also!

...I wonder how may different threads of election there are? :smt017

5. Study just how many times the word covenant shows up – around 282 times I think – Now how many of those references are found in Paul?

That depends. I strongly believe Hebrews could have been written by Paul. Much of the terminology is the same, his superabundance as an Apostle would make Hebrews a logical result of his love also for the Jews (which in Acts it is clear he was called to preach to the Jews just as much as the Gentiles), and also early Church Father's suggested Paul as the author.


~Josh

 

[AVBunyan]

That's not a proof for gifts being invalid, that only talks about tongues! That's also one of the shortest saddest articles I've ever seen.

Well Josh - in sincerity I posted what I felt was right - There was some sarcasm in my articles which I warned you about and I regret and told you that I would have liked to have edited them but the basics I hold to.

On the other hand you attitude you displayed was one of mocking and sarcasm - at least that is how I took it.

Now - when you answer with, " You have no sense of practical grace and forgiveness do you?" When I just told you I believe we were forgiven - then we can chat no more on these subjects.

I am sorry I offered to post my thoughts on the issues for nothing edifying came out of it Since you haven't proven to me other wise I'll stick with what I wrote. BTW - I do not want to discuss the issue anymore - You asked and I posted and you disagreed - done deal.

Nice chatting with but I've had enough.

 

[cyberjosh]

AV,

The reason I am sarcastic is because sometimes it seems necessary to carry the force of what I am saying. No doubt if I were to merely suggest an alternate interpretation you would only carry on in your normal manner and either give very little detail in defense (I'm sorry I'm some one who likes detailed defenses when appropriate) or perhaps just give me another link to your 1611 site (which I must admit I do not care very much for).

I'm sorry we disagree but I do not like it when topics like spiritual gifts are slighted so easily (see your post above) or when we try to do away with asking for forgiveness (why on earth would you do that) and rather bank on our justification - not caring or seeing it necessary to repent for things as they occur in your life (which I see as necessary - and Biblically justifiable).

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[AVBunyan]

- not caring or seeing it necessary to repent for things as they occur in your life (which I see as necessary - and Biblically justifiable).God Bless, ~Josh

Josh - you misunderstanding and accusation is very typical of forum posters and readers today and is the main reason why I am leaving this forum. If you remember in my article on Forgiveness I said, "Now – application - Do I believe it is good to confess – yes. It's not a bad idea to cleanse the conscience before the Lord."

People today do not read posts very closely nor do they really run the references given - You cannot get what I've presented in those three articles with just a casual read especially when your mind is made up beforehand.

Now to your hinting that I do not believe in repenting - absolute nonsense - I believe a saint should acknowledge his wrong (to both God and the offended party), repent (turn away) of the sin and then thank God for the forgiveness he has in Christ. But to say I do not believe in repentance is wrong. I have stated a sinner's repentance cannot justify (the blood justifies) but a sinner who gets saved will repent. These kind of misrepresentations have wore me out of forums.

Now that this repenting misunderstanding is cleared up I bid you farewell.

 

[unred typo]

- not caring or seeing it necessary to repent for things as they occur in your life (which I see as necessary - and Biblically justifiable).God Bless, ~Josh

Josh - you misunderstanding and accusation is very typical of forum posters and readers today and is the main reason why I am leaving this forum. If you remember in my article on Forgiveness I said, "Now – application - Do I believe it is good to confess – yes. It's not a bad idea to cleanse the conscience before the Lord."

People today do not read posts very closely nor do they really run the references given - You cannot get what I've presented in those three articles with just a casual read especially when your mind is made up beforehand.

Now to your hinting that I do not believe in repenting - absolute nonsense - I believe a saint should acknowledge his wrong (to both God and the offended party), repent (turn away) of the sin and then thank God for the forgiveness he has in Christ. But to say I do not believe in repentance is wrong. I have stated a sinner's repentance cannot justify (the blood justifies) but a sinner who gets saved will repent. These kind of misrepresentations have wore me out of forums.

Now that this repenting misunderstanding is cleared up I bid you farewell.

AV, if you’re still listening, I do have a bone to pick with you. Josh has not been any more harsh with you than you have been with others. In fact, you can be as blunt as I am at times. Nothing wrong with that, : but to blame his “misunderstanding and accusation†for your leaving is quite unfair. I believe Josh is very conscientious about reading both posts and the scriptures referenced in them. When you say people today do not read posts very closely nor do they “really run the references given†and that we just don’t ‘get it,’ is quite biased yourself. You’re painting us all with a pretty broad brush. It is possible to read your articles, understand them and still disagree on good, sound scriptural and logical grounds.

For instance, I personally disagree with your statement that a sinner who gets saved will repent. Repentance is unto salvation, not the other way around.

 

[AVBunyan]

but to blame his “misunderstanding and accusation†for your leaving is quite unfair.

Trying to clear up some things here.

Josh is not the reason I am leaving - his misrepresentation of my posts was just typical of many. Don’t give Josh all the credit for causing me to head out :-D – the many posts and misrepresentation like his by others is the reason. And his being blunt doesn't bother me. I was a bit taken back by the tone of his response due to the sincerity of my seeking to honestly answer his issues. I feel those three articles cannot be digested with just a quick read - they require some study, running references, and reflection - can't happen with one simple read.

Because I believe in eternal security you folks automatically assume I do not confess, repent, or seek to walk holy before God - These false assumptions get old - no where can you find that I am against the above. I am only against the above when one seeks to make them a part of their plan for one's justification - Why do you folks have such a hard time seeing this?

Again what Josh did in accusing me of not believing in repenting was just typical and I have had enough of that type of false assumptions by some of you folks here - I keep having to come back and say, "I never said that...I don't believe that ...where did you get that from? It got old and I have had enough of it.

I believe a person is justified by what Christ did at Calvary and because of what Christ's shed blood I am eternally secure forever. Now, as a regenerated saint, I believe I should seek to obey, walk worthy of my vocation (Eph. 4:1), pray, witness, repent when I mess up, seek to ask forgiveness from those I offend, love my wife, be faithful to church, and much more. I do not believe in loose living in any way shape or form. I just don't believe, like many of you here, that by doing or not doing the above things keeps me saved. Can I be more clear?

Now - I think I can finally delete this link and move on and let you folks post in peace.

God bless

 

[Heidi]

It really is pointless to explain these things to people who have doubt about their salvation rather than faith. Faith is a gift from God and if people don't have it, we can't give it to them because it comes from God.

 

[unred typo]

quote by AVBunyan on Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:51 pm

Trying to clear up some things here.

Josh is not the reason I am leaving - his misrepresentation of my posts was just typical of many. Don’t give Josh all the credit for causing me to head out – the many posts and misrepresentation like his by others is the reason. And his being blunt doesn't bother me. I was a bit taken back by the tone of his response due to the sincerity of my seeking to honestly answer his issues. I feel those three articles cannot be digested with just a quick read - they require some study, running references, and reflection - can't happen with one simple read.

Sorry. I read too much into what you wrote. I’m glad you weren’t blaming Josh. I wouldn’t be so hasty to think Josh gave your articles just a quick read. He’s pretty sharp and it doesn’t take him long to absorb a spiritual concept.

quote by AVBunyan:
Because I believe in eternal security you folks automatically assume I do not confess, repent, or seek to walk holy before God - These false assumptions get old - no where can you find that I am against the above. I am only against the above when one seeks to make them a part of their plan for one's justification - Why do you folks have such a hard time seeing this?

Who has said that you don’t confess, repent or seek to walk holy before God? It certainly wasn’t me and I had to explain that once to you already. I don’t know you IRL, and I don’t know one thing about your life and walk with the Lord. I think you are reading something into what we write in a general sense of ‘you’ and taking it personally.

quote by AVBunyan
Again what Josh did in accusing me of not believing in repenting was just typical and I have had enough of that type of false assumptions by some of you folks here - I keep having to come back and say, "I never said that...I don't believe that ...where did you get that from? It got old and I have had enough of it.

Josh didn’t accuse you of not believing in repenting, he said you don’t believe it is necessary for salvation. You have declared such to be the case. He believes it is. So do I. What’s the deal?

quote by AVBunyan I believe a person is justified by what Christ did at Calvary and because of what Christ's shed blood I am eternally secure forever. Now, as a regenerated saint, I believe I should seek to obey, walk worthy of my vocation (Eph. 4:1), pray, witness, repent when I mess up, seek to ask forgiveness from those I offend, love my wife, be faithful to church, and much more. I do not believe in loose living in any way shape or form. I just don't believe, like many of you here, that by doing or not doing the above things keeps me saved. Can I be more clear?

That’s clear enough. Let me see if I got it. The sticking point is that Josh, I believe, says repentance is necessary for salvation. You believe a Christian ought to do that and they will by God’s grace but it is not a requirement to be saved. I agree with Josh but I take Josh’s position a step further. I believe all those things you say a Christian ought to do, can be written as ‘love one another’ and must be done because they are the works of faith that you and I and everyone dead or alive will be judged by.

quote by AVBunyan

Now - I think I can finally delete this link and move on and let you folks post in peace.
God bless

Your choice. If that’s what God is leading you to do, I guess you have no choice, do you?

 

[cyberjosh]

Again what Josh did in accusing me of not believing in repenting was just typical and I have had enough of that type of false assumptions by some of you folks here - I keep having to come back and say, "I never said that...I don't believe that ...where did you get that from? It got old and I have had enough of it.

I've enjoyed seeing the coorespondence here, with you explaining everything and all, but you must not have ever understood my posting style which I often employ. I on purpose make statements based on implications to their weakest point (which often means an extreme) to repulse the defending party to a point where they might recant or reword to reach a middle ground. Thus when I was debating with another poster recently about the diety of Jesus (and they denied it) I wrote that I didn't serve a "just add the Holy Spirit" microwavable, created Jesus. Is that an extreme portrayal of believing Jesus was created rather than eternal?: absolutely. But what am I trying to force the person to think about? The worst possible extent their doctrinal errors may bring them to, that's what. In my most sucessful (that is - at least agreeing to disagree) debates I've had - most started out very bluntly and sarcastically, but once the opposing party saw what points I was trying to make, we then carried out the rest of the conversation moderately on a middle ground: instead of shouting to one another from opposite sides of the pole we met in the middle and sincerely discussed it. If your views are so vastly different than mine to begin with, my simple presentation of what I believe in contrast, without critically evaluating the other's claims, would only push an impasse between us. But if we begin a dialogue on similar terms or concerns (say not wanting to disrespect Jesus by going to the extreme of "microwavable" - allowing us to talk more respectively of Jesus and perhaps how his diety might assist that respect) then it becomes much easier.

I'm sorry if I was harsh, but that's how my posting style works sometimes.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

Sorry. I read too much into what you wrote. I’m glad you weren’t blaming Josh. I wouldn’t be so hasty to think Josh gave your articles just a quick read. He’s pretty sharp and it doesn’t take him long to absorb a spiritual concept.

Thanks for the confidence in my ability to discern a subject, but I do have to admit that I didn't read the entirety of the first link (for example - and as short as it is a quick skim about got it all anyway). I infact was disappointed that that link only mentioned tongues. Thus I saw two different lines of arguements: AV's & then the link's - and they didn't match. AV claimed obsolecence of all gifts, then gives the links which talk only about tongues, which is only 1 of the nine gifts. Not to mention I arleady know what people think about tongues around here as we have had this discussion in the past in the "Are tongues real?" thread.

So call me hasty, but I replied on the spur of the moment telling him two things: that it only mentioned one of the gifts (which was true - and thus hardly supported his claim that all gifts were obsolete), and secondly that if he singled out tongues for the reason I assumed he did (as expressed in the "Are tongues real?" thread - that tongues were emotional & fake hype) I then told him not to be narrow minded and proceeded to tell him how my Dad speaks tongues.

So yes, in honesty, I did not read the whole article but I saw the Scripture references and the conclusion and quickly saw a slant that AV seemed to be using (which didn't quite fit) by implying that if you disprove tongues being real today that that may somehow apply to all gifts (which just is not true). If this seems hasty, I'm sorry but my patience grew short when I contemplated the idea of having to discuss multiple pages on tongues, before we actually got around to the point of all gifts (which would then lead it on an irreperable tangent - like most threads do - and mislead the topic from the original point).

If I erred I apologize. But I don't think my post was unwarranted, despite me not reading the entire article (since it didn't seem immediately relevant).

God Bless,

~Josh